TJ Madsen is among the founding members of the New Herald Tribune and chairs the editorial board. He worked for national syndicated newspapers in Newark, Philadelphia, and Baltimore before moving to the midwest.
February 9 , 2026
Washington, DC - Convicted trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell has indicated she would be willing to provide testimony that could affect one of the nation’s most recognizable political figures — former President Bill Clinton — but only if she receives clemency from President Donald J. Trump.
Maxwell, the onetime socialite and close associate of Epstein who was convicted in 2021 on multiple federal charges related to the recruitment and abuse of underage girls, appeared via videoconference Monday before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Rather than answer lawmakers’ probing questions, she invoked her constitutional right against self-incrimination and remained silent for the duration of the deposition.
Her attorney, David Oscar Markus, subsequently delivered a message that has sent shockwaves through both political parties. Markus told lawmakers that Maxwell would cooperate fully with congressional investigators — including offering potentially damaging testimony of everyone except President Trump— if President Trump granted her clemency. According to Markus, Maxwell could “cast suspicion” upon Mr. Clinton in the same breath that she would assert the innocence of President Trump himself.
“Ms. Maxwell is prepared to speak fully and honestly if granted clemency by President Trump,” Markus said, adding that “only she can provide the complete account.”
This development arrives amid an intense political and legal battle over the disclosures from the so-called Epstein Files Transparency Act — legislation signed by President Trump last year that mandated the release of millions of unclassified records related to the Epstein investigation. While those documents have fueled lawsuits and reputational damage for numerous figures, neither Mr. Trump nor Mr. Clinton has been credibly accused of criminal conduct in connection with Epstein.
Congressional Republicans, led by Oversight Chairman Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), expressed frustration with Maxwell’s refusal to answer questions directly and dismissed the clemency proposal as a transparent negotiating tactic. “We had many questions to ask about the crimes she and Epstein committed, as well as questions about potential co-conspirators,” Comer said after the deposition. “It is disappointing that she declined to participate.”
Democrats were equally skeptical, not only of the motivations behind Maxwell’s gambit but of the broader implications of granting clemency to one of the most notorious figures associated with Epstein’s crimes. Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.) said the offer was a “clear campaign for clemency” rather than a pursuit of truth, and voiced concern that Trump’s response could further erode public trust.
The White House has so far declined to indicate whether President Trump is even considering Maxwell’s entreaty. Earlier public comments from Trump suggested ambivalence about intervening in the case at all; last year he said when asked about a pardon that he “was told to say that I haven't thought about it” and would need to “take a look” at any application.
Legal scholars and former prosecutors have noted that any clemency deal tied to compelling testimony — especially when that testimony could directly affect high-profile political figures — raises fraught constitutional issues. Clemency powers are broad, but the statutory and ethical standards that normally govern immunity and plea agreements do not typically apply to pardons issued for political or personal advantage.
As lawmakers prepare to press forward with additional depositions — including scheduled interviews of Bill and Hillary Clinton later this month — the Maxwell clemency proposal has injected a new level of drama into what was already one of the most closely watched political investigations of the decade.
Copyright © 2026. All rights reserved.