Ghislaine Maxwell sat for a virtual deposition before the House Oversight Committee on Monday — and refused to say a word. The convicted sex trafficker invoked her Fifth Amendment rights and, through her attorney, raised a clemency demand as the price of her cooperation. The message was clear: pay up, or get nothing.
The Washington Examiner reported that Maxwell's lawyer, David Oscar Markus, laid out the offer publicly after the deposition, posting on X that his client is:
"Prepared to speak fully and honestly if granted clemency by President Trump."
Markus went further, claiming that:
"Only she can provide the complete account."
He also added a sweetener for both sides of the aisle, asserting that:
"Both President Trump and President Clinton are innocent of any wrongdoing."
House Oversight Chairman James Comer confirmed that Maxwell declined to answer questions but emphasized the committee's focus remains on Epstein's network and the government's handling of the investigation. Five additional depositions are scheduled in the coming weeks — including former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on February 26 and former President Bill Clinton the following day.
Maxwell is serving a 20-year sentence after her 2021 conviction on federal sex trafficking charges.
She's currently housed at a minimum-security prison in Bryan, Texas — a downgrade from her previous higher-security facility, a transfer that occurred after a two-day taped interview with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche in late July. During that earlier interview, Maxwell did not invoke the Fifth and answered DOJ officials' questions with her attorneys present.
So she's talked before. The question is what changed between cooperating with the DOJ and stonewalling Congress.
The answer appears to be strategy. On January 21, Markus wrote to the committee again offering Maxwell's testimony — but only in exchange for clemency. Monday's deposition was the committee calling her bluff. She didn't blink.
Alan Dershowitz, the former Epstein defense attorney, told the Washington Examiner that the trade makes sense on its own terms:
"If what the public really wants is information, this is a perfect case to exchange information."
Dershowitz called Maxwell "the Rosetta Stone" — the one person who could decode the full scope of Epstein's operation.
He argued that Maxwell likely would not be in prison had Epstein lived to stand trial, suggesting she would have been positioned as a cooperating witness. He also noted that requiring testimony without immunity still exposes her to perjury charges, giving her every incentive to stay silent without a deal in place.
Predictably, Democrats on the committee used the moment to frame the entire proceeding as a Trump problem. Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas wasted no time:
"Abundantly clear that she will continue protecting pedophiles and sex traffickers until she is granted clemency by Donald Trump."
Crockett added:
"She doesn't care about the crimes that she has committed and is completely unremorseful."
Rep. Suhas Subramanyam separately suggested Maxwell was "campaigning" for clemency, and that her public claims about Trump and Clinton were designed to pressure the White House. Rep. James Walkinshaw echoed similar themes.
Notice what Democrats are doing here. They're not demanding Maxwell testify about the powerful men in Epstein's orbit. They're not pressing for answers about Bill Clinton's multiple trips aboard Epstein's private jet after leaving the White House.
They're not asking why the Epstein investigation was handled the way it was for years. They're using a convicted sex trafficker's silence as a cudgel against the current president — the same president whose administration released the Epstein files in the first place.
The DOJ files released under Trump refer to both Trump and Clinton repeatedly. But the nature of those references tells different stories.
Trump appears in flight logs and social settings from the 1990s — and records show he severed ties with Epstein years before the financier's first criminal case. Clinton's appearances are harder to wave away: multiple trips on Epstein's private jet, scheduling records, contact logs — all after he left the White House.
Democrats want to make this about clemency politics. The actual story is about what Maxwell knows and who it implicates.
The White House has shown no appetite for a deal. When asked about Maxwell clemency in November, President Trump was characteristically direct:
"I haven't thought about it for months. Maybe I haven't thought about it at all … I don't rule it in or out I don't even think about it."
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt reinforced the point days earlier:
"It is not something he's talking about or even thinking about at this moment in time."
The Oversight Committee isn't waiting on Maxwell's terms. Comer confirmed five more depositions are coming. The Hillary Clinton deposition on February 26 and Bill Clinton's the following day will be the marquee events — and potentially far more consequential than anything Maxwell offered on Monday, which was nothing.
Dershowitz, for his part, said he volunteered to testify before Congress and waive attorney-client privilege but was never called. That's a loose thread worth pulling. A former Epstein defense attorney willing to talk under oath, and the committee hasn't taken him up on it.
Maxwell's play is transparent. She holds information the public wants. She's serving twenty years. Clemency is the only card she has, and she's playing it the only way she can — loudly, publicly, and with just enough bipartisan cover to make it interesting.
But the investigation doesn't live or die on her cooperation. The depositions are moving forward. The files are public. The Clintons are scheduled to sit in the same seat Maxwell occupied on Monday.
The question isn't whether Maxwell talks. It's whether the people who flew on those planes, attended those dinners, and appeared in those logs will have anything more convincing to say than a woman who just took the Fifth.
