Schweigen unter Eid – Maxwell bietet Entlastung an und beruft sich zugleich auf das Schweigerecht

Ghislaine Maxwell is playing a double game. Through her attorney, she informed lawmakers that she was prepared to state that neither Donald Trump nor Bill Clinton were guilty of any wrongdoing in their respective contacts with Jeffrey Epstein. This message reached both Democrats and Republicans following a closed-door hearing. At the same time, Maxwell herself refused to provide any substantive testimony and invoked the Fifth Amendment to avoid answering questions that could incriminate her.

Lawmakers attempted on Monday to question Epstein’s former associate. They sought to clarify who was involved in the orbit of the convicted sex offender and who may have supported or enabled his abuse. But Maxwell remained silent. No details, no context, no names. Instead, the formal assertion of her right against self-incrimination.

Democrats view the offer to exonerate Trump and Clinton as transparent. Democratic Representative Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico said it was obvious that Maxwell was hoping for a pardon. She sees it as an attempt to gain political goodwill in order to shorten her prison sentence. Maxwell was convicted for her role in the abuse scheme surrounding Epstein and is currently incarcerated. She has been fighting her conviction for years. The Supreme Court rejected her appeal, but before a federal court in New York her attorneys are seeking a renewed review. They cite significant new evidence and argue that her trial was tainted by constitutional violations.

The Republican chairman of the relevant committee, James Comer of Kentucky, expressed disappointment that Maxwell was not willing to provide substantive testimony. At the same time, he himself is under pressure. He is pushing to enforce subpoenas against Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton. After threatening contempt of Congress proceedings, both agreed to appear for hearings later this month.

“Once again, the focus shifts. Maxwell signals exoneration for the sitting president, Donald Trump, and for former president Bill Clinton, yet she herself refuses to provide any substantive testimony.” The committee is seeking clarity about a network that operated for years under the protection of wealth and influence. What remains is a stark contrast: an offer of political exoneration - and at the same time, complete silence on all incriminating questions.

Dear readers,

We do not report from a distance, but on the ground. Where decisions impact people and history is made. We document what would otherwise disappear and give those affected a voice.

Our work does not end with writing. We provide concrete help to people and advocate for the enforcement of human rights and international law – against abuses of power and right wing populist politics. We do not look away, because looking away always benefits the wrong side.

Your support makes this work possible.

Support Kaizen