Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

espionage

Ghislaine Maxwell Proffer: A Daughter Acknowledges Her Father’s Espionage Shadows but Denies Epstein’s Sex-Blackmail Op Rumors

Published

12 minute read

Sam Cooper's avatar Sam Cooper

In July 2025, inside a sealed Justice Department conference room in Tallahassee, Ghislaine Maxwell spoke at length about her life with Jeffrey Epstein. Across two days of questioning, she confronted the themes that now shadow the American administration and some of the world’s most powerful men: was her father, Robert Maxwell, the root of a sprawling intelligence operation—one that extended through his daughter’s relationship with the mysteriously wealthy Epstein and reached leaders from Prince Andrew to Bill Clinton and even Donald Trump?

The session was not a cooperation deal or plea bargain but a proffer under limited immunity. Prosecutors could impeach Maxwell if she later contradicted herself.

Maxwell sat with her lawyers. Across the table were Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, FBI Special Agent Spencer Horn, and Deputy U.S. Marshal Mark Beard. Their questions probed Epstein’s fortune, his circle of elites, the persistent intelligence rumors, and his death.

On Friday afternoon, the Justice Department released hundreds of pages of partially redacted transcripts and audio recordings from the interviews. The White House presented this as a gesture of transparency amid backlash from Trump’s base and criticism from Democrats. The redactions, though extensive in places, still allowed readers to follow the central exchanges.

The closest Maxwell came to portraying Epstein as involved in anything “covert” or “nefarious” was in a curious recollection: “He showed me a photograph of himself with African warlords… He said he was in the business of finding stolen money for billionaires. He would take a percentage of what he recovered.”

Did Maxwell—who has already been convicted of perjury—lie again to shield powerful friends?

One exchange, centering on perhaps the most notorious and publicly recognized piece of evidence in the Epstein saga, suggests she may have.

Blanche: “The photograph of Prince Andrew with Virginia Giuffre has been described as one of the most consequential pieces of evidence. How do you respond?”

Maxwell: “It’s manufactured. Literally a fake photo. My London flat was too small to host such an encounter, and the date on the back doesn’t match flight logs. My friendship with Andrew made him trust Epstein more, but I had nothing to do with that picture.”

On Robert Maxwell and Intelligence

Blanche: “With respect to your father, there have been multiple questions about whether he worked for any intelligence agency. Do you have any knowledge about that?”
Maxwell: “I think—well certainly my father had a background in intelligence… I believe he did in the second World War. He was… a British intelligence officer. I think that… once you’ve been an intelligence officer, you’re kind of—always; it doesn’t mean that you’re formally employed.”

She added she had “no formal knowledge” of specific activities, but believed he “did help people.”

On whether Robert Maxwell ever introduced her to Epstein, she was emphatic: “They never met… I know they never met.” She said her father vetted Epstein through Bear Stearns leaders “Jimmy Cayne and… Ace Greenberg.”

Maxwell’s words were cautious, but telling. She essentially confirmed what intelligence veterans often describe: once active in that world, many never fully leave. By her account, her father lived as a businessman and politician but remained an informal node in intelligence—“trading business or ideas” with powerful people and institutions.

This amounts to an acknowledgment: Robert Maxwell lived and died inside the world of intelligence. His role as publisher, financier, and political broker likely made him a valuable cutout, and that was likely a profitable arrangement for his family. Plausible reporting over decades has strongly supported ties to MI6 and Mossad. The most persistent allegations involve the sale of bugged PROMIS software to U.S. government agencies on behalf of Israel’s Mossad, and financial dealings with Soviet bloc actors. None of these claims have been proven in court. But the limited comments of Ghislaine Maxwell suggest she knew her father’s business well.

On Epstein, Mossad, CIA, and the FBI

Blanche: “Have you ever had any contact… from Mossad…?”
Maxwell: “Well, not deliberately… Not deliberately.”

