House subpoenas Maxwell; judge denies Epstein grand jury files release
July 23 (UPI) -- In the ongoing political drama over the so-called Jeffrey Epstein list of sex offenders, several developments took place Wednesday.
A U.S. House panel on Wednesday formally subpoenaed Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, while a U.S. district judge on the same day refused to unseal the grand jury testimony and records from cases against Epstein in the past.
The House Oversight Committee on Wednesday subpoenaed Maxwell to depose her on Aug. 11 at the Federal Correctional Institution in Tallahassee, Fla.
Maxwell, 63, was an associate of former financier and convicted sex offender Epstein, who killed himself while jailed in New York City and awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges that included minors in 2019.
She also is the daughter of former British media mogul Robert Maxwell and is serving a 20-year prison sentence in Florida after a jury found her guilty of sex trafficking in 2021.
"The facts and circumstances surrounding both your and Mr. Epstein's cases have received immense public interest and scrutiny," House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., said in the subpoena.
Comer said the Justice Department also is undertaking "efforts to uncover and publicly disclose additional information related to your and Mr. Epstein's cases."
"It is imperative that Congress conduct oversight of the federal government's enforcement of sex trafficking laws generally," he added, "and specifically its handling of the investigation and prosecution of you and Mr. Epstein."
House speaker questions Maxwell's credibility
Comer submitted the subpoena a day after a House Oversight subcommittee approved a motion that directed him to seek Maxwell's testimony before the Oversight Committee.
The Justice Department on Tuesday also announced it will interview Maxwell soon to provide greater transparency in the case against Epstein.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., on Wednesday questioned the credibility of Maxwell's testimony.
"Could she be counted on to tell the truth?" Johnson asked reporters. "Is she a credible witness?"
He called Maxwell "a person who's been sentenced to many, many years in prison for terrible, unspeakable conspiratorial acts and acts against innocent young people."
The subpoena announcement comes on the same day that a federal judge denied one of three Justice Department requests to release grand jury records from Epstein's grand jury trial there.
U.S. District of Southern Florida Judge Robin Rosenberg refused to unseal the grand jury testimony and records from cases against Epstein in 2005 and 2007.
Rosenberg said the Justice Department did not sufficiently outline arguments to unseal the court records.
She also denied a request to transfer the matter to the U.S. District Court for Southern New York.
Two federal judges there similarly are considering DOJ motions to unseal grand jury files from the former Epstein cases.
Bondi said Trump's name is in the files
While those rulings are pending, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi told Trump his name appears in the Epstein files, The New York Times reported on Wednesday.
Bondi did not state the context in which Trump is mentioned, and White House Communications Director Steven Cheung said Trump did not engage in any wrongdoing.
Instead, Trump expelled Epstein from his Mar-a-Lago club because the president thought Epstein was a "creep," Cheung added.
Bondi earlier suggested she would release files related to the Epstein case, but recently said they don't contain anything noteworthy.
Her announcement regarding the files triggered controversy, including among Republican congressional members.
Johnson canceled Thursday's House session and said the chamber will recess until Sept. 2.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
27 minutes ago
- NBC News
Disgraced former Rep. George Santos reports to prison for seven-year sentence
WASHINGTON — Disgraced former Rep. George Santos reported to prison on Friday, beginning a more than seven-year sentence after pleading guilty to a laundry list of federal charges that included wire fraud, identity theft and money laundering. He is in custody at the Federal Correctional Institution Fairton in Fairton, New Jersey, the Federal Bureau of Prisons confirmed Friday. The flashy New York Republican, who stormed onto the national stage when he unexpectedly won a congressional seat in 2022 and was expelled by his colleagues the very next year, didn't go quietly this week. He appeared on an hour-long podcast, engaged with his followers on X Spaces and posted a series of farewell tweets on X. He also continued to post videos for supporters on the Cameo platform through Friday morning, charging a minimum of $300 per video, according to the site. 'Well, darlings …The curtain falls, the spotlight dims, and the rhinestones are packed. From the halls of Congress to the chaos of cable news what a ride it's been! Was it messy? Always. Glamorous? Occasionally. Honest? I tried… most days,' Santos wrote on X. 'I may be leaving the stage (for now), but trust me legends never truly exit," he continued. In his hour-and-a-half Spaces live broadcast, Santos, a Donald Trump ally in Congress, said he had been asked by many people whether he would get a presidential pardon or commutation that could cut short his 87-month sentence. 'The answer to that is, I don't know. You're asking the wrong person,' he said on Thursday. 