Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Thailand News and Discussion Forum | ASEANNOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Ghislaine Maxwell is on Pardon Watch

Ghislaine Maxwell Is on Pardon Watch! 67 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think Trump should pardon Ghislaine Maxwell, Yay or Nay?

    • Yay - Trump should pardon Ghislaine Maxwell
      33%
      20
    • Nay - Trump should not pardon Ghislaine Maxwell
      66%
      39

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Featured Replies

  • Popular Post
23 minutes ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

Are you for real? A real living specimen? This is misguided for any normal living person. Her conviction rests on specific, proven acts, not unproven conspiracies. Epstein’s 2008 plea deal and death don’t negate the evidence against her, as courts have repeatedly upheld.

Rubbish. It's conspiracy

 

conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, conspiracy to transport minors to participate in illegal sex acts, transporting a minor to participate in illegal sex acts, sex trafficking conspiracy, and sex trafficking of a minor.

 

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/ghislaine-maxwell-sentenced-20-years-prison-conspiring-jeffrey-epstein-sexually-abuse

  • Replies 124
  • Views 3.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • Slowhand225
    Slowhand225

    If they have nothing on Epstein then her conviction should be vacated.

  • All she has to say is that  the con grifter  was always a good boy,she will be out next week. If she says Trump was involved in shenanigans.she will never ever see the light of day again.

  • No client list, no crime.   Let her out before someone suicides her. 

Posted Images

I'd vote big NO for the pardon of the Menendez brothers.

  • Popular Post
2 hours ago, theblether said:

 

I don't agree. Get her back into court and televise it. Viewing figures,would rival the OJ Simpson trial. 

 

 

Sounds like the systemic   sexual abusing of young women is a matter of entertainment to you.

 

 

To note, even if there was some reason to get Ms. Maxwell 'back in court' no broadcast is allowed in federal criminal court.

she was convicted for getting young girls to have sex with older men, should never have the charges squashed, as for the trump accusations being tossed around we all know he did associate with him at one time but there is no evidence it was any more than association, same as epstriens lawyer and others, its just a dem talking point, if he was mentioned in them for being involved with girls biden would have exposed it or any of the miriad of dems  over the years would have. All this is  is a he said she said with no set evidence apart from political innuendo, anyone that used young girls for their sexual gratification needs to be held responsible no matter who they are, that includes democrats & republicans

  • Popular Post

Pretty hard to rationalize a convictions for conspiracy, when the other party never made it to court to be convicted of said crimes.

 

Can't convict her in connection with his past conviction, as 10 yr statue of limitation expired.  Did she really promote prostitution, or simply provide a holiday destination for people to visit and have sex.

 

Don't think she needed to groom anyone, as I think they were hooking before she met any of them.

  • Popular Post
3 hours ago, theblether said:

 

No. 

 

Congress can't get access to the Grand Jury material obtained in the two cases against Epstein. Congress is not the place as it will descend into horrendous hyperpartisan grandstanding. I'd prefer a televised retrial.

 

As for a pardon - Trump should just leave his keys at the door if he does that. Not a chance he should pardon her. No chance, never. 

 

There is no basis for a retrial.  She is on her final appeal to the SCOTUS, and that court does not allow  television coverage  of proceedings. You are right. It would be political suicide to pardon her, unless he agrees to do so at the end of his term, and instead offers a commutation.

I don't know her I wish her well? Sounds like someone does not want to piss her off.

I thought usually even though a person is guilty of a crime ( which she is) information leading to conviction of others involved usually can be taken into account for a more lenient sentence. 

It seems no one was really interested in getting the truth about who was involved dershovitz of course he remained " clothed" whilst getting a massage epstein made a point of getting wealthy and influential people to engage in his lifestyle. As they say you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

The fact many were constantly visiting his island knew exactly what to expect 

10 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Your derangement cult was silent about Epstein for years. Only in the last 2 weeks have you  pipped up about it because you think now, after all these years Trump is involved.

We was influenced by young Donald going on and on about getting the truth out about all the pedophiles involved with epstein 

  • Author
2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

No client list, no crime.

 

Let her out before someone suicides her. 

No she was convicted of sex trafficking a minor and 3 counts of conspiracy to engage in criminal sexual activity (with minors).

 

Nothing to do with a client list of the Epstein files.

 

You arguing for the release of someone with such convictions against her is a bit of a surprise.

29 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

There is no basis for a retrial.  She is on her final appeal to the SCOTUS, and that court does not allow  television coverage  of proceedings. You are right. It would be political suicide to pardon her, unless he agrees to do so at the end of his term, and instead offers a commutation.

Maybe after mid terms, as may be a lame duck by then anyway :coffee1:

  • Author
17 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Your derangement cult was silent about Epstein for years. Only in the last 2 weeks have you  pipped up about it because you think now, after all these years Trump is involved.

You are fine with the Epstein files being hidden and thereby pedophiles being protected?

45 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Pretty hard to rationalize a convictions for conspiracy, when the other party never made it to court to be convicted of said crimes.

 

Can't convict her in connection with his past conviction, as 10 yr statue of limitation expired.  Did she really promote prostitution, or simply provide a holiday destination for people to visit and have sex.

 

Don't think she needed to groom anyone, as I think they were hooking before she met any of them.

It is not often I agree with you (!) but I too have problems with a conviction which relies heavily on "conspiracy" when the other party to the conspiracy died under suspicions circumstances whilst in prison on remand.

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You are fine with the Epstein files being hidden and thereby pedophiles being protected?

Did I say that? No.

I am highlighting the hypocrisy of all the anti Trumpers here that basically repeat whatever the current msm headlines are.

They all mocked anyone that talked of the 'client list' but now, all of a sudden believe it and want it released because they think it will implicate Trump, no other name has been mentioned whatsoever.... you have all been brainwashed to despise the man that you couldn't care less about anyone else related to Epstein...you only want Trump to be there.

14 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No she was convicted of sex trafficking a minor and 3 counts of conspiracy to engage in criminal sexual activity (with minors).

 

Nothing to do with a client list of the Epstein files.

 

You arguing for the release of someone with such convictions against her is a bit of a surprise.

 

Not really a surprise. 

 

The girls she recruited were willing participants. Underage? Possibly, if they are to be believed. But I never believed a word out of Guiffre's mouth and I suspect the others were economic with the truth, or at least exaggerating/sensationalising some of it for a payout. 

 

She deserves jail as I already stated. But 20 years for recruiting (inviting) them while the men who actually had sexual relations with them are not only free, but with their identities hidden by the state seems a little unfair, no? 

 

She's been incarcerated for 5 years already. I believe that is enough for the crime when you look at the details and the circumstances. She is not a danger to the public and extremely unlikely to re-offend. 

  • Author
  • Popular Post
1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Pretty hard to rationalize a convictions for conspiracy, when the other party never made it to court to be convicted of said crimes.

 

Can't convict her in connection with his past conviction, as 10 yr statue of limitation expired.  Did she really promote prostitution, or simply provide a holiday destination for people to visit and have sex.

 

Don't think she needed to groom anyone, as I think they were hooking before she met any of them.

Don't think she needed to groom anyone, as I think they were hooking before she met any of them.”

 

A baseless slur against the victims of child rape and obfuscation of the crimes committed by the woman convicted of sex trafficking children.

 

The cesspit is deep around here.

I think she should be offered an immunity deal after which she'll probably need to be placed in Witness Protection.
Do be daft - Trump isn't going to "pardon" her.

Note:
Ghislaine Maxwell didn't commit suicide next week.

  • Popular Post
22 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Don't think she needed to groom anyone, as I think they were hooking before she met any of them.”

 

A baseless slur against the victims of child rape and obfuscation of the crimes committed by the woman convicted of sex trafficking children.

 

The cesspit is deep around here.

 

If you can find time to climb down off your moral soap box, the reality is that the sex workers were willing participants. They did it for the money, the fun, and the chance to hang around  what they thought were important, powerful people. Having  met people like this at various "events", I found them to be manipulative, scheming, vindictive, malicious, and skilled gold diggers..  Their clients might be awful people too, but that is another issue, separate from the type of person who was working for Epstein.

 

Based on the confirmed reports of Deputy AG Todd Blanche’s interview with Ghislaine Maxwell, here are the three most plausible outcomes and their ROM probabilities:

  • Deal‑for‑clemency (≈ 50 %) – Maxwell signs a proffer that clears Trump and implicates 1–2 Democrats; DOJ files a sealed Rule 35(b) by July 2026 (≈ 40 % sentence cut), BOP moves her to a camp in 2027, and Trump commutes the rest on 19 Jan 2029.

  • Limited help, modest cut (≈ 30 %) – She supplies narrow financial intel; court trims her term by ~20 %; no commutation; Trump remains untouched.

  • Maxwell flips on Trump (≈ 20 %) – She produces evidence against him; a special counsel is appointed, impeachment talk revives, and her retrial bid gains traction.

NB: Assessment grounded in current U.S. law
• Rule 35(b) – post‑conviction sentence reduction for “substantial assistance”
• 18 U.S.C. § 3621 – BOP authority to transfer inmates
• Presidential clemency – Article II pardon/commutation power

Methodology: Monte Carlo simulation using Dirichlet priors

— ChatGPT o3

  • Author
44 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Not really a surprise. 

 

The girls she recruited were willing participants. Underage? Possibly, if they are to be believed. But I never believed a word out of Guiffre's mouth and I suspect the others were economic with the truth, or at least exaggerating/sensationalising some of it for a payout. 

 

She deserves jail as I already stated. But 20 years for recruiting (inviting) them while the men who actually had sexual relations with them are not only free, but with their identities hidden by the state seems a little unfair, no? 

 

She's been incarcerated for 5 years already. I believe that is enough for the crime when you look at the details and the circumstances. She is not a danger to the public and extremely unlikely to re-offend. 

Jonny obfuscates child rape.

 

I’m surprised to see you putting forward such views in defence of a criminal convicted of such serious sex crimes against children.

 

Minors cannot agree to sex with adults, it’s not a thing, I do hope you understand that.

 

 

 

20 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Don't think she needed to groom anyone, as I think they were hooking before she met any of them.”

 

A baseless slur against the victims of child rape and obfuscation of the crimes committed by the woman convicted of sex trafficking children.

 

The cesspit is deep around here.

Children ... seriously.   Legally, maybe, but they were having sex, some prostituting themselves before meeting Maxwell.  

 

Every wonder why Virginia Giuffre, one of the most prominent persons, and others,  didn't testify at Maxwell's trial for the prosecution.   Would paint a completely different image of abuse vs very willing to have sex for money.  

 

I suppose you think all the gals in the sex trade in TH are being abuse & exploited ... :cheesy:

12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Jonny obfuscates child rape.

 

I’m surprised to see you putting forward such views in defence of a criminal convicted of such serious sex crimes against children.

 

Minors cannot agree to sex with adults, it’s not a thing, I do hope you understand that.

 

 

 

 

Maxwell didn't rape anyone. 

 

Nor was she convicted of it. 

 

The raping would have been done by the people on the client list. 

  • Author
  • Popular Post
10 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Children ... seriously.   Legally, maybe, but they were having sex, some prostituting themselves before meeting Maxwell.  

 

Every wonder why Virginia Giuffre, one of the most prominent persons, and others,  didn't testify at Maxwell's trial for the prosecution.   Would paint a completely different image of abuse vs very willing to have sex for money.  

 

I suppose you think all the gals in the sex trade in TH are being abuse & exploited ... :cheesy:

I feel I ought to make this clear.

 

14,15 year olds are children, they do not have competence to agree to sexual activity with an adult.

Adult sex with minors is child rape.

 

The law is very clear on this matter, I hope you are too.

 

  • Author
3 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Maxwell didn't rape anyone. 

 

Nor was she convicted of it. 

 

The raping would have been done by the people on the client list. 

When did I say Maxwell raped anyone?

 

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The girls she recruited were willing participants.


The kind of remark that makes my flesh crawl.

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

When did I say Maxwell raped anyone?

 

You said I obfuscate rape.

 

Maxwell didn't rape anyone, so why would you mention rape when discussing the length of her sentence?

 

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The kind of remark that makes my flesh crawl.

 

They were paid and went of their own accord. That is a matter of record. Most were of legal age. For the ones that were not, she deserves jail time as I have said multiple times. It is the length of the sentence I am disputing and the fact that those on the client list are not only free but protected. 

 

You appear to be confusing Epstein's crimes with Maxwell's. 

35 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

.  

 

I suppose you think all the gals in the sex trade in TH are being abuse & exploited ... :cheesy:

 

they are when they enter my house !

40 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

NB: Assessment grounded in current U.S. law
• Rule 35(b) – post‑conviction sentence reduction for “substantial assistance”

Just to note on Rule 35(b) that involves a motion that the US Prosecutor makes to the Court and decision is in the Court's discretion:

 

Rule 35(b): Only the Prosecutor (U.S. Attorney)

 

For a sentence to be reduced under Rule 35(b), only the prosecutor, usually the U.S. Attorney, can file the motion. The convicted defendant cannot request this on their own, even if they believe they gave helpful information. That decision is left up to the government.

 

If the government’s motion is filed, the court may then review whether the defendant’s substantial assistance justifies a reduced sentence. The judge has the power, but not the obligation, to approve it. It's also important to note that these motions must still follow the one-year sentencing rule, unless exceptions apply.

 

FAQ -- 2. What Kind of Help Qualifies as “Substantial Assistance”?
Substantial assistance means giving information that helps the government prosecute or investigate another person. This includes details about offenses committed or names of others involved. The help must be useful, and often it must be promptly provided to count.

 

https://thepathtojustice.com/rule-35-motion-what-is-it

4 hours ago, KhaoHom said:

This is the problem with these human trafficking bull<deleted> laws. RICO can be abused unmercifully as well as just general conspiracy charges. I know nothing about the case but I'll guarantee that she was convicted on the flimsiest of evidence and it's basically some large overarching Grand conspiracy bullshi+.

 

Ghislaine Maxwell was arrested on 2 July 2020 and indicted for those offences by Donald Trump’s DOJ—remember his 'I wish her well.'
 

So, if this is all just 'grand conspiracy bullsh*t', maybe you need to do penance for blaspheming your own leader’s 'best people' — ten Hail Marys Hitlers should do it.

5 hours ago, phetphet said:

It's not a matter of what we think. It depends on if there is real evidence that Trump was involved in Epstein's sexual dealings with young girls, and if she knows where it is, and is willing to testify and reveal it. Real evidence. Although her word alone might do real damage, it's only hard evidence that might finish him.

 

Even more so than the Jan 6 rioters, he will be keen to find a way to free her if she indeed knows where the skeletons are hidden.

 

even with ahrd evidence, there will never be any admission by him of doing wrong, all a plat against him and his family.  Even if tried in court, claiming 5th amendment will be his style.  IMHO

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.