October 6, 2025 • 19 mins
After today’s Supreme Court ruling, Ghislaine Maxwell only has one shot at freedom and it rests in the President’s hands. Maxwell was sentenced to 20 years for conspiring with Jeffrey Epstein to sexually abuse minors, but her attorneys are saying the “fight isn’t over” yet.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Hey there, folks. It is Monday, October sixth, and for
all intents and purposes, that is it for Gallaine Maxwell.
But she has maybe one shot left at freedom. Will
Trump give it to her? Welcome to this episode of
Amy and TJ. Look, no legal expert, A lot of
(00:22):
stuff can happen. But now after a Supreme Court says nope,
we're not going to know this to UK's either, Gallaine Maxwell,
she essentially has one shot left.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
Her only shot is from President Trump, who has been
desperately trying to distance himself from Gallainne Maxwell from Jeffrey
Epstein for months now. So the idea that he would
then give her some sort of a pardon or clemency
or some sort of get out of jail free card.
What that would do to not just him, but any
(00:52):
MAGA politician who aligned himself or herself with Trump following
up the decision? I mean it would be political suicide,
is what I'm trying to get. And I know he
technically doesn't have an opportunity to run for reelection. He
certainly doesn't want his base turning on him the way
they have, or they did at least initially with the
Epstein file. Should they won't, they will they be released saga.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
But don't you think nothing. It seems okay, this is
us from the outside, just speaking on what we see,
and what we see upsets him. It seems like nothing
irks him more than constantly being affiliated with Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
That's right, And I think, yes, that might come from
a personal place. But also he's very well aware that
this is a serious issue with the people who are
closest to the people who follow him, who vote for him,
who are at his rallies. These are the very group
of people who want total transparency, they want justice, and
(01:47):
they certainly don't want President Trump doing anything to help
Gallaine Maxwell at this point.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
All right, So, and the Supreme Court doesn't want to
help either, because that's the news today, folks. Gallainne Maxwell, who,
of course, the convicted sex offender. She has been convicted
of several crimes associated with Jeffrey Epstein, also the convicted
sex offender now dead by Elaine Maxwell, was trying has
been trying for years to get her convictions thrown out,
(02:16):
her argument being that she was a part of an
immunity agreement that Jeffrey Epstein had well, she appealed that
appellate court listened and said, nope, let the conviction stand.
She then appealed that appellate decision up to the Supreme Court.
And today Robes, they said the same thing they did.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
And she was hoping that because Jeffrey Epstein got this
sweetheart dealer, or at least that's how it's been referred
to in two thousand and seven.
Speaker 1 (02:40):
Exactly, of course that's what it is.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
But it is, you know, basically saying anyone of his
cohorts or anyone who helped him also would be immune
from any sort of future convictions. However, that was in
the state of Florida. There was nothing that precluded the
State of New York from pursuing the charges that it did.
And of course, yes, to remind everyone, she is serving
twenty years for conspiring with Jeffrey Epstein to sexually abuse minors.
(03:06):
It is a serious crime, it is a violent crime,
and it is one that she was found guilty of
by a jury of her peers.
Speaker 1 (03:15):
Again, this one is and you correct me if this
sounds wrong, Rose, but she the argument she's been making
in court is not one about her innocence.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
No, it's not.
Speaker 1 (03:25):
She's making an argument, a technical argument about this immunity deal.
The language is down there. I put it in there somewhere,
the language of the immunity deal. Yes, the United States
will also agree that it will not institute any criminal
charges against any potential co conspirators of Epstein. That was
in his non prosecution agreement. Like you said, Robes in Florida. Now,
(03:48):
that's great, but it's we ain't got to listen to that.
We're not bound by that in New York and nowhere
else in the world is bound by that. And that's
the argument she's been trying to make. Capella judges said, no,
this cotis Supreme Court. They we only want to hear it.
They did not have to rule on anything. They just said, nah,
this is not one we're going to take up.
