FabSwingers.com forum: Ghislaine Maxwell interview

By *arry and Megs OP Couple
37 weeks ago

Ipswich

For anyone interested the transcript and audio are available on the US DOJ website.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *luebell888Woman
37 weeks ago

Glasgowish

I don't believe what she said.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
37 weeks ago

"I don't believe what she said."

I imagine for TDS sufferers there are only two options.

1. Maxwell says Trump is guilty of something: as they suspected

2. Maxwell says Trump isn’t guilty of anything: she’s lying.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *I TwoCouple
37 weeks ago

near enough

"I don't believe what she said."

It's a little strange that she would clear a President, a democrat who the president hates and an English Royal then gets moved to a soft prison. I don't think she lied, I don't think she saw any of the three have sex with minors. But why would she be there watching ?

All very confusing.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *allySlinkyWoman
37 weeks ago

Leeds

Virginia Guiffre said she had sex in the bathtub with Prince Andrew at Gillaine's London house. That is where the famous photo was taken. In the uncropped version you can see Epstein's reflection in the mirror as he takes the pic.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *I TwoCouple
37 weeks ago

near enough

"Virginia Guiffre said she had sex in the bathtub with Prince Andrew at Gillaine's London house. That is where the famous photo was taken. In the uncropped version you can see Epstein's reflection in the mirror as he takes the pic. "

But Ghislaine Maxwell probably wasnt there so she didn't lie

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *allySlinkyWoman
37 weeks ago

Leeds

Yes to actually not see something happening is different to not knowing it went on.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ingdomNightTimePleasuresMan
37 weeks ago

nearby

How much ££ was she paid off

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ophieslutTV/TS
Forum Mod
37 weeks ago

Central

You can hardly assume that she's not focused only on her own survival and prospects, when making such extraordinarily qualified statements

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
37 weeks ago

Guiffre also:

Claimed that she had a major accident before her death which the police say didn’t happen.

Alleged that Epstein trafficked her to Alan Dershowitz between 2000 and 2002, claiming sexual abuse. Dershowitz consistently denied these allegations, asserting they were false and accusing Giuffre and her attorneys of attempting extortion. In November 2022, Giuffre agreed to drop her allegations against Dershowitz, stating in a joint statement that she “may have made a mistake” in identifying him as one of her abusers.

Has been sued by another Epstein victim Rina Oh who alleged in court filings that Giuffre sexually assaulted her in 2001 in a massage room while Epstein watched, claiming Giuffre initiated the act to please Epstein. The claims were still live at the time of Guiffre’s death.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ex MexicoMan
37 weeks ago

North West

I don't see what the point would be of speculating about Maxwell's testimony. The one thing we can be sure of is that she has no good reason to say anything other than what would most benefit her.

As far as Trump's involvement is concerned, and despite what anyone dull enough to unironically use that idiotic "TDS" non-sequitur would say, Maxwell's statements are of no use whatsoever in establishing his innocence or guilt.

All we can say on that subject is Trump's own words and actions have substantially shown that it would not be surprising if he were to have been involved in some of Epstein's worst crimes, but without actual evidence we have to assume his innocence. Of that, at least.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *abioMan
36 weeks ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

"I don't believe what she said.

I imagine for TDS sufferers there are only two options.

1. Maxwell says Trump is guilty of something: as they suspected

2. Maxwell says Trump isn’t guilty of anything: she’s lying."

Remember it isn’t the democrats that are driving this Epstein train, it’s you tin foil hat conspiracy theorists republicans, who bought the line that Trump said he would release everything, then said “oh never mind!”

Trouble of your own creation….

Plus the judges who refused to release the grand jury testimony said that was for show as it would not show anything that was not already out there and was a deliberate attempt at distraction!

Plus we know that she has already lied… and then she suddenly gets moved from a hard jail in Florida to an open jail described as club med in Texas

Plus the person asking the questions for the DOJ use to be trumps personal lawyer

Can’t tell me it all doesn’t smell a bit…. Quid pro quo, she says he did nothing, he makes her life easier and eventually pardons her….. hmmmmm

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *abioMan
36 weeks ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

Guiffre also:

Claimed that she had a major accident before her death which the police say didn’t happen.

