By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In a move spurred by pressure from President Trump’s supporters, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche met with Ghislaine Maxwell in Florida as part of the Justice Department’s efforts for increased transparency in the Epstein case. The meeting, followed by a scheduled second interview, saw Maxwell answering every question truthfully, according to her attorney. The DOJ aims to release additional information learned from the interviews at an appropriate time, following Trump’s directive to release all credible evidence. Maxwell is currently serving a 20-year sentence in federal prison at FCI Tallahassee for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking operation.
Read the original article here
Ghislaine Maxwell’s lawyer, David Oscar Markus, has indeed spoken out following a meeting with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who is associated with the Trump administration’s Justice Department. The meeting itself immediately raises significant questions given the players involved and the context of the Epstein case, where Maxwell was convicted of sex trafficking and related charges. The fact that this meeting occurred, particularly under the guise of “transparency,” has fueled a lot of skepticism.
Markus described the meeting as a “good day,” which, in this instance, could be seen as deeply concerning. It suggests that Maxwell may be cooperating with the Justice Department, particularly given her history of untruthfulness and perjury, which raises an eyebrow or two. This could indicate potential future deals, which might include a pardon or reduction in her sentence. The fact that no promises were made doesn’t necessarily alleviate concerns, it could be that the negotiation is still in process.
The focus is, naturally, on what might have been discussed, and the potential for Maxwell’s testimony. Given her previous actions, one might question if she would remain truthful in order to protect herself. Given she was already convicted of several criminal acts, what does she have to lose by lying? The scenario being painted is that she might provide testimony to the House, likely in order to protect Donald Trump. The meeting with Blanche, who also has ties to Trump, makes the possibility of some kind of arrangement seem even more likely.
The worry is that Maxwell could be used to shield Trump from any culpability in the Epstein case, which would undermine the justice system. There is a fear that she will testify that Trump had no involvement in the sexual activities, and that the MAGA base would rally around this statement, leading to a distorted view of events and protecting Trump’s reputation. The media would likely present both sides, leading to a muddling of the waters, thus shielding Trump and potentially granting Maxwell a backdoor escape.
In the eyes of some, the fact that a meeting like this could occur at all, with a key figure tied to Trump, suggests a conflict of interest. The narrative is that the outcome could be that Trump walks away unscathed while the victims are denied justice. The situation is perceived as witness tampering, with the potential for a pardon granted in exchange for her silence, or for her to falsely protect Trump.
The idea of a pardon would trigger an uproar, given the nature of her crimes. The fact that Trump’s former attorney was conducting the interview is a massive red flag for impartiality. The potential is that the investigation will protect Trump and cover up his connections to Epstein, leaving the victims without the justice they deserve. There are also worries that, if Maxwell were to turn against Trump, she might meet a tragic end, underscoring the high stakes of this situation.
The fact that Newsweek and others may not be entirely truthful on what is happening is a worry, some fear that these media outlets are attempting to paint Trump in a better light. Some even suggest there is a concerted effort to portray any mention of Trump as innocuous, thus whitewashing the situation. The notion of “I plead the 5th” being equated with honesty and truthfulness is laughable.
The core of the concern is that the DOJ meeting, and any subsequent testimony or deals, will ultimately prioritize protecting Trump, and potentially offering Maxwell a deal for doing so. This is the fear. It is an environment where transparency is replaced by secrecy, and justice takes a backseat to political maneuverings. The whole thing stinks to high heaven and is a mockery of justice.