217
There we go. She's asking for it explicitly what Trump's been dangling in her face.
FR she literally has nothing to gain from this unless a pardon has been promised to her.
She shows no remorse for her crimes.
Sexual predators never feel remorse. Their crimes are heinous, and it's not possible to do something like that to another person if you have a conscience.
On the upside, if she’s out and about when the war breaks out, I’d wager she’s got a very limited shelf life
If she's out, and not suicided immediately, she's probably got some ridiculous amount of cash stashed away to ride out the end of the world on a tropical beach somewhere.
Nothing to lose either.
Both of those mean she could accuse Trump directly and they can't do anything to her legally about it.
Except you know the DOJ guy said something like "We want to make sure you're treated fairly and you do the right thing - it would be so sad to see you commit suicide like Jeffrey because of your guilty conscience."
Then tell her to enjoy prison, and release the evidence instead.
There is a reason why Epstein and Maxwell haven't talked. Guess what happens to Maxwell as soon as Republicans think she will talk?
She is also only willing to testify after her appeals are resolved — which could take months or even years.
She also will not speak to congressional investigators in the federal prison in Florida where she is currently incarcerated
Rot, talk, or get pardoned and she can still talk.
Hmmm I'm more interested in the Epstein list that Bondi had. Maybe we finish going through that list before starting on a second one?
Eric is a despicable monster. Worse than the others by orders of magnitude.
*Deplorable * monster
Edit /s lol... just on the off chance
Eric didn't do it. Eric is innocent.
No. I wish he was. He did it to me. I still can't breathe by myself.
Eric do got a big hog
My impression is that the reason team Biden went after Maxwell first is that Epstein's documents are not super-compelling evidence on their own. They really wanted to flip Maxwell to explain the documents, but weren't willing to give her whatever deal she was asking for. I feel like she's just trying the same plan with the new administration, now that they're under higher pressure (and possibly interested in more selective prosecutions).
This is definitely it. Being on a client list isn't sufficient evidence. These guys have a lot of money they covered things up. An eye witness testimony could be enough. If they're still investigating releasing the list could scare some suspects into destroying evidence.
She'll commit perjury, the best perjury to save the best people. Everyone says so.
Smart of them to make it public like this. If something happens to her now, it looks so much worse. Evil conniving...
I don't know exactly how this works, but I think you'll be held in contempt when you get a subpoena and decide not to show up.
Oh, she will show up…she’s just going to plead the fifth amendment.
It feels like the fact that she might be getting a pardon suggests she may have leverage over Trump
She doesn't have leverage that won't get her in trouble.
That's not how the law works, lady.
I bet she'd talk in exchange for mercy.
Couldn't he just release the Epstein files anyway? Since they're a hoax, who cares?
this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2025
217 points (98.7% liked)
politics
31232 readers
2162 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS