NBC Has Entered The Chat

 Credit where credit is due:

“The defendant’s willingness to brazenly lie under oath about her conduct, including some of the conduct charged in the Indictment, strongly suggests her true motive has been and remains to avoid being held accountable for her crimes,” prosecutors wrote in a pretrial motion.

Prosecutors said that Maxwell also lied when she was given a chance to acknowledge her actions in a 2016 civil suit. “When the defendant was given the opportunity to address her conduct with minors in the context of a civil suit, she lied repeatedly,” they wrote.

And then there’s the judge at her trial:

“Ms. Maxwell today acknowledged the courage of the victims, talked about the pain and anguish they expressed, to some extent acknowledged the pain and suffering,” Nathan said. “What wasn’t expressed was acceptance of responsibility.”

As well as the purposelessness of the Blanche interview:

Jack Scarola, a lawyer who represents roughly 20 Epstein victims, said that Maxwell’s history of mendacity shows that any investigator who questions her must be thoroughly prepared. “It is apparent to us that approaching an interview casually will be a complete waste of time,” he said.

Trump fired the lawyer who prosecuted Maxwell, then sent in Blanche. I’m sure we can trust his account of what she said. After all, her own lawyer says she told the truth. Of course, her lawyers said that about her civil deposition, too.

That deposition led to the perjury charges which prosecutors finally declined to pursue, because Maxwell was sentenced to 20 years in jail.

After her arrest, Maxwell was also charged with two counts of perjury alleging she made false statements in a deposition under oath in the 2016 civil case. Prosecutors alleged that Maxwell lied when she said she was not aware of Epstein’s efforts to recruit underage girls for sex.

Maxwell also lied when she claimed she was unaware of anyone 18 years or younger being on Epstein’s properties, they said, and when she denied that she had sexual contact with other women while with Epstein, and that Epstein had sex toys.

Does all of this make her a non-credible witness? It should. Could she be rehabilitated as a witness? Why, yes, she could:

Legal experts say that cooperating witnesses who have previously lied can still be effective witnesses if there is evidence that corroborates their claims. Their credibility can also be boosted if they give a compelling reason for why they lied.

Isn’t it ironic? Don’t you think?