Ghislaine Maxwell agreeing to appear before Congress sounds, on paper, like a breakthrough. In reality, it’s more of a reminder of how little closure the Epstein case has actually delivered.

Maxwell, the longtime confidant of convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, is set to testify virtually before the House Oversight Committee on Feb. 9. The session is part of the committee’s ongoing investigation into Epstein’s activities and network, announced by Chairman James Comer during a markup related to contempt resolutions involving former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

But expectations are already being managed downward. Maxwell’s attorneys have made it clear she intends to invoke the Fifth Amendment. Comer himself acknowledged as much, saying he hopes she changes her mind but does not expect substantive answers. Committee staff have also indicated they anticipate Maxwell will “take the fifth” throughout the deposition.

That reality raises an obvious question: what does Congress actually gain?

From Maxwell’s perspective, the move is entirely rational. She is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence following her 2021 conviction for recruiting and trafficking underage girls for Epstein. Any deviation from silence could carry legal risk, regardless of whether prosecutors claim there is no remaining exposure. Her lawyers have framed the hearing as political theater — a characterization that, while self-serving, isn’t entirely off base.

From Congress’s perspective, however, the hearing reflects sustained public pressure. The Epstein case refuses to fade, fueled by periodic document releases, resurfacing photographs, and skepticism surrounding official conclusions — including the Justice Department’s 2025 memo stating there was no evidence Epstein maintained a “client list” and that he died by suicide.

Maxwell’s name inevitably sits at the center of that distrust. She is widely viewed as someone who knows more than she has ever said publicly, even if the legal system has largely exhausted its leverage over her. The Oversight Committee’s repeated attempts to question her, including earlier subpoenas and denied immunity requests, reflect that unresolved tension.

The problem is that silence, however frustrating, is still a legal right. A witness invoking the Fifth may satisfy public curiosity symbolically, but it rarely advances factual understanding. If Maxwell follows through on her attorneys’ guidance, the February appearance is unlikely to provide new revelations — only a visible reminder of how many questions remain unanswered.

In that sense, Maxwell’s testimony may be less about uncovering facts and more about signaling that Congress is still paying attention. Whether that’s enough to restore public confidence in the handling of the Epstein case is another matter entirely.

From Daily Caller:

Source

Photo Credit: David Dee Delgado/Getty Images