'The only person that can answer that question is, you know, whoever the president of the United States is — in this case, President Donald Trump.' The White House has not commented on the matter. Santos' political career was one of the shortest and most tumultuous in recent memory. Even before he was sworn into office, the New York Times and other outlets revealed that he had fabricated parts of his resume, and the personal narrative that he shared with donors and voters on the campaign trail began to fall apart. The House Ethics Committee issued a scathing investigative report about Santos, finding he'd likely committed multiple federal crimes, and the Justice Department indicted him on 23 counts, including embezzling contributions from supporters, illegally obtaining unemployment benefits and lying on House financial disclosures. In the 2022 midterm elections, Santos had been one of four Republicans who had flipped Democratic-held seats in New York. But after the indictment and Ethics report, it was those same New York GOP colleagues who led the charge to oust him from Congress. On Dec. 1, 2023, the House voted 311-114 to expel Santos, making him just the sixth person in U.S. history to be expelled from the House of Representatives. After his guilty plea, Santos was sentenced to 87 months behind bars this past April and ordered to pay almost $374,000 in restitution and over $200,000 in forfeiture. During his appearances this week, Santos repeatedly expressed remorse for his lies and actions, even as he tried to settle political scores with those who ousted him from Congress. "I think we can all attest that I've made a string of s--- choices in my life, and for that, I'm sorry to those I've disappointed, to those I've let down, to those that I have caused irreparable damage. I'm sorry. I mean it. I'm not— I'm not placating. This isn't for show," Santos said on Spaces.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Trump administration's lawsuit over Chicago's sanctuary city policies tossed by federal judge
A federal judge on Friday dismissed a Trump administration lawsuit challenging sanctuary city policies in Chicago and the state of Illinois. The Justice Department sued Illinois, Cook County and the city of Chicago — along with several state and local officials, including Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker and Mayor Brandon Johnson — in February, arguing their sanctuary laws 'interfere' with Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) ability to arrest and deport illegal migrants. District Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, concluded that sanctuary policies — which prohibit local law enforcement from cooperating with federal authorities on immigration enforcement — are protected by the 10th Amendment. 6 Federal agents detain a protester attempting to block US ICE agents from entering a building housing an immigration court in Chicago, Ill. on June 16, 2025. REUTERS '[T]he Sanctuary Policies reflect Defendants' decision to not participate in enforcing civil immigration law — a decision protected by the Tenth Amendment and not preempted by [federal immigration laws],' Jenkins wrote in her 64-page ruling. 'Finding that these same Policy provisions constitute discrimination or impermissible regulation would provide an end-run around the Tenth Amendment,' the judge continued. 'It would allow the federal government to commandeer States under the guise of intergovernmental immunity — the exact type of direct regulation of states barred by the Tenth Amendment.' Jenkins also determined that the Trump administration lacked standing to sue the 'individual defendants' named in the case, such as Pritzker and Cook. She dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice, meaning the Trump administration may amend its complaint if it wishes to continue litigating the issue. In their lawsuit, the Trump administration singled out the Illinois Trust Act and Chicago's Welcoming City ordinance. 6 President Donald Trump speaks to reporters outside the White House on July 25, 2025. Ron Sachs/CNP / The Trust Act declares that 'State law does not currently grant State or local law enforcement the authority to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' while the Welcoming City ordinance emphatically states, 'No agency or agent shall: arrest, detain or continue to detain a person solely on the belief that the person is not present legally in the United States.' Pritzker and Johnson celebrated the judge's ruling. 'Illinois just beat the Trump Administration in federal court,' the governor wrote on X. 'Their case challenging the bipartisan TRUST Act was dismissed — unlike the President, we follow the law and listen to the courts.' 6 Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker speaks after a meeting in the governor's office in Chicago on April 7, 2023. Getty Images Meanwhile, Johnson tweeted that the ruling 'affirms what we have long known: that Chicago's Welcoming City Ordinance is lawful and supports public safety.' 'Chicago cannot be compelled to cooperate with the Trump Administration's reckless and inhumane immigration agenda,' the mayor added. 'Our city is safer when local law enforcement can focus on the needs of Chicagoans.' 6 Lindsay C. Jenkins, US district judge for the Northern District of Illinois nominee, testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill on Oct. 12, 2022. REUTERS 6 Protesters hold up a sign opposing President Trump outside Trump Tower in Chicago during a rally on Jan. 20, 2025. AP The ruling is a setback to the Trump administration, which earlier this week sued New York City and Mayor Eric Adams over Gotham's sanctuary city policies — similarly arguing that rules limiting the NYPD's and other law enforcement agencies' cooperation with federal immigration enforcement are unconstitutional. The move came after two illegal migrants allegedly shot an off-duty Customs and Border Protection officer in the face in a Manhattan park. Attorney General Pam Bondi filed suit against Chicago and the state of Illinois on her first day on the job at DOJ. 6 Federal agents hold back a protester during an ICE exercise outside an immigration court in Chicago on June 16, 2025. REUTERS Bondi teased that the lawsuit would be the first of several going after sanctuary policies in Democrat-run states and cities. 'If you are a leader of a state or local jurisdiction that obstructs or impedes federal law enforcement, you will be next,' Bondi said in February. The DOJ has since filed lawsuits against New York City, Los Angeles, Newark, Jersey City, Paterson and Hoboken over sanctuary laws. The White House and DOJ did not immediately respond to The Post's requests for comment.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