Speaker 2 (04:09):
Yeah. I mean the fact that they even considered her appeal,
because this wasn't typically when they would do something like
this was newsworthy in and of itself, but certainly this
was done before they typically start their new court term
where they discussed which court cases to take on. So
them doing this out of session, so to speak, or
when they traditionally do it was unusual, But now it's
(04:32):
been put to bed. She has no other option, She
has no other road to go down to try and
up end the conviction she was handed in twenty twenty one.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
You're right, that made headlines at the time because they woo,
something must be cooking here if they're taking this up,
and it was out of the ordinary, it was. It
was a big headline, so we thought something might be
coming they did.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
Nah, Certainly, we saw several things happen when we saw
a Deputy Attorney General Blanche meet with her, have those
hours long conversations with her, to which we listened to
hours of that conversation, or at least certainly the transcripts
we read them. And you know, you said she wasn't
denying it, or at least that wasn't the basis for
this appeal to the Supreme Court. But she does vehemently
(05:16):
deny all of her conviction. She says she it was
mischaracterized and she didn't know what was going on, YadA YadA, YadA,
YadA YadA. But the concern was that because she was
talking with the Trump administration, because she then seemingly got
some favors handed down to her, which we can get into,
there was concern that perhaps there was some sort of
(05:39):
backhanded thing going on where the Supreme Court might suddenly
take up her argument that she shouldn't have been convicted
in the first place.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
That's what the conspiracy theorist right there. However, there were
some facts that were lining up to make a lot
of people go, wait a second, what is going on?
What did you call the prison she's at now it's
called something, Oh gosh, club fed, club fed, club fed,
club fed. So already folks think about the interview she
did with ag Blanche. We got those transcripts, we heard
(06:09):
the audio tapes and whatnot, so it's out there. But
one of the biggest headlines of the thing that came
across is she was adamant never saw Trump do anything wrong,
never saw him do anything inappropriate, like she repeated it,
and she was gushing in her praise of him. I
understand she's trying to get a pardon, but that coupled
with the president. Now, if she had a chance of
(06:32):
getting a pardon, I don't think, given where he is
and where I don't, I don't think. I think her
chances went way way way down.
Speaker 2 (06:39):
Oh, given the court of public opinion. I mean, certainly
most politicians will read the tea leaves, they will check
where the wind's coming from, and they will adjust their
sales accordingly. He has permanently affixed his sales as far
away from anything to do with Jeffrey Epstein Gallainne Maxwell.
And even despite all of his ever to try and
(07:00):
change the conversation or change the news headlines, it k
kept coming back to this. So I just can't imagine
there would be a scenario in which he would want
to in any way be a part of Glene Maxwell
getting any sort of deal. However, I was shocked. We
were all shocked. In the middle of all of the criticism,
we did see her move to a much different facility.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
And nobody could explain why.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
Nobody has explained why still, and this has been months.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
Nobody knows why this was outside of normal procedure. Why
is she there? Nobody to understand. And again, this is
a place for non violent folks. She is a violent
sex offender. That is how she's classified, and that type
of prisoner or whatever, that classification is not one that
would be just walking around roaming freely for the most
part at this club fed I can't remember what town
it's in. Down there, but it's a.
Speaker 2 (07:50):
It's in Texas.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
It's kind of not a certainly not maximum security, but
it kind of roam free. Was there a degree, Well,
it is the I apologize that's not what I'm meant,
but it's one of these kind of open it's kind
of not just fenced in.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
One hundred percent.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
That is the case.
Speaker 2 (08:08):
And so this is it's called a federal prison camp
and it's in Brian, Texas, and so yes, there is
much lacks er security. I believe they said this is
the lowest security of all of the federal prison systems,
and this is for non violent offenders. So the fact
that she's in there with her violent convictions is something
(08:28):
that a lot of this is all reportedly coming from
other fellow prisoners. They were not happy about being housed
now with somebody who is in a very different category
than they are, So that didn't seem fair to any
of the other folks who were there. Elizabeth, Elizabeth Holmes
is there. How did I forget her last name? That's funny,
but that's the type of criminal. It's a high profile crime, certainly,
(08:51):
but this was one. This was a white collar crime,
as they say it. So that's typically what you see
in this prison, so it is highly unusual and it
has raised a lot of brows that she is at
this prison camp.
Speaker 1 (09:03):
Okay, do I have it right? Wasn't it the exact
same weekend, the very weekend after the interviews with ag Blanche?
Speaker 2 (09:09):
It would be hard to give a reason, and that's
probably why they didn't give a reason as to why
or even speaking to the timing of this move was made.
