Behind Closed Doors – Judge Stops Trump’s Maxwell Push and Calls It a “Diversion” – Grand Jury Transcripts Remain Sealed

It was meant to be the masterstroke. Donald Trump, under growing pressure over persistent questions about his ties to the Epstein scandal, pushed the Justice Department to release the secret grand jury transcripts from the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The release, according to the official justification, was meant to serve transparency – in reality, it was an attempt to neutralize criticism and silence the stubborn conspiracy theories within his own ranks. But federal judge Paul A. Engelmayer, serving at the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, refused. Engelmayer, an experienced jurist with an impeccable reputation, left no doubt that he would not weaken the rules of grand jury secrecy for political reasons. Exceptions, he wrote, were only to be considered in “special circumstances,” and that was not the case here. Anyone who disclosed such secrets “casually or promiscuously” would undermine the foundation on which grand juries rest: the trust of future witnesses. But the judge went even further – he called the government’s request nothing more than a “diversion.” The transcripts, Engelmayer said, contained no significant new information. They consisted of routine summaries from two law enforcement officers whose statements had already been made public during the 2021 trial.

This assessment was a direct blow to the White House’s argument. For in doing so, Engelmayer made clear that releasing the transcripts would add nothing to public knowledge – and that the government’s push was aimed not at full disclosure but at the appearance of it. For Maxwell, who is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence, the ruling was a victory. Her attorneys had stressed that she still had ongoing legal remedies, and that a release could violate her rights. For months there has also been speculation as to whether her recent transfer to a lower security prison in Texas – shortly after an interview with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche – could be part of a political maneuver to obscure unwanted connections. The defense rejects this, but openly speaks of a campaign to cast Maxwell as the sole scapegoat after Epstein’s death.

The government’s defeat in New York is not its only setback. In Florida, a federal judge recently refused to release grand jury materials from an earlier Epstein investigation in 2006. That case ended at the time with a non-prosecution agreement that provided Epstein and four other named individuals with full protection from future prosecution – an agreement that Maxwell is now invoking before the Supreme Court. At the same time, the Republican-led House Oversight Committee has issued sweeping subpoenas, including to Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and several former top officials, to testify before Congress in the fall. In the meantime, the image remains of a president seeking the stage to demonstrate his ability to act, yet failing against the walls of the judiciary. Engelmayer’s decision makes it clear that transparency cannot be forced by decree – especially not when the files in question contain little substantive relevance. But the legal battle is not over. Thousands of other documents and electronic files are in the government’s possession. The Justice Department and the FBI declared in early July that there was neither a “client list” nor incriminating blackmail material, and announced that no further materials would be released in order to protect the victims. But this is not where the story ends. Our investigations are continuing – and there is one aspect that Trump has so far consistently ignored. In the coming days we will report on this in more detail. The investigations in France are not yet complete.

Frère Jacques, Frère Jacques
Dormez-vous ? Dormez-vous ?
Sonnez les matines, sonnez les matines
Ding, dang, dong – ding, dang, dong

To be continued .....

Investigative journalism requires courage, conviction – and your support.