I think it’s weird that trump never mentioned her name once till she took her own life

It’s like he now can because she isn’t there to correct any notes or details……

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ools and the brainCouple
36 weeks ago

couple, us we him her.

The rich and powerful covering shit up??

Never heard of such a thing!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *arry and Megs OP Couple
36 weeks ago

Ipswich

Jas anyone figured out this one ?

Flight logs record that Clinton travelled on Epstein’s plane 26 times but Maxwell characterized it as “one journey” – and said he had never received a massage.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *resesse_MelioremCouple
36 weeks ago

Border of London

"Jas anyone figured out this one ?

Flight logs record that Clinton travelled on Epstein’s plane 26 times but Maxwell characterized it as “one journey” – and said he had never received a massage."

Wasn't he more into blowjobs anyway?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *otMe66Man
36 weeks ago

Terra Firma

[Removed by poster at 26/08/25 00:24:06]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *otMe66Man
36 weeks ago

Terra Firma

The interviews were conducted under an immunity agreement..

Maxwell’s statements, as long as they were proven to be truthful are protected from any prosecution.

You would have thought at least one person would have been thrown under the bus??

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ex MexicoMan
36 weeks ago

North West

"The interviews were conducted under an immunity agreement..

Maxwell’s statements, as long as they were proven to be truthful are protected from any prosecution.

You would have thought at least one person would have been thrown under the bus??

Given how old Jeff came to meet his maker, I would think Maxwell would probably err on the side of caution rather than risk pissing off anyone with a bit of extra-legal reach.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *acktopervMan
36 weeks ago

Stourport-On-Severn

"The interviews were conducted under an immunity agreement..

Maxwell’s statements, as long as they were proven to be truthful are protected from any prosecution.

You would have thought at least one person would have been thrown under the bus??

One person though was "thrown under the bus" Elon Musk denied having ever met Maxwell. But she said they had met on a Caribbean island in 2010 or 2011 for a 4 day birthday party. They also met at the Vanity Fair Oscars party in 2014 (where they were photographed together).

Now call me suspicious, implicating Musk (not a best friend of the POTUS), would make Trump happy. Maybe, just maybe, she got moved to a nicer prison for that rather than not throwing anybody else under the bus.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
36 weeks ago

She's made a carrier out of selling lies why stop at freedom?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *allySlinkyWoman
36 weeks ago

Leeds

"She's made a carrier out of selling lies why stop at freedom?"

If they were lies why was she imprisoned ?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *resesse_MelioremCouple
36 weeks ago

Border of London

"She's made a carrier out of selling lies why stop at freedom?

If they were lies why was she imprisoned ? "

My enemy is a paedophile:

Yay! The truth is out!

My friend is a paedophile:

Filthy liar!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *I TwoCouple
36 weeks ago

near enough

She exonerated Trump as requested by trumps lawyer

She exonerated Clinton to make exonerating trump believable

She incriminated musk because trump doesn't like him anymore and it helps make both the above believable.

She'll be walking round a Walmart near you in 3 1/2 years time when she gets her pardon.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *allySlinkyWoman
36 weeks ago

Leeds

She'll be walking round a Walmart near you in 3 1/2 years time when she gets her pardon."

Do you mean Asda ?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *I TwoCouple
36 weeks ago

near enough

She'll be walking round a Walmart near you in 3 1/2 years time when she gets her pardon.

Do you mean Asda ?"

Do they have Asda in 'murica

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *allySlinkyWoman
35 weeks ago

Leeds

She is British and people who have been to prison can't stay in America

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *acktopervMan
35 weeks ago

Stourport-On-Severn

She can stay if Trump pardons her, which he almost certainly will.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *allySlinkyWoman
35 weeks ago

Leeds

"She can stay if Trump pardons her, which he almost certainly will."