And they just I think they did say there were
sources who came out and said, hey, this was a
matter of security. She has threats against her life. This
was what was best for everyone, and the Bureau of
(09:29):
Prisons made the decision to move this prisoner where they
deemed it to be safest and best. And that was
kind of the end of it. But of course we
have lots of journalists asking questions about the next steps
for Galaine and what may happen.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
I forgot, We've never got the answer to that. I'll
speculate for a second, Say he pardons her, what's that
backlash going to be. What's how explosive of a revolt
would it be?
Speaker 2 (09:59):
Look, I think right now he's still dealing with statues
being put up on the National Mall with him holding
hands and frolicking with Jeffrey Epstein people constantly. I love
that verd when it comes to the statue because that
is exactly what it depicts, frolicking. When he went to
the UK, he has, you know, pictures of him and
Jeffrey Epstein and even Malania up there with Epstein greeting him.
(10:23):
Actually cast onto a huge castle for all to see.
Windsor castle. I mean, everywhere he goes in the world,
he is being hounded and shadowed by these images of him.
Whether people have to put up a screen show on
a castle or a big ten foot statue on the
National Mall, this is something he cannot shake. So I
(10:45):
can't imagine he would want to invite more criticism and
almost confirm the suspicions that are out there.
Speaker 1 (10:50):
And I think, look, I was thrown off a little bit,
but I couldn't really believe the backlash. We talk about
his base and I think he said was the line
he said, I could choose somebody in the middle of
the highway of the Fifth Avenue.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
I believe he said.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
And my folks was still vote for me, whatever it was.
But this is one of those things. We always think
he's just no matter what he does, they're gonna stick
with their guy. I was surprised at how many people
just by them saying we're not gonna release any more files,
there is no list, and oh, by the way, confirmed
he killed himself. Just stating those three things was enough
(11:24):
that folks lost it. To then pardon this lady.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
That would just be I can't imagine anyone could. I
know he thinks, and he has certainly been able to
keep a loyal following despite a lot of stuff that's
come out. This might be the nail in his coffin
if he went this way. Now here's the interesting thing.
You have these reporters asking questions of the White House.
(11:50):
They have never flat out said no, President Trump is
not going to pardon Gallainne Maxwell. They have never even
indicated that. And in fact, when ask again today there
was a vague response.
Speaker 1 (12:03):
Well how vague.
Speaker 2 (12:05):
It was pretty vague. This is what and this is
similar to what we've heard before. When White House Press
Secretary Carolyn Levitt told reporters today October six that she
was unaware if Trump had been asked to pardon Maxwell,
saying it's not something I've heard discussed.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
So this saying it hasn't even come up, so it's not.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
No, she's saying she hasn't heard of it being discussed.
Doesn't mean it didn't happen, or it hasn't been discussed
or isn't being discussed.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
She's doing that plausible deniability thing. They left her out
of it on purpose, maybe suggesting vague. I mean, what
is I cannot remember the answers they've given.
Speaker 2 (12:44):
Something similar to that. Trump has said, no one's asked me.
I haven't heard anything. So that's kind of and so
I think that is interesting because of course it doesn't
shut the door completely on it. And then Carolyn Levitt
did follow up with this, we don't comment on clemency
requests that may or may not have been made.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
But when they were asked about Diddy, he started talking
and said, you know what, they haven't asked me yet.
It might be I like some of use it Dada.
So we shall see now as we're discussing this here
what it seems to everybody. Yes, the Supreme Court told
her No, she is out at least of legal options
when it comes to this appeal. However, we will tell
(13:23):
you after this what her attorney says they want to
do now moving forward, They at least think they've got
some maybe vague options too.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
Welcome okay, I.
Speaker 1 (13:47):
I had done so well.
Speaker 2 (13:48):
I didn't say welcome aback for at least three weeks.
But there I go again.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
Shu kept up with me.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
Welcome back to I hope you're not taken aback, but
welcome back to Amy and DJ. We are talking about
the Supreme Courts. Fairly interesting and big decision today to
not consider Glainne Maxwell's appealed to her twenty twenty one conviction.
She felt like the immunity deal that Jeffrey Epstein struck
back in two thousand and seven should basically nullify the
(14:18):
conviction she had by the State of New York. But hey,
that was the state of Florida where that deal was struck,
not the State of New York. Supreme Court didn't rule
on its validity or not. They just said, we're not
even going to consider it at this point.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
Rejection. I mean, that's got to say something about the case.