Blanche: “Did you ever think that Mr. Epstein was getting any money from any intelligence agency, including Mossad?”
Maxwell: “Well, I don’t believe so, but I wouldn’t know. I mean, I would be very surprised if he did. I don’t think so. No.”

Horn: “CIA? DIA?”
Maxwell: “I don’t think so. I just don’t think he had the wherewithal, and I think that whole aspect is bullshit.”

Her denials stand in contrast with reasonably credible, though not court-validated, media reporting. In 2019, journalist Vicky Ward reported in The Daily Beast that a former White House official said they had heard Alexander Acosta—then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, who handled Epstein’s 2007 plea deal at the end of the George W. Bush presidency—tell Trump transition interviewers in 2017: “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to ‘leave it alone,’” adding that Epstein was “above his pay grade.”

Epstein’s Suspicious Wealth

Blanche: “How did Epstein make his money?”
Maxwell: “He started as a math teacher at Dalton. From there he was hired by Bear Stearns… At Bear Stearns, he developed some new type of trading system—a trading vehicle. Then, after a disagreement, he left. That’s when he said he was in the business of finding stolen money for billionaires. He would take a percentage of what he recovered. But I was not part of his business world, except tangentially.”

She identified “very important clients”: Les Wexner—for whom Epstein “structured or restructured The Limited,” handled “his entire personal finances,” and “all of the investment strategy” (she speculated the 71st-Street townhouse, the vast Upper East Side mansion that became Epstein’s New York base, factored into compensation); Leon Black—“the same as what he did for Wexner”; another connected female in their circle provided the—“same help in business,” and even “contracts for the maids”; and there was an unnamed wealthy Ohio woman with “the largest Klein painting.”

Rumors have long swirled that Epstein’s fortune was less about finance and more about leverage — that his friendships with billionaires, politicians, and world leaders provided opportunities for kompromat, even blackmail. Investigators, journalists, and critics have speculated that his homes may have doubled as “honey traps,” recording powerful men in compromising situations to secure influence.

On blackmail: “Never. No… I thought he was a legitimate businessman, very conscientious, very good at math.”

On Clinton, Trump, Barak, and Movie Stars

Blanche: “You’ve been named on flight logs with President Clinton. How would you describe his relationship with Mr. Epstein?”
Maxwell: “President Clinton was my friend. Not Epstein’s… Clinton traveled on Epstein’s plane twenty-six times, or whatever the flight logs say. I was there. He never received a massage. I never saw anything improper.”

Blanche: “Did you ever see Mr. Clinton participate in massages or any improper behavior with young women?”
Maxwell: “No. Never. I was there. He never received a massage. I never saw anything improper.”

On specifics, she described joint travel:

  • Cuba, where she said Clinton met Fidel Castro.
  • Italy, a Vatican visit with Clinton aide Mark Middleton and Middleton’s wife to see Henry VIII’s divorce documents.
  • Africa, where Clinton flew with Chris Tucker and Kevin Spacey aboard Epstein’s jet.

She also volunteered: “I was very central in the ramp-up [of] the Clinton Global Initiative” and suggested Epstein “may have helped me help them” financially—without details.

Blanche: “What about Donald Trump? Your name and his are often linked through Epstein.”
Maxwell: “My father knew Trump. I admired him… Trump was never inappropriate with anybody. Never.”

Blanche: “Did you ever see Mr. Trump at Epstein’s homes or on his planes?”
Maxwell: “No. I never saw anything like that. I never saw him in any improper context with Epstein.”

Horn: “We’ve seen reports of Epstein’s relationship with Ehud Barak. Given your father’s deep ties to Israel, what was your impression of that connection?”
Maxwell: “I can think of Ehud Barak, yes. But I don’t know the details of their relationship. My father loved Israel, so I pay attention to it. We have ties to Israel. But I can’t tell you more.”

On the “Black Book”

Blanche: “Was there a client list? A black book of names?”
Maxwell: “There is no list. We’ll start with that… Nothing like that.”