To former prosecutors, DOJ interview with Ghislaine Maxwell looked unorthodox
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche met for a second day with convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, without offering more than a broad rationale for his hours of questioning. Multiple former federal prosecutors told CBS News they were bewildered by his decision to launch into such talks and described the unfolding events as both unorthodox and concerning. "She's somebody who has been sentenced by a court to 20 years in prison, and she is likely also desperate to get out from under that sentence," said Elizabeth Oyer, a former Justice Department pardon attorney and federal public defender. "It's hard to really believe that the Justice Department would rely on anything that she might have to say." Oyer suggested that Maxwell was speaking with Blanche "in the hope that she might be able to cut a deal that will benefit her, and that raises fundamental questions about the credibility of any information she could possibly provide." Maxwell's defense lawyer, David Markus, said after the meeting that she answered everything asked of her "and she didn't hold anything back." Asked whether Maxwell is seeking a pardon, Markus said, "We haven't spoken to the president or anybody about a pardon just yet," adding, "We hope he exercises that power in the right and just way." "It's unprecedented for the deputy attorney general to be directly involved in interviewing someone who's been convicted of a crime and may be interested in cooperating to get leniency," one former senior Justice Department official told CBS News on the condition he not be identified. "It strikes me simply as an effort to address a political concern, which is not what the Justice Department does." Blanche is a senior Justice Department official who previously served as a personal attorney to President Trump. He is also a former federal prosecutor for the Southern District of New York. He announced his decision to travel to Florida to meet with Maxwell after days of public attention swirled around the administration's mixed messaging about the possible release of files on Jeffrey Epstein, who died in jail in 2019 as he was awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. Maxwell was convicted in 2021 for her role in the trafficking ring. Several aspects of the Blanche decision appear to break with longstanding Justice Department practices. Among the most concerning, former officials said, is having Blanche conduct the interviews, rather than the line prosecutors who helped win a conviction in the Maxwell case, and who are continuing to combat her efforts to appeal the outcome. Adding to the complication is that the prosecutor who led the Maxwell case, Maurene Comey, was fired by the Trump administration a week ago. One former prosecutor said a key reason for having a line prosecutor handle such an interview is their comprehensive knowledge of both Maxwell and the facts of the case against her. Otherwise, this attorney said, it could be very hard to determine whether Maxwell is being truthful — especially since there were already past questions about her willingness to be fully candid about the misconduct that led to her arrest, and Epstein's. "The best way to determine that is to ask questions you already know the answers to," the former prosecutor said. "Todd Blanche is in no position to assess the truth if he doesn't know all the facts." Because Blanche's meetings were occurring behind closed doors, it is unclear if he was accompanied by other Justice Department officials or FBI agents. The Justice Department has not responded to a request for comment. Experts told CBS News that meetings of this nature almost always include an FBI agent who can memorialize the discussion in formal interview notes that could later have evidentiary value, if needed. "If Blanche was meeting with Maxwell alone, that's obscene malpractice," another former federal prosecutor, who had decades of experience, told CBS News. "He can't testify and become a witness, nor can he write a report of their meeting." Prosecutors are not permitted to write up interview reports and are not sworn law enforcement officers with training to document an interview of this kind. "It would be a mess," the former official said. "The first rule of a meeting with a witness is to have an agent present." As another former prosecutor put it: "This is not typical." "It's not the most effective way" to work if the goal is to gather additional evidence or identify potential targets for future prosecution, this person said. Mr. Trump has never been accused of misconduct in connection with Epstein's criminal activity, and he has consistently said he cut ties with Epstein before Epstein's first arrest in 2006 for his conduct with underage girls. Mr. Trump has sought to push past the crush of attention on the topic, even referring to it as "the Jeffrey Epstein hoax." Blanche explained his decision to meet with Maxwell by saying he would "pursue justice wherever the facts may lead." "If Ghislane Maxwell has information about anyone who has committed crimes against victims, the FBI and the DOJ will hear what she has to say," Blanche said. Like Oyer, many former federal prosecutors saw the meeting as a political move intended to dampen growing mistrust about the decision not to make public the files connected with Epstein's case. Multiple former prosecutors spoke with CBS News about the matter, but asked not to be identified because they feared retribution against them or their current employers. Johnson says Jeffrey Epstein files controversy is not a hoax Idaho murders documents released after Bryan Kohberger is sentenced to life in prison How Canine Companions service dogs help with tasks; Chase from "Paw Patrol" joins CBS News Solve the daily Crossword
