Ghislaine Maxwell

The House Oversight and Accountability Committee’s high-stakes investigation into the Jeffrey Epstein network hit a significant roadblock on Monday, February 9, 2026. Ghislaine Maxwell, currently serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking, appeared virtually before the committee but refused to provide any new testimony, repeatedly invoking her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. At Modern Memo, we analyze the strategic silence from the convicted groomer, the frustration of lawmakers seeking accountability for the “Elite 25,” and the looming depositions of high-profile political figures. The Deposition: A Blanket Refusal The much-anticipated closed-door session ended shortly after it began. Maxwell appeared via videolink from a minimum-security federal prison camp in Bryan, Texas, and immediately asserted a “blanket” Fifth Amendment privilege. The Stance: Maxwell’s legal team characterized the proceeding as “political theater,” arguing that since the committee refused to grant her legal immunity, any statement she made could be used to bring further charges. The Contradiction: Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) called the move “inconsistent,” noting that Maxwell had previously spoken at length with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche last year regarding similar subject matter without invoking her right to silence. This selective cooperation has led some to question whether Maxwell is intentionally shielding specific associates. Unanswered Questions: Protecting the “List of 25”? Despite the silence, the committee entered a series of specific questions into the official record. These questions, authored by Chairman James Comer (R-KY) and others, focus on the individuals who allegedly benefited from Epstein’s operations but escaped indictment: The Hidden Abusers: In a December 2025 habeas corpus petition, Maxwell stated that “four named co-conspirators” and 25 men who entered into secret settlements were never prosecuted. The committee is demanding to know why these individuals remain protected by the federal system. Foreign Intelligence: Questions were raised regarding Epstein and Maxwell’s potential ties to foreign intelligence services, specifically those associated with Russia and Israel. Trump vs. Clinton: While Democrats focused on documented social photographs of the current President with Epstein, Republicans highlighted the extensive flight logs and frequent visits to “Little St. James” by former President Bill Clinton. The “Contempt” Showdown with the Clintons The Maxwell deposition occurred just as the investigation pivots toward its next major phase: the depositions of Bill and Hillary Clinton. The Agreement: After months of resistance and a threat of “contempt of Congress” proceedings from Chairman Comer, the Clintons have agreed to appear for filmed depositions on February 26 and 27. The Public Demand: The Clintons have demanded that their testimony be held publicly, arguing that a closed-door session would allow for “selective leaks.” Republicans, however, maintain that private depositions are standard for sensitive grand jury-related material to ensure the integrity of the ongoing probe. DOJ Under Fire: The Redaction Crisis The frustration on Capitol Hill isn’t limited to Maxwell’s silence. Both parties are increasingly critical of the Department of Justice (DOJ) under Attorney General Pam Bondi. Transparency Lags: While the Epstein Files Transparency Act mandated the release of all investigative material, the DOJ has so far produced only a fraction of the 6 million pages, claiming heavy redactions are necessary for victim privacy. Victim Outrage: Survivors have expressed “disgust” at the slow pace, noting that while the government is slow to name abusers, it has accidentally exposed the names of dozens of victims in unvetted spreadsheets. Final Word Staying informed on the Epstein investigation isn’t just about the names in the headlines—it plays a powerful role in your understanding of how the legal system handles high-level corruption and the limits of congressional oversight. When you look past the frustration of a “silent” witness and focus on the data of the unanswered questions and the missing DOJ files, you gain a clearer picture of the systemic hurdles to transparency. Quality information replaces the noise of partisan speculation with the clarity of legal filings and committee procedure. It allows you to see this silence not as an end to the story, but as a catalyst for the next phase of subpoenas and public testimony. By choosing to follow the facts of the probe rather than the rhetoric of the participants, you align your perspective with the realities of the justice system and support a more informed, resilient society. Where Facts, Context, and Perspective Matter At The Modern Memo, our goal is simple: to provide clear, well-researched reporting in a media landscape that often feels overwhelming. We focus on substance over sensationalism, and context over commentary. If you value thoughtful analysis, transparent sourcing, and stories that go beyond the headline, we invite you to share our work. Informed conversations start with reliable information, and sharing helps ensure important stories reach a wider audience. Journalism works best when readers engage, question, and participate. By reading and sharing, you’re supporting a more informed public and a healthier media ecosystem. The Modern Memo may be compensated and/or receive an affiliate commission if you click or buy through our links. Featured pricing is subject to change. 📩 Love what you’re reading? Don’t miss a headline! Subscribe to The Modern Memo here!