By Michael Gold, Melanie Bencosme, Thomas Vollkommer, Nikolay Nikolov, James Surdam and Whitney Shefte

February 9, 2026

The House Oversight Committee’s deposition of Ghislaine Maxwell ended less than an hour after it began on Monday morning, when the convicted accomplice of the late Jeffrey Epstein pleaded the Fifth Amendment.

Maxwell appeared before lawmakers virtually for a closed-door interview in the House bipartisan probe into the federal government’s handling of Epstein’s case.

Her attorney apparently told lawmakers, however, that she could not implicate neither President Donald Trump nor former President Bill Clinton in any wrongdoing.

“[B]oth President Trump and President Clinton are innocent of any wrongdoing. Ms. Maxwell alone can explain why, and the public is entitled to that explanation,” lawyer David Oscar Markus posted on X after the deposition.

NEW GHISLAINE MAXWELL MUGSHOT INCLUDED IN DOJ’S LATEST EPSTEIN FILES RELEASE

Markus also told lawmakers that she would only answer questions if her prison sentence was cut short by Trump, according to the statement.

“If this Committee and the American public truly want to hear the unfiltered truth about what happened, there is a straightforward path. Ms. Maxwell is prepared to speak fully and honestly if granted clemency by President Trump.   Only she can provide the complete account. Some may not like what they hear, but the truth matters,” his statement said.

Maxwell is currently serving out a 20-year sentence at a Texas prison.

“As expected, Ghislaine Maxwell took the fifth and refused to answer any questions. This is obviously very disappointing,” House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., told reporters after the deposition. “We had many questions to ask about the crime she and Epstein committed, as well as questions about potential co-conspirators. We sincerely want to get to the truth for the American people and justice for the survivors.”

Comer said Maxwell’s lawyer told the committee that she would only answer questions if she was granted clemency by President Donald Trump.

Maxwell did say through her attorney, however, that neither Trump nor 

Democrats on the panel, who spoke after Comer, accused Maxwell of trying to lobby for a pardon and demanded that Trump publicly rule out the possibility.

“What we did get was another episode in her long-running campaign for clemency from President Trump, and President Trump could end that today,” said Rep. James Walkinshaw, D-Va. “He could rule out clemency for Ghislaine Maxwell, the monster. The question for all of us today is why hasn’t he done that?”

DEMOCRATS SAY CLINTONS’ AGREEMENT TO TESTIFY UNDERCUTS SUBPOENA PUSH, WON’T BRING NEW EPSTEIN ANSWERS

The former British socialite was found guilty in December 2021 of being an accomplice in Epstein’s scheme to sexually traffic and exploit female minors.

The DOJ said at the time of her sentencing that Maxwell “enticed and groomed minor girls to be abused in multiple ways.”

Comer announced lawmakers would hear from Maxwell late last month during a meeting on holding former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in contempt of Congress for refusing to appear for his Epstein probe.

“We’ve been trying to get her in for a deposition. Our lawyers have been saying that she’s going to plead the Fifth, but we have nailed down a date, Feb. 9, where Ghislaine Maxwell will be deposed by this committee,” Comer said at the time.

Contempt proceedings against the Clintons stalled, however, after they agreed via their attorneys to appear in person on Capitol Hill just days before the full House of Representatives was expected to vote on referring the pair to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for criminal charges.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Comer’s team had been in a back-and-forth with Maxwell’s attorney for months trying to nail down a date for her to speak to committee lawyers.

He agreed to delay her previous planned deposition in August after her lawyer asked him to wait until after the Supreme Court decided whether it would hear her appeal. The Supreme Court turned down Maxwell’s case in October.

She and the Clintons’ depositions are part of the House Oversight Committee’s months-long probe into how the government handled Epstein’s case. 

Comer told reporters on Monday that five more depositions would happen in the coming weeks including former Victoria’s Secret CEO Les Wexner on Feb. 18, Hillary Clinton on Feb. 26, Bill Clinton on Feb. 27, Epstein accountant Richard Khan on March 11, and Epstein attorney Darren Indyke on March 19.

On the last day of January, hundreds of people filled the pews of Immanuel Presbyterian Church in Koreatown to hear not the word of God but the gospel of the Democratic Socialists of America.

It was the local chapter’s bimonthly meeting and also a kickoff event for a year during which they planned to build on an already impressive foothold in L.A. politics. Four of their own are council members and the two up for reelection — Eunisses Hernandez and Hugo Soto-Martínez — received standing ovations after their impassioned speeches. They implored the faithful to believe that anything is politically possible in a year when President Trump is waging war on Los Angeles and one of their own, Zohran Mamdani, is the mayor of New York.

Among the true believers was someone who arrived late that day: L.A.’s original democratic socialist insurgent, Nithya Raman.

She shocked the city’s political class in 2020 by beating Councilmember David Ryu — the first time in 17 years that an incumbent lost their seat. Her upset blazed the way for Hernandez and Soto-Martínez in 2022 and fellow DSAer Ysabel Jurado in 2024. They’ve created a progressive bloc that has helped Mayor Karen Bass implement her agenda, offering Her Honor cover from critics on the left while also pushing for democratic socialist principles such as less police spending and more intervention programs.