Speaker 2 (14:32):
We don't even want to hear what you have to say.
That's the ultimate. Yeah, no, thanks, We're just not interested.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
You may have seem so personal with that, because we've
all been victim of that in some way form of fashion.
Maybe it was a mother, maybe it was somebody you
were dating, don't even.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
Want to hear Yes, oh yeah, I did hear that
from my mom quite a bit. So yes, that makes
a lot of sense. Now everyone is pointing to her
only option being a Trump pardon, and we've just gone
over why that seems extremely highly like beyond any realm
of possibility that Trump would ever consider that. If he
(15:10):
understands what the political temperature is about this and this subject,
he wants to get it far away from this as possible.
Speaker 1 (15:17):
But they think they have some options. Now we don't
know what they could be. These would have to be
hail Mary's of some kind. But whatever option she has now,
it would be almost flucish, if you will. It would
have to be some deal somewhere that she struck.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
Now.
Speaker 1 (15:33):
Her attorney made an interesting comment after this, talking about
the disappointment, but said, quote, the fight isn't over. Serious
legal and factual issues remain, and we will continue to
pursue every happnue available to ensure that justice is done.
Not exactly sure what that means, Not exactly sure what
those options could be, but they say they're not just
(15:54):
gonna sit around and wait for this sentence to be over.
She's still trying to get out of prison.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
So the problem is she's perjured herself before, and so
anything that she says, it's just incredibly difficult to believe
at this point. And do most of us believe she knows?
And do the victims say she knows? They absolutely concur
that she does. But all of them have I mean,
those who are speaking out have all said everything that
(16:22):
comes out of her mouth is a lie.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
And I mean, now she has an incentive to say
exactly what she needs to say that benefits her. That's
one thing people are pointing to that look members of Congress,
they they have to answer to their constituents. They have
to get themselves on news, they have to look like
they're tough on crime. If they want to bring her
to Capitol Hill have her testify, what kind of deal
(16:48):
can be struck? I actually don't know, but that's an
option at least that was on the table. The possibility
were so desperate to get information from this lady that
they were willing to cut a deal.
Speaker 2 (16:58):
The only I was just going over in my head.
What would be any sort of motivation for President Trump
to pardon her or give her a get out of
jail free card, even at the end of his presidency,
as so many presidents do. They'll just drop huge, huge
pardon bombs on their way out. But what would be
(17:18):
his incentive other than the fact that she had something
on him that she could have given up, that she
could have said, that she could have thrown at him
and so so. Yes, But then if he did do that,
then everyone would put those two things together, and his legacy,
which you know he cares significantly about, would be blown up.
So it just unless there is actually something real that
(17:41):
she could be holding over his head there, I cannot
think of any reason why he would pardon her or
give her any sort of clemency.
Speaker 1 (17:49):
She would have played that card by now, wouldn't She
would had something on him that if he was afraid
of her, exactly, I should have played that card a
while ago.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
And for all the folks, you know, a lot of
people it's interesting, have all talked about what she knows,
and certainly she knows more than anyone alive could possibly know.
But you know, she and her lawyers say she's had
threats in her life. Her lawyers say she's scared for
her safety, so it is interesting that she was moved
to a lower security prison. There are so many questions
(18:20):
I have about someone who they claim is at risk
based on the information she may or may not have,
or based on the fact that people in prison don't
like people who mess around with young children. But there
are still I guess a few avenues. I don't the
lawyers didn't get specific, but we will be looking for
(18:40):
any sort of new headline as to whether or not
this she has a case going forward, if she is
planning on still giving any sort of information to Congress,
And certainly I think a lot of folks from the
top on down would like this to be a chapter
that goes away.
Speaker 1 (18:57):
At this point, I would too, I mean, point, do
you ever close? This has ever done? Is there ever
enough information out there that satisfies the American public? Is
there ever enough punishment that's done? Is there ever anything
that's gonna make those victims feel better? I do not know,
but this just keeps dragging, and what they say every time,
it's like you're not even opening up a new of
(19:17):
the same wound. Like new wounds they keep revictimized. That's
what they are saying, victimized all over again by this stuff.