On Epstein’s Prison Death

Maxwell said she does not believe Epstein killed himself, but also rejected the idea that he was silenced to protect powerful figures.

“I do not believe he died by suicide, no,” Maxwell said.

When asked if she had any theory about who might have killed him, she replied, “I don’t.” Pressed further on whether she thought Epstein was murdered to “keep him quiet” because he had information about “rich and powerful people,” she answered, “I do not have any reason to believe that.”

“And I also think it’s ludicrous,” she added, noting that if such people had wanted him dead, “they would’ve had plenty of opportunity when he wasn’t in jail.”

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Crime

Canadian Sovereignty at Stake: Stunning Testimony at Security Hearing in Ottawa from Sam Cooper

Published on

Canada’s Border Vulnerabilities: Confronting Transnational Crime and Legal Failures

The Bureau has chosen to publish the full opening statement of founder Sam Cooper before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, during the session titled “Canada–United States Border Management,” held on Tuesday, October 7, 2025, and webcast live at https://www.ourcommons.ca/Committees/en/SECU/Meetings  (Opening statement from Sam Cooper begins at 11:11:23)

https://www.ourcommons.ca/Committees/en/SECU/Meetings?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

OTTAWA Thank you for inviting a journalist to address lawmakers on a subject of extraordinary national importance. Tens of thousands of lives, our livelihoods, and our sovereignty are at stake.

I offer these remarks and recommendations with humility. I’m still learning every day. I speak regularly with numerous law-enforcement and security professionals in both the United States and Canada. For over a decade, I’ve focused professionally on the threats that transnational crime poses to Canada’s borders, institutions, and people, alongside deep reporting on our financial and legal vulnerabilities to threat networks that often include ties to hostile state activity. Canada’s recent terror designation of the India-based Bishnoi gang is important. But that particular action recognizes only one facet of the many-sided transnational fentanyl, human-trafficking, Chinese-supplied chemical precursor, weapons-trafficking, terror and extremism threats that I will discuss today.

Across hundreds of interviews with Canadian and U.S. experts, I have come to a conclusion: many Canadians — including citizens, lawmakers, and judges — do not yet fully understand the scope and nature of the problem, and also seem defensive in engaging it. And if we don’t understand it, we cannot solve it.

In these politically divisive times, I hope I can add value by relaying, clearly and fairly, what professionals on both sides of the border are saying about the cultural, legal, and political differences that impede cooperation between the United States and Canada. My reporting has emphasized Canadian enforcement challenges — not to be unduly critical of my homeland, but because I think we should focus first on the levers we control, and reforms we should have already tackled decades ago.

This isn’t my opinion only. As you know, Canadian Association Police Chiefs president Thomas Carrique recently warned that police are being asked to confront a new wave of transnational threats with “outdated and inadequate” laws “never designed to address today’s criminal landscape.” He added that Canada would have been far better positioned to “disrupt” organized crime had Ottawa acted on reforms first recommended in the early 2000s.

As RCMP Assistant Commissioner David Teboul said this year after the discovery of major fentanyl labs in British Columbia — notable for their commercial-grade chemistry equipment and scientific expertise — “There’s a need for legislative reform around how such equipment and precursor chemicals can be obtained.” More border regulations could help, but will not be sufficient absent foundational legal change.

It has long been my experience in discussions with senior U.S. enforcement experts that American and Australian police can collaborate effectively because the two nations are able to authorize wiretaps on dangerous transnational suspects within days. In Canada, that speed is impossible, and it has become a major obstacle.

As former RCMP investigator Calvin Chrustie testified before British Columbia’s Cullen Commission several years ago, due to judicial blockages arising from Charter of Rights rulings, it had become practically impossible to obtain timely wiretaps on Sinaloa Cartel targets in Vancouver. In recent years, such delays in sensitive investigations have undermined cooperation between the RCMP and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration in major cases of fentanyl trafficking and drug money laundering. In 2017, I was personally alerted to these longstanding concerns about the breakdown in RCMP–DEA cooperation by a U.S. State Department official.

