'She has nothing to lose' Why is Ghislaine Maxwell now keen to talk about Epstein?

After Ghislaine Maxwell met federal prosecutors last week, the imprisoned British socialite's legal team portrayed her as a beacon of truth willing to discuss all matters related to her child sex-trafficking co-conspirator Jeffrey Epstein's many crimes.

- Victoria Bekiempis

"Ghislaine answered every single question asked of her over the last day and a half. She answered those questions honestly, truthfully, to the best of her ability," her lawyer, David Oscar Markus, said.

Maxwell's highly unusual two-day sit-down with the deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche – who served as Donald Trump's criminal defense lawyer before working for his justice department – comes as the US president tiptoes through a political minefield related to Epstein and his own social links to the disgraced former financier.

But Blanche's meeting – held amid rumors and denials of a pardon for Maxwell – did not only show Trump's flagging efforts at damage control over the Epstein scandal. Maxwell is simultaneously pursuing several other strategies to be freed from her 20-year prison sentence. And some experts question whether her highest priority is revealing the whole truth and everything she knows about Epstein and Trump and other powerful figures as opposed to simply earning her freedom.

Maxwell's team is urging the US Supreme Court to consider her appeal, which contends that she was shielded from prosecution as part of Epstein's controversial 2008 plea deal – an argument opposed by the same justice department that has now met her.

Maxwell is also trying to make the most of a congressional subpoena by demanding immunity. Her lawyers said if this did not happen, Maxwell would have no choice but to invoke her fifth amendment rights to remain silent. They also suggested clemency, which Trump could grant immediately.

Ron Kuby, a longtime defense lawyer, said this broad-spectrum approach reflected a sound legal strategy. "If I were representing her, I would be doing exactly the same thing," he said. Kuby said the Supreme Court agreed to take on "only the smallest fraction" of petitions. "It's a last-ditch effort that defendants use when they have enough money."