Yes, that's true

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *resesse_MelioremCouple
35 weeks ago

Border of London

"She can stay if Trump pardons her, which he almost certainly will."

Surely even he cannot be blind to the optics of that. And what would be in it for him?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ingdomNightTimePleasuresMan
35 weeks ago

nearby

When she’s pardoned that’s Prince Andrew off the hook for good.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ex MexicoMan
35 weeks ago

North West

"When she’s pardoned that’s Prince Andrew off the hook for good. "

He was never going to be properly on the hook, really, was he.

I suppose he has at least had as much punishment as could realistically be dished out to someone in his position. His reputation is ruined, he's persona-non-grata in many important circles and his legacy will be as an embarrassing punchline in the Royal Family's history - no mean feat when considering the collection of idiots and basket cases it's made up of.

Would have been nice if he'd been tried for his alleged crimes, but I guess that's just another argument in favour of the abolition of the Monarchy.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *xposedInTheMaleMan
35 weeks ago

Cambridgeshire

"When she’s pardoned that’s Prince Andrew off the hook for good. "

One of the papers yesterday was trumpeting that they had proof that Andrew was in contact with Epstein longer than he said. But it turns out this proof is "Epstein said it when trying to get someone to sign-up to a business deal".

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *allySlinkyWoman
35 weeks ago

Leeds

The proof is from Andrew's emails revealed in the court case of the Chinese business contact Andrew was friends with, who is being investigated as a spy.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *xposedInTheMaleMan
35 weeks ago

Cambridgeshire

"The proof is from Andrew's emails revealed in the court case of the Chinese business contact Andrew was friends with, who is being investigated as a spy. "

Proof of what?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *allySlinkyWoman
35 weeks ago

Leeds

Proof Andrew was in contact with Epstein five years longer than he said. Five years after Epstein's conviction.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *xposedInTheMaleMan
35 weeks ago

Cambridgeshire

"Proof Andrew was in contact with Epstein five years longer than he said. Five years after Epstein's conviction. "

Those emails weren't written by Andrew - they were written by Epstein when touting for business.

So, the question is "How much do you trust Epstein's word?".

I don't think that anyone denies that Andrew had some seriously inappropriate friends. But that doesn't make everything said about him true.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *allySlinkyWoman
35 weeks ago

Leeds

I think we are talking about different emails

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *abioMan
35 weeks ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

The Epstein stuff has gotten more wild over the last 24 hrs… so here is the hopefully TLDR version

1) So.. congress comes back from summer break after closing a week early as house republican leadership tried to stop a vote on most of the Epstein files being released .. basically there was a motion that would bypass leadership who were trying to stop it, so instead of voting leadership decided to extend the summer recess

2)House oversight committee has a behind closed doors hearing in relation to Epstein, and has more than a dozen Epstein survivors as witnesses… the hearings in so graphic several of the members on that committee walk out in tears afterwards

3) 2 house members (1 democrat 1 republican) put forward a house procedural motion allowing them to bypass house republican leadership and have a vote on the floor for all members to order the DOJ to release the Epstein files

4) House republican leadership tries to cut it off by putting up their own motion, saying they support the work of the house oversight committee and they should continue but not to release files

5)Trump administration then chime in saying they should not support the original motion saying that any Republican who votes for it, it will be seen as “a grave and hostile act against the president”

6) House oversight committee released 33000 pages of Epstein files notes…. But in them is basically nothing that we already know, rumours that it was put out at the request of house republican leadership to try and derail the other effort

7) Trump then again calls the Epstein files a democratic hoax…. At the same time 2 dozen Epstein survivors have a press conference literally outside congress .. they then say that if the DOJ don’t release the Epstein files, they will release their own “Epstein list” and name names of their abusers

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *abioMan
35 weeks ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

So where we are at now is that house leadership decides what comes to the floor for voting…. The other motion would allow them to basically take over the floor so they could have the vote

If all democrats vote for the motion (they will) then they need 6 republicans to join them… we have the co sponsor of the motion but we will see how many others grow a pair and defy Trump

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread