Ghislaine Maxwell Pleads Fifth in Brief House Oversight Deposition; Attorney Conditions Full Testimony on Trump Clemency Offer
Ghislaine Maxwell invoked the Fifth Amendment during a brief virtual deposition with the House Oversight Committee on February 9, 2026, refusing to answer questions unless former President Trump granted clemency — a condition set by her attorney.
- Brief, closed-door deposition: Maxwell pleaded the Fifth and refused to answer questions in a session that lasted under an hour (ABC News, Politico).
- Clemency condition made public: Attorney David Oscar Markus said Maxwell would testify fully only if President Trump granted clemency; he also denied any indication of wrongdoing by former Presidents Trump or Clinton (ABC News, Politico).
- Investigation continues: The committee plans more depositions and was granted access to unredacted Department of Justice files the same day (ABC News, Politico).
What happened at the deposition
Maxwell appeared by video from a minimum-security federal prison in Texas, where she is serving a 20-year sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking scheme. The session was closed to the public; within minutes she invoked her Fifth Amendment right and declined to answer questions. The exchange concluded in under an hour. Sources: ABC News, Politico.
Markus’s statement and the clemency condition
At the outset, Maxwell’s attorney, David Oscar Markus, told the committee Maxwell had “no indication” of wrongdoing by former Presidents Donald Trump or Bill Clinton and argued that Maxwell “alone can explain why, and the public is entitled to that explanation.” Markus said she would “speak fully and honestly” only if President Trump granted clemency that would shorten her sentence. Markus also referenced Maxwell’s ongoing habeas corpus petition in New York federal court seeking a new trial or reduced sentence and noted her Supreme Court appeal had been rejected. (Sources: ABC News, Politico.)
“Ms. Maxwell alone can explain why, and the public is entitled to that explanation,” — David Oscar Markus, as publicly posted and read at the deposition.
Markus’s post on X and his statement framed clemency as the pathway to unfiltered answers, renewing debate about whether offers of clemency could be used to extract testimony and what that would mean for survivors seeking accountability. (ABC News.)
Lawmakers respond
House Oversight Chairman James Comer called the outcome “very disappointing,” released the full video and audio of the deposition to the public, and emphasized the committee’s mission to uncover Epstein’s crimes, potential co-conspirators, and deliver justice for survivors. Comer said there was no indication Maxwell had been politically pressured to refuse testimony. (ABC News.)
Republican members, including Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), echoed Markus’s note that Maxwell indicated no wrongdoing by Trump or Clinton and pointed to legal posture — including the pending habeas petition — as a likely reason for her silence. Several Republicans stressed respecting legal rights while continuing investigative work. (ABC News.)
Democrats criticized the move: Rep. Suhas Subramanyam said Maxwell appeared to be using the deposition to campaign for clemency and argued she “should have no hope of ever getting out of prison.” Rep. Jasmine Crockett said Maxwell showed no remorse and was not seeking closure for victims. Democrats opposed any idea of immunity or clemency that might undercut survivors’ interests. (Sources: ABC News, YouTube.)
Broader probe and next steps
The committee’s bipartisan investigation examines federal handling of Epstein’s earlier prosecution, his 2019 death at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, and connections to wealthy, powerful figures. Lawmakers were granted access to unredacted Department of Justice files on the same day Maxwell declined to testify. (Sources: ABC News, Politico.)
Scheduled depositions include Leslie Wexner (Feb. 18), Hillary Clinton (Feb. 26), and former President Bill Clinton (Feb. 27). The committee also plans to depose Epstein’s accountant and lawyer; these witnesses could produce documents and testimony that fill gaps left by Maxwell’s silence. (Sources: ABC News, YouTube.)
Legal context and prior moves
Maxwell previously asked the committee for immunity in exchange for testimony; the request was rejected after bipartisan meetings with survivors who opposed any deal that might appear to reward a convicted trafficker. The committee’s rejection reflected lawmakers’ desire to balance investigative needs with survivors’ rights. (Source: ABC News.)
Officials have noted that former President Trump has not ruled out pardoning Maxwell in the past, and Markus’s public condition revived those possibilities. Legal experts say a presidential pardon or commutation could change Maxwell’s incentives but would not erase many civil or other legal consequences. (Sources: ABC News, Politico.)
Implications for United States of America
Rule-of-law questions: Maxwell’s invocation of the Fifth and her attorney’s public conditioning of testimony on a Trump clemency offer highlight tensions between legal rights and public demand for accountability. For many Americans, the episode raises questions about equal application of the law and whether political deals could shape testimony. (Source: ABC News.)
Political consequences: The clemency issue feeds into national debates ahead of elections; Republicans and Democrats frame the stakes differently, with GOP members stressing continued investigation and Democrats warning against deals that could compromise survivors’ interests. (Sources: Politico, ABC News.)
Impact on survivors and public trust: Victims’ groups opposed immunity and urged lawmakers to prioritize survivors’ needs; Maxwell’s refusal to testify may frustrate those seeking fuller accounts. The committee’s release of depositions and unredacted files aims to restore some public confidence by providing document-based transparency. (Source: ABC News.)
Legal and investigative strategy: With Maxwell silent, investigators will rely on documents, other witnesses, and forensics. Upcoming depositions and access to unredacted DOJ files could yield new leads; the committee’s work will hinge on evidence independent of any conditional testimony tied to clemency. (Sources: ABC News, YouTube.)
Presidential authority and precedent: If a presidential clemency offer were used to secure testimony, it would spark debate about executive power and precedent. While a president can pardon federal offenses, the political and legal fallout of a pardon tied to testimony would be significant. (Sources: ABC News, Politico.)
Committee release and next moves
The committee released the deposition video and audio to allow public review and said it will pursue other witnesses and documentary evidence. As the investigation continues, observers will watch whether Maxwell’s silence changes, whether other witnesses fill gaps, and whether talk of clemency becomes a formal part of the inquiry. (Sources: ABC News, Politico, YouTube.)