These impeded investigations have involved the upper echelons of Chinese Triads, which maintain deep global leadership in Canada and align with Chinese state-interference networks, as well as senior Iranian and Hezbollah-linked networks operating here. Both networks are engaged in fentanyl trafficking and money laundering in collaboration with Mexican cartels active in Canada.

Canada must urgently reform what it can fix on our side.

My first recommendation is this — there is no “low-hanging fruit.” I have not spoken to a single knowledgeable Canadian officer — current or former — who believes that simply spending more on personnel, equipment, training, or border staffing will solve this. What I hear is that, from ten to twenty years ago, before the evolution of Charter-driven disclosure and delay jurisprudence in Canada, our nations enjoyed a much closer enforcement relationship. Experts point above all to two Supreme Court rulings — Stinchcombe and Jordan — as the core legal obstacles. Our Stinchcombe disclosure standards and Jordan time restrictions, as applied, disincentivize complex, multi-jurisdictional cases and deter U.S. partners from sharing sensitive intelligence that could be exposed in open court. Veterans describe enterprise files stalling for lack of approvals or because specialized techniques are denied. When police and prosecutors anticipate disclosure fights they cannot resource — and trial deadlines they cannot meet — the rational choice is to avoid the fight altogether.

I can explain in greater detail, but without question these rulings have devastated Canada’s ability to prosecute sophisticated organized crime. The result is a vicious circle of non-prosecution and impunity. To deny the need for deep legal reform is to deny the depth of the problem.

To sum up, my reporting at The Bureau has highlighted interlocking failures — legal, political, and bureaucratic — that have turned Canada into a permissive platform for synthetic narcotics and criminal finance, badly misaligning us with our Five Eyes law-enforcement and intelligence partners, and bringing us to the brink of a rupture with the United States.

Thanks for your attention, Chairman and Members.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Continue Reading

espionage

Canada’s federal election in April saw ‘small scale’ foreign meddling: gov’t watchdog

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

A new exposé by investigative journalist Sam Cooper claims there is compelling evidence that Prime Minister Mark Carney and former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau are strongly influenced by an “elite network” of foreign actors, including those with ties to communist China and the World Economic Forum.

A report from a federal watchdog confirmed that foreign meddling did occur in Canada’s April 2025 federal election on a “small scale.”

Canada’s Security and Intelligence Threats to Elections Task Force (SITE TF) said in a recent note that the “small-scale” interference that happened was hard to attribute to one particular state actor.

The task force does have the power to warn of any threats during an election. It did not do so this year despite warnings from opposition Conservatives that meddling at the hands of Communist China is a reality.

“Over the course of the election period, the SITE TF observed instances of foreign interference such as transnational repression, inauthentic and coordinated amplification of online content, and online threats such as scams and disinformation,” the report’s conclusion reads.

“These activities were observed at a small scale and often remain difficult to attribute to a foreign actor.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, election interference from China’s Communist Chinese Party (CCP) government has been a real issue in Canada in recent years.

In March, the SITE TF warned that the CCP government would most likely try to interfere in Canada’s federal election.

When it comes to the integrity of elections in Canada, there have been reported issues of meddling at the hands of foreign powers.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, a new exposé by investigative journalist Sam Cooper claims there is compelling evidence that Prime Minister Mark Carney and former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau are strongly influenced by an “elite network” of foreign actors, including those with ties to communist China and the World Economic Forum.

The commission was formed after Trudeau’s special rapporteur, former Governor General David Johnston, failed in an investigation into CCP allegations after much delay. That inquiry was not done in public and was headed by Johnston, who is a “family friend” of Trudeau.

Johnston quit as “special rapporteur” after a public outcry following his conclusion that there should not be a public inquiry into the matter. Conservative MPs demanded Johnston be replaced over his ties to China and the Trudeau family.

Continue Reading

Trending

X