jerrymahoney

No.

For one the word 'clears' as it appears in the topic head is not used in the ABC News source article. And the words "... Trump had never done anything in her presence" is from the ABC source document. It makes no implication as to anything that may have or may have not occurred NOT in her presence.

I emphasized certain words because those words do not agree with some of the words others have posted including yourself.

I didn't jump and say anything. I just posted the link as occurred in the ABC News article.

REDUX: Posted yesterday at 08:29 AM JerryMahoney Seems to me both attorneys Blanche and Markus have chosen their words very carefully.

Per the ABCNews report linked page 1: During her nine hours speaking with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche last month, Ghislaine Maxwell said nothing during the interview that would be harmful to President Donald Trump, telling Blanche that Trump had never done anything in her presence that would have caused concern, according to sources familiar with what Maxwell said. (my emphasis)

A Merry Mailman t-shirt

The statement in the #2 post this topic is that Ms. Maxwell "(told) Blanche that Trump had never done anything in her presence that would have caused concern." That statement makes no reference as to what may have occurred that would have caused concern but NOT in Ms. Maxwell presence whether she knows about it or not.

Note that the quote: "... telling Blanche that Trump had never done anything in her presence that would have caused concern," is from the ABC News story and not in the OP version. And the word 'clears' as used in the topic heading does not appear in the linked ABCNews story. As for the Supreme Court the case has to do with how federal Non prosecutorial agreements (NPA's) are handled in the different appellate circuits and has really nothing to do with how Trump or anyone else views the conviction as to the charges or evidence allowed at trial. And the DoJ has opposed to the Supreme Court taking the case.

The thumbs down were only fun when it was disclosed who posted them.

The Supreme Court will decide SEP 29 whether to take Ms. Maxwell's case. If so, and she wins -- which is by no means certain -- her case gets tossed and she is out free & clear. Everything else smacks of quid pro quo and is soap opera. Again, the Supreme Court appeal is procedural and has nothing to do with the evidence that led to her conviction.

Seems to me both attorneys Blanche and Markus have chosen their words very carefully.

What was clarified, if that, is that Ms. Maxwell herself did not observe any improper behavior with any third person(s) while in Mr. Trump's presence. It does not refer to any improper behavior by Mr. Trump that might have occurred while not in Ms. Maxell's presence.

Per the ABC News quote above: "... telling Blanche that Trump had never done anything in her presence that would have caused concern," I would think that is referring to a third person.

There are 2 active legal cases right now: - Trump sues Murdoch. WSJ, et al over the Epstein birthday card - Maxwell's filing with the Supreme Court to accept her case on the 2007 NPA All the rest is soap opera.