Clintons NEXT — Depositions Set After Maxwell Disaster

Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted sex trafficker who knows more about Jeffrey Epstein’s network than perhaps anyone alive, just sat before Congress and said absolutely nothing.

Story Snapshot

Maxwell invoked Fifth Amendment rights throughout her entire February 9, 2026 House Oversight Committee deposition, refusing to answer any questions about Epstein’s network
The virtual deposition contrasts sharply with her July 2025 cooperation with the Justice Department, where she answered questions without invoking the Fifth
House Oversight Chair James Comer called the session disappointing while Democrats questioned whether Maxwell received favorable treatment including a prison transfer
Bill and Hillary Clinton face scheduled depositions on February 26-27 as the congressional probe into Epstein’s elite connections continues

When Constitutional Rights Meet Congressional Frustration

The one-hour virtual deposition produced precisely zero new revelations about the sex trafficking operation that ensnared powerful figures across politics, finance, and entertainment. Maxwell, serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking minors, exercised her constitutional right against self-incrimination on every substantive question posed by the House Oversight Committee. She provided prepared statements but declined to elaborate on Epstein’s network, Justice Department handling of the case, or her knowledge of co-conspirators. Representative James Comer expressed disappointment that Americans missed an opportunity to learn truth from someone uniquely positioned to reveal systematic failures in the investigation.

The Immunity Question Nobody Could Answer

Maxwell’s legal team attempted to negotiate favorable conditions before the deposition, requesting immunity, advance questions, and postponement until her appeals concluded. Comer refused these demands. The Supreme Court had already rejected Maxwell’s conviction appeal in late 2025, removing her final legal shield. Her attorney David Oscar Markus argued the Fifth Amendment invocation was legitimate given Congress denied immunity protections. This constitutional standoff raises questions about how Congress can compel testimony from convicted criminals who reasonably fear additional prosecution. The contrast with her DOJ cooperation, where she received limited immunity and answered questions over two days, suggests Maxwell calculates risks differently depending on who asks the questions.

A Tale of Two Interrogations

The discrepancy between Maxwell’s July 2025 Justice Department interview and her congressional silence deserves scrutiny. She cooperated extensively with DOJ officials, answering questions without invoking Fifth Amendment protections, then received a transfer to a minimum-security facility in Texas. Democrats, led by Ranking Member Robert Garcia, questioned whether this sequence indicated special treatment from the Trump administration. Republicans countered that DOJ granted her immunity protections Congress rightfully refused. Representative Andy Biggs noted Maxwell’s attorney indicated no evidence suggesting wrongdoing by either Trump or Clinton based on reviewed materials. The partisan divide reflects deeper suspicions about who benefits from Maxwell’s selective silence and whether justice system protocols favor the politically connected.

What Maxwell’s Silence Protects

Garcia’s question resonates beyond partisan rhetoric: Who is Maxwell protecting by refusing to testify? Epstein’s network included billionaires, presidents, royalty, and celebrities photographed at his properties in documents released by his estate in December 2025. Images showed Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, and Bill Gates at various Epstein locations, though photographs alone prove nothing criminal. Maxwell’s conviction in 2021 on five counts including sex trafficking of a minor established her central role in Epstein’s operation. Victim testimonies during her 2022 sentencing painted her as an active recruiter and participant. Maxwell maintains she was scapegoated after Epstein’s 2019 jail suicide prevented him from facing justice. Her refusal to identify other participants suggests either she fears additional legal exposure or believes silence offers her best chance at eventual clemency.

The Clinton Depositions Loom Large

Bill and Hillary Clinton face their own congressional depositions scheduled for February 26 and 27 after the Oversight Committee threatened contempt proceedings. Their appearance follows Maxwell’s stonewalling and occurs amid intense scrutiny of Bill Clinton’s documented flights on Epstein’s private jet and visits to his properties. The Clintons have consistently denied knowledge of Epstein’s criminal activities despite photographic evidence of social connections. Whether they cooperate more fully than Maxwell or invoke similar constitutional protections will signal how seriously Washington’s elite view congressional authority. The probe also issued subpoenas to former attorneys general and FBI directors, suggesting Comer intends to examine why Epstein received a lenient 2008 Florida plea deal and how his 2019 federal case was managed.

Justice Delayed for Epstein’s Victims

The true cost of Maxwell’s silence falls on survivors who sought validation and closure through congressional investigation. These women testified courageously during Maxwell’s criminal trial, describing abuse that occurred when they were minors. They watched Epstein escape full accountability through suicide and saw Maxwell receive a sentence some considered insufficient given the scope of trafficking. Congressional hearings offered hope that the full network might finally face exposure, that enablers and participants beyond Maxwell might be identified, and that institutional failures allowing Epstein’s operation to flourish for decades might be corrected. Instead, they witnessed another hour of evasion from someone who knows exactly what happened and chooses continued silence. Comer correctly noted taxpayers funded this fruitless exercise while victims received nothing approaching truth or justice.