My goodness.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
Well, maybe this is one of the final, if not
the final chapters in the Gallaine maxwells Sock. We shall see,
but thank you for listening to us, every one. I
made me roboch alongside TJ. Holmes. We will talk to
you soon.
Hey there, folks. It is Monday, October sixth, and for
all intents and purposes, that is it for Gallaine Maxwell.
But she has maybe one shot left at freedom. Will
Trump give it to her? Welcome to this episode of
Amy and TJ. Look, no legal expert, A lot of
(00:22):
stuff can happen. But now after a Supreme Court says nope,
we're not going to know this to UK's either, Gallaine Maxwell,
she essentially has one shot left.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
Her only shot is from President Trump, who has been
desperately trying to distance himself from Gallainne Maxwell from Jeffrey
Epstein for months now. So the idea that he would
then give her some sort of a pardon or clemency
or some sort of get out of jail free card.
What that would do to not just him, but any
(00:52):
MAGA politician who aligned himself or herself with Trump following
up the decision? I mean it would be political suicide,
is what I'm trying to get. And I know he
technically doesn't have an opportunity to run for reelection. He
certainly doesn't want his base turning on him the way
they have, or they did at least initially with the
Epstein file. Should they won't, they will they be released saga.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
But don't you think nothing. It seems okay, this is
us from the outside, just speaking on what we see,
and what we see upsets him. It seems like nothing
irks him more than constantly being affiliated with Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
That's right, And I think, yes, that might come from
a personal place. But also he's very well aware that
this is a serious issue with the people who are
closest to the people who follow him, who vote for him,
who are at his rallies. These are the very group
of people who want total transparency, they want justice, and
(01:47):
they certainly don't want President Trump doing anything to help
Gallaine Maxwell at this point.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
All right, So, and the Supreme Court doesn't want to
help either, because that's the news today, folks. Gallainne Maxwell, who,
of course, the convicted sex offender. She has been convicted
of several crimes associated with Jeffrey Epstein, also the convicted
sex offender now dead by Elaine Maxwell, was trying has
been trying for years to get her convictions thrown out,
(02:16):
her argument being that she was a part of an
immunity agreement that Jeffrey Epstein had well, she appealed that
appellate court listened and said, nope, let the conviction stand.
She then appealed that appellate decision up to the Supreme Court.
And today Robes, they said the same thing they did.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
And she was hoping that because Jeffrey Epstein got this
sweetheart dealer, or at least that's how it's been referred
to in two thousand and seven.
Speaker 1 (02:40):
Exactly, of course that's what it is.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
But it is, you know, basically saying anyone of his
cohorts or anyone who helped him also would be immune
from any sort of future convictions. However, that was in
the state of Florida. There was nothing that precluded the
State of New York from pursuing the charges that it did.
And of course, yes, to remind everyone, she is serving
twenty years for conspiring with Jeffrey Epstein to sexually abuse minors.
(03:06):
It is a serious crime, it is a violent crime,
and it is one that she was found guilty of
by a jury of her peers.
Speaker 1 (03:15):
Again, this one is and you correct me if this
sounds wrong, Rose, but she the argument she's been making
in court is not one about her innocence.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
No, it's not.
Speaker 1 (03:25):
She's making an argument, a technical argument about this immunity deal.
The language is down there. I put it in there somewhere,
the language of the immunity deal. Yes, the United States
will also agree that it will not institute any criminal
charges against any potential co conspirators of Epstein. That was
in his non prosecution agreement. Like you said, Robes in Florida. Now,
(03:48):
that's great, but it's we ain't got to listen to that.
We're not bound by that in New York and nowhere
else in the world is bound by that. And that's
the argument she's been trying to make. Capella judges said, no,
this cotis Supreme Court. They we only want to hear it.
They did not have to rule on anything. They just said, nah,
this is not one we're going to take up.
Speaker 2 (04:09):
Yeah. I mean the fact that they even considered her appeal,
because this wasn't typically when they would do something like
this was newsworthy in and of itself, but certainly this
was done before they typically start their new court term
where they discussed which court cases to take on. So
them doing this out of session, so to speak, or
when they traditionally do it was unusual, But now it's
(04:32):
been put to bed. She has no other option, She
has no other road to go down to try and
up end the conviction she was handed in twenty twenty one.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
You're right, that made headlines at the time because they woo,
something must be cooking here if they're taking this up,
and it was out of the ordinary, it was. It
was a big headline, so we thought something might be
coming they did.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
Nah, Certainly, we saw several things happen when we saw
a Deputy Attorney General Blanche meet with her, have those
hours long conversations with her, to which we listened to
hours of that conversation, or at least certainly the transcripts
we read them. And you know, you said she wasn't
denying it, or at least that wasn't the basis for
this appeal to the Supreme Court. But she does vehemently
(05:16):
deny all of her conviction. She says she it was
mischaracterized and she didn't know what was going on, YadA YadA, YadA,
YadA YadA. But the concern was that because she was
talking with the Trump administration, because she then seemingly got
some favors handed down to her, which we can get into,
there was concern that perhaps there was some sort of
(05:39):
backhanded thing going on where the Supreme Court might suddenly
take up her argument that she shouldn't have been convicted
in the first place.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
That's what the conspiracy theorist right there. However, there were
some facts that were lining up to make a lot
of people go, wait a second, what is going on?
What did you call the prison she's at now it's
called something, Oh gosh, club fed, club fed, club fed,
club fed. So already folks think about the interview she
did with ag Blanche. We got those transcripts, we heard
(06:09):
the audio tapes and whatnot, so it's out there. But
one of the biggest headlines of the thing that came
across is she was adamant never saw Trump do anything wrong,
never saw him do anything inappropriate, like she repeated it,
and she was gushing in her praise of him. I
understand she's trying to get a pardon, but that coupled
with the president. Now, if she had a chance of
(06:32):
getting a pardon, I don't think, given where he is
and where I don't, I don't think. I think her
chances went way way way down.
Speaker 2 (06:39):
Oh, given the court of public opinion. I mean, certainly
most politicians will read the tea leaves, they will check
where the wind's coming from, and they will adjust their
sales accordingly. He has permanently affixed his sales as far
away from anything to do with Jeffrey Epstein Gallainne Maxwell.
And even despite all of his ever to try and
(07:00):
change the conversation or change the news headlines, it k
kept coming back to this. So I just can't imagine
there would be a scenario in which he would want
to in any way be a part of Glene Maxwell
getting any sort of deal. However, I was shocked. We
were all shocked. In the middle of all of the criticism,
we did see her move to a much different facility.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
And nobody could explain why.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
Nobody has explained why still, and this has been months.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
Nobody knows why this was outside of normal procedure. Why
is she there? Nobody to understand. And again, this is
a place for non violent folks. She is a violent
sex offender. That is how she's classified, and that type
of prisoner or whatever, that classification is not one that
would be just walking around roaming freely for the most
part at this club fed I can't remember what town
it's in. Down there, but it's a.
Speaker 2 (07:50):
It's in Texas.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
It's kind of not a certainly not maximum security, but
it kind of roam free. Was there a degree, Well,
it is the I apologize that's not what I'm meant,
but it's one of these kind of open it's kind
of not just fenced in.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
One hundred percent.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
That is the case.
Speaker 2 (08:08):
And so this is it's called a federal prison camp
and it's in Brian, Texas, and so yes, there is
much lacks er security. I believe they said this is
the lowest security of all of the federal prison systems,
and this is for non violent offenders. So the fact
that she's in there with her violent convictions is something
(08:28):
that a lot of this is all reportedly coming from
other fellow prisoners. They were not happy about being housed
now with somebody who is in a very different category
than they are, So that didn't seem fair to any
of the other folks who were there. Elizabeth, Elizabeth Holmes
is there. How did I forget her last name? That's funny,
but that's the type of criminal. It's a high profile crime, certainly,
(08:51):
but this was one. This was a white collar crime,
as they say it. So that's typically what you see
in this prison, so it is highly unusual and it
has raised a lot of brows that she is at
this prison camp.
Speaker 1 (09:03):
Okay, do I have it right? Wasn't it the exact
same weekend, the very weekend after the interviews with ag Blanche?
Speaker 2 (09:09):
It would be hard to give a reason, and that's
probably why they didn't give a reason as to why
or even speaking to the timing of this move was made.