Raman kept a low profile at the DSA-LA event, according to attendees. The 44-year-old listened to her colleagues’ speeches and those of other hopefuls, made small talk with fellow members and then left.

There was no hint that afternoon of the political earthquake she uncorked this Saturday, when Raman announced a mayoral run against longtime ally Bass. The council member described the mayor to The Times as an “icon” who nevertheless needs to be replaced because “Los Angeles is at a breaking point.”

I can only imagine Bass — whom Raman publicly endorsed just a month ago — was surprised.

The mayor seems vulnerable, for sure. From her handling of the Palisades fire to crumbling infrastructure to the economy and so much more, critics maintain Bass spent all of last year living up to the old Johnny Mathis and Deniece Williams duet: She did things too much, too little and too late. This was all before sources told The Times last week that Bass ordered an after-action report on the Palisades fire be — no pun intended — watered down to limit legal liability against the city.

Her supporters point to a drop in homelessness and homicides over the last four years as reason enough for Bass to return — but their hosannas haven’t gotten as much traction as an incumbent should be seeing at this point in a reelection campaign. That’s why the proverbial smart money had someone on the right side of L.A.’s Democratic spectrum mounting a strong challenge this year — Councilmembers Monica Rodriguez or Traci Park, L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath or even 2022 challenger Rick Caruso.

While Mamdani’s fall win got local progressives dreaming about one day doing the same in Los Angeles, the prospect of a strong challenger from the left in this mayoral cycle was considered so unlikely that DSA-LA didn’t have candidate Rae Huang — a dues-paying member and Presbyterian minister — speak at the Immanuel gathering since she couldn’t gather enough signatures to make her case for an endorsement in the fall.

Raman has proved effective enough as a council member to win her reelection outright two years ago during the primaries despite a well-funded effort to paint her as a limousine leftist. I admire her brio to take on Bass and respect her place in L.A. political history. I’m glad someone is going to make the mayor work hard to get reelected because no incumbent should ever have an automatic reelection.

But Nithya Raman?

Presbyterians, such as those who pray at the Koreatown church, have historically believed in predestination, the idea that God has determined everyone’s fate and we can’t do a thing about it. Raman doesn’t belong to the denomination, but perhaps its tenets moved her at Immanuel into believing that another unlikely political revival is in her stars. Because that’s the only way to make sense of Raman’s turn and belief that she can pull off the victory.

Raman’s 4th District is one of the wealthier in the city, a mishmash of Encino rich, Silver Lake hipster and the San Fernando Valley lower middle class — relatively sheltered from the day-to-day struggles of many working class and working poor Angelenos living in L.A. While Soto-Martínez and Hernandez draw their perspective and base from the union and activist left, Raman’s loudest supporters have struck me as folks who might have the passion and money to win over her district but don’t have the street-level knowledge and experience to sell their candidate to all corners of the city.

Raman has walked the progressive walk during her two council terms by getting arrested at sit-ins, showing up to protests and through her City Hall work. But the coalition she needs to topple Bass seems exceedingly hard to build.

She’d have to run under the assumption that enough people on the left think the current mayor is a sellout — or at minimum, just not progressive enough. That conservative and centrist voters so loathe Bass that they’ll hold their nose and vote for a democratic socialist. She’d have to win over Latino voters, who went with Caruso four years ago but who represent only 19% of Raman’s district in a city that’s nearly majority Latino.

Raman would have to peel off labor from Bass, who has counted on and rewarded their support from Sacramento to Washington to City Hall for over two decades. Needs to paint Bass as soft on Trump’s deportation deluge despite her consistently calling him out. Appeal to homeowners who won’t like Raman’s ties to YIMBY-minded folks seeking to shove multistory units anywhere and everywhere. Convince Black voters — who already must reckon with the likely reality that the city will not have three Black council members for the first time since 1963 because the leading candidates to replace outgoing Curren Price are Latinos — that dethroning the city’s first Black female mayor is somehow good for the community’s political future.

And then there’s Raman’s fellow DSA members. The rank-and-file are currently furious at her for recently, unsuccessfully trying to tweak L.A.’s so-called mansion tax. Raman can’t run in the primary with DSA’s endorsement because that process ended last fall. Supporters can petition for a vote on the matter, but that opens her anew to critics who engineered a censure of her during her 2024 reelection campaign for accepting an endorsement by a pro-Israel group while the country was bombing Gaza.

Raman — who can keep her council seat if she doesn’t beat Bass — is about to find out that L.A. isn’t as progressive as people make it out to be.

Los Angeles Councilmember Nithya Raman speaks to a crowd as she hosts an election night event in Edendale in March 2024 in Los Angeles.

(Myung Chun/Los Angeles Times)

She might have visions of a populist movement a la what happened in New York ushering her into City Hall — but she’s no Mamdani and Bass is no Eric Adams. Even fans of Raman I talked to over the weekend are upset that the progressive march that DSA-LA has successfully launched in city and county politics this decade now must deal with a curveball from within. It threatens to distract from efforts for other campaigns in a year when the left needs to concentrate on defeating true opponents — not a fellow traveler like Bass.

Raman must figure this disruption is worth the risk for her legacy and will further strengthen L.A.’s left. Let’s see what voters decide.