And they just I think they did say there were
sources who came out and said, hey, this was a
matter of security. She has threats against her life. This
was what was best for everyone, and the Bureau of
(09:29):
Prisons made the decision to move this prisoner where they
deemed it to be safest and best. And that was
kind of the end of it. But of course we
have lots of journalists asking questions about the next steps
for Galaine and what may happen.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
I forgot, We've never got the answer to that. I'll
speculate for a second, Say he pardons her, what's that
backlash going to be. What's how explosive of a revolt
would it be?
Speaker 2 (09:59):
Look, I think right now he's still dealing with statues
being put up on the National Mall with him holding
hands and frolicking with Jeffrey Epstein people constantly. I love
that verd when it comes to the statue because that
is exactly what it depicts, frolicking. When he went to
the UK, he has, you know, pictures of him and
Jeffrey Epstein and even Malania up there with Epstein greeting him.
(10:23):
Actually cast onto a huge castle for all to see.
Windsor castle. I mean, everywhere he goes in the world,
he is being hounded and shadowed by these images of him.
Whether people have to put up a screen show on
a castle or a big ten foot statue on the
National Mall, this is something he cannot shake. So I
(10:45):
can't imagine he would want to invite more criticism and
almost confirm the suspicions that are out there.
Speaker 1 (10:50):
And I think, look, I was thrown off a little bit,
but I couldn't really believe the backlash. We talk about
his base and I think he said was the line
he said, I could choose somebody in the middle of
the highway of the Fifth Avenue.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
I believe he said.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
And my folks was still vote for me, whatever it was.
But this is one of those things. We always think
he's just no matter what he does, they're gonna stick
with their guy. I was surprised at how many people
just by them saying we're not gonna release any more files,
there is no list, and oh, by the way, confirmed
he killed himself. Just stating those three things was enough
(11:24):
that folks lost it. To then pardon this lady.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
That would just be I can't imagine anyone could. I
know he thinks, and he has certainly been able to
keep a loyal following despite a lot of stuff that's
come out. This might be the nail in his coffin
if he went this way. Now here's the interesting thing.
You have these reporters asking questions of the White House.
(11:50):
They have never flat out said no, President Trump is
not going to pardon Gallainne Maxwell. They have never even
indicated that. And in fact, when ask again today there
was a vague response.
Speaker 1 (12:03):
Well how vague.
Speaker 2 (12:05):
It was pretty vague. This is what and this is
similar to what we've heard before. When White House Press
Secretary Carolyn Levitt told reporters today October six that she
was unaware if Trump had been asked to pardon Maxwell,
saying it's not something I've heard discussed.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
So this saying it hasn't even come up, so it's not.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
No, she's saying she hasn't heard of it being discussed.
Doesn't mean it didn't happen, or it hasn't been discussed
or isn't being discussed.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
She's doing that plausible deniability thing. They left her out
of it on purpose, maybe suggesting vague. I mean, what
is I cannot remember the answers they've given.
Speaker 2 (12:44):
Something similar to that. Trump has said, no one's asked me.
I haven't heard anything. So that's kind of and so
I think that is interesting because of course it doesn't
shut the door completely on it. And then Carolyn Levitt
did follow up with this, we don't comment on clemency
requests that may or may not have been made.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
But when they were asked about Diddy, he started talking
and said, you know what, they haven't asked me yet.
It might be I like some of use it Dada.
So we shall see now as we're discussing this here
what it seems to everybody. Yes, the Supreme Court told
her No, she is out at least of legal options
when it comes to this appeal. However, we will tell
(13:23):
you after this what her attorney says they want to
do now moving forward, They at least think they've got
some maybe vague options too.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
Welcome okay, I.
Speaker 1 (13:47):
I had done so well.
Speaker 2 (13:48):
I didn't say welcome aback for at least three weeks.
But there I go again.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
Shu kept up with me.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
Welcome back to I hope you're not taken aback, but
welcome back to Amy and DJ. We are talking about
the Supreme Courts. Fairly interesting and big decision today to
not consider Glainne Maxwell's appealed to her twenty twenty one conviction.
She felt like the immunity deal that Jeffrey Epstein struck
back in two thousand and seven should basically nullify the
(14:18):
conviction she had by the State of New York. But hey,
that was the state of Florida where that deal was struck,
not the State of New York. Supreme Court didn't rule
on its validity or not. They just said, we're not
even going to consider it at this point.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
Rejection. I mean, that's got to say something about the case.
Speaker 2 (14:32):
We don't even want to hear what you have to say.
That's the ultimate. Yeah, no, thanks, We're just not interested.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
You may have seem so personal with that, because we've
all been victim of that in some way form of fashion.
Maybe it was a mother, maybe it was somebody you
were dating, don't even.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
Want to hear Yes, oh yeah, I did hear that
from my mom quite a bit. So yes, that makes
a lot of sense. Now everyone is pointing to her
only option being a Trump pardon, and we've just gone
over why that seems extremely highly like beyond any realm
of possibility that Trump would ever consider that. If he
(15:10):
understands what the political temperature is about this and this subject,
he wants to get it far away from this as possible.
Speaker 1 (15:17):
But they think they have some options. Now we don't
know what they could be. These would have to be
hail Mary's of some kind. But whatever option she has now,
it would be almost flucish, if you will. It would
have to be some deal somewhere that she struck.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
Now.
Speaker 1 (15:33):
Her attorney made an interesting comment after this, talking about
the disappointment, but said, quote, the fight isn't over. Serious
legal and factual issues remain, and we will continue to
pursue every happnue available to ensure that justice is done.
Not exactly sure what that means, Not exactly sure what
those options could be, but they say they're not just
(15:54):
gonna sit around and wait for this sentence to be over.
She's still trying to get out of prison.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
So the problem is she's perjured herself before, and so
anything that she says, it's just incredibly difficult to believe
at this point. And do most of us believe she knows?
And do the victims say she knows? They absolutely concur
that she does. But all of them have I mean,
those who are speaking out have all said everything that
(16:22):
comes out of her mouth is a lie.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
And I mean, now she has an incentive to say
exactly what she needs to say that benefits her. That's
one thing people are pointing to that look members of Congress,
they they have to answer to their constituents. They have
to get themselves on news, they have to look like
they're tough on crime. If they want to bring her
to Capitol Hill have her testify, what kind of deal
(16:48):
can be struck? I actually don't know, but that's an
option at least that was on the table. The possibility
were so desperate to get information from this lady that
they were willing to cut a deal.
Speaker 2 (16:58):
The only I was just going over in my head.
What would be any sort of motivation for President Trump
to pardon her or give her a get out of
jail free card, even at the end of his presidency,
as so many presidents do. They'll just drop huge, huge
pardon bombs on their way out. But what would be
(17:18):
his incentive other than the fact that she had something
on him that she could have given up, that she
could have said, that she could have thrown at him
and so so. Yes, But then if he did do that,
then everyone would put those two things together, and his legacy,
which you know he cares significantly about, would be blown up.
So it just unless there is actually something real that
(17:41):
she could be holding over his head there, I cannot
think of any reason why he would pardon her or
give her any sort of clemency.
Speaker 1 (17:49):
She would have played that card by now, wouldn't She
would had something on him that if he was afraid
of her, exactly, I should have played that card a
while ago.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
And for all the folks, you know, a lot of
people it's interesting, have all talked about what she knows,
and certainly she knows more than anyone alive could possibly know.
But you know, she and her lawyers say she's had
threats in her life. Her lawyers say she's scared for
her safety, so it is interesting that she was moved
to a lower security prison. There are so many questions
(18:20):
I have about someone who they claim is at risk
based on the information she may or may not have,
or based on the fact that people in prison don't
like people who mess around with young children. But there
are still I guess a few avenues. I don't the
lawyers didn't get specific, but we will be looking for
(18:40):
any sort of new headline as to whether or not
this she has a case going forward, if she is
planning on still giving any sort of information to Congress,
And certainly I think a lot of folks from the
top on down would like this to be a chapter
that goes away.
Speaker 1 (18:57):
At this point, I would too, I mean, point, do
you ever close? This has ever done? Is there ever
enough information out there that satisfies the American public? Is
there ever enough punishment that's done? Is there ever anything
that's gonna make those victims feel better? I do not know,
but this just keeps dragging, and what they say every time,
it's like you're not even opening up a new of
(19:17):
the same wound. Like new wounds they keep revictimized. That's
what they are saying, victimized all over again by this stuff.
My goodness.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
Well, maybe this is one of the final, if not
the final chapters in the Gallaine maxwells Sock. We shall see,
but thank you for listening to us, every one. I
made me roboch alongside TJ. Holmes. We will talk to
you soon.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com