Transcription
Hey everybody, Dr. G here. I'm a clinical and forensic psychologist as well as a body language expert. But today, we're not going to be analyzing body language. Today, we're going to be doing a forensic analysis of Ghislaine Maxwell's recent interview with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanch.
Before we get started with this, a couple of quick things. One, I wanted to make sure you know this is not a psychological evaluation of any kind. These are just my opinions. In addition to that, I do want to remind you to like and subscribe if you want to see more content just like this. All right, let's go.
So, the way we're going to be analyzing today is a little bit different. We have the transcript as well as actual audio recordings of this interview. We're going to be using both. I'm going to be using clips from other interviews. I'm going to help you better understand what a liar and manipulator Ghislaine Maxwell is. I'm just going to be highlighting certain elements of this interview. There's so much more I could cover. I will probably ultimately do a second video, but I want to highlight what I think is most important. All right, let's just jump right in.
First, we're going to listen to Ghislaine Maxwell addressing whether or not people were secretly recorded.
"I never wired nor saw a single house that had any type of uh inappropriate, let's say, video surveillance. And I'll define that for you. Inappropriate surveillance would mean in a bathroom, in a bedroom, in any private area of a home, >> in a room where there were massages given. You do not believe a camera exists or a video camera or a camera that takes pictures um inside any of his residences. >> Correct. >> So even the appropriate cameras that you just talked about which would be kind of exterior security cameras. Did you know whether there was any cameras that you're aware of inside any of the locations? >> Never. With one exception. >> Okay. What's the exception? >> The exception is Palm Beach."
All right, I'm going to stop here for a second. So, basically, Palm Beach, they said somebody was stealing things, so they had a camera set up to catch that. That's the the only exception. So, if that's the only exception, I want to show you this picture from the New York Times from a few weeks ago. This is an image that was released by the New York Times inside of Jeffrey Epstein's townhouse in New York. Now, I want you to keep in mind this was released on August 5th. This interview was done July 25th. So, she did not know that publicly. We now know that Jeffrey Epstein, in fact, if you look right here, had cameras in other rooms. We know this for a fact. It was not just this room either.
So, when she thinks the public only knows specific things that she then lies with impunity because she does not believe anybody can challenge it. And this is how she lies and manipulates. She believes the public only knows certain things and she lies based on those parameters. She's really upset by the idea that Virginia Giuffre had a picture with Prince Andrew. She constantly talks about how it's fake. We're going to cover that later. That is an actual piece of evidence that's publicly available. So, she gets very upset by it. She does not know that. We in fact know that Jeffrey Epstein did have cameras in other rooms. That is also covered in the New York Times article. So, we know for a fact this is a lie on top of the fact that other people haven't have reported that he had hidden cameras around and she absolutely would have known that.
Now, we're going to listen to Ghislaine Maxwell talking about how Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew initially met. Just listen.
"We got a lot to talk about regarding this. Did >> there come a time when um Mr. Epstein met Prince Andrew? >> Yes. >> And others in the royal family or just Prince Andrew as far as you know? >> Well, so as as much as I can piece it together. All right. First of all, let's just state I did not introduce him to Prince Andrew. I did not introduce him to Prince Andrew or to Sarah Ferguson. That is a flat untruth."
Stop. So, she is unequivocally denying that she introduced Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein. Let's hear what Prince Andrew has to say about that and then we're going to listen to the rest of what she says.
">> He was your guest as well in 2000. Epstein was a guest at Windsor Castle and at Sandringham. He was brought right into the heart of the royal family at your invitation. >> But uh certainly at my invitation, not at the royal family's invitation, >> but remember that it was his girlfriend that was the key element in this. He was the as it were plus one to some extent in in in that aspect. >> Am I right in thinking you threw a birthday party um for Epstein's girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell at Sandringham? No, it was a shooting weekend. >> A shooting weekend. >> Just a straightforward straightforward shooting weekend."
All right, let's go back to listening to Ghislaine Maxwell's version of events.
">> And Sarah had called Epstein and had arranged with Lynn or I don't know. I don't know. Now I'm speculating. Anyway, long and short, he met Andrew at there. And I'm not holding you to an exact date, but when >> we can date it from that picture if you find me the picture. >> Would you know without looking at a photo in your mind approximately when was that? >> I want to say it was 2000 2000. No, probably 2001 2002. >> Early 2000s. >> Yes. >> And I think it was actually um Prince Andrew himself who suggested that he met Jeffrey Epstein through you. I think that's true. So, uh,"
Do you see how quickly she turns? As soon as she finds out other people have information, she just flips it as though that's what she's been saying the whole time. "I think that's true." She literally just explained how that was not true. And yet, when Todd Blanch introduced additional information, she latched onto that and immediately changed it. And this is how she manipulates and lies. She's very good at it because then she flips her story, immediately starts talking about how he's correct, but she was just seconds ago saying the exact opposite.
Admittedly, it is a little bit frustrating to me that Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanch did point this out to her. Why not just let her continue to dig herself into a deeper hole to see whether or not she's telling the truth? Giving her additional information helps her correct her story. In in my mind, at least to me, in a forensic setting, that is not helpful. That gives them it gives liars and manipulators something to work with. So, frankly, I wish he hadn't said that to see where she would ultimately go with it because now she can correct her story and add details that she wouldn't have otherwise.
Now, we're going to listen to her talking about a photograph of Virginia Giuffre and Prince Andrew. Virginia Giuffre is no longer living, but but she has talked extensively about this and that's part of why Ghislaine Maxwell is in prison right now.
">> Do you think it was just misdated or do you think it's a literally a fake photo? I believe it's literally a fake photo. >> Um, why do you think that? >> Um, well, first of all, I don't remember it. >> We'll start. >> But but okay, but the outfit I'm wearing, >> yeah, >> is the outfit from my mom's birthday party."
Let's hear what Prince Andrew has to say about the same subject.
">> You provided a photo of the two of you together. >> Yes. >> Your arm was around her waist. >> Yes. >> You've seen the photo. I've seen the photograph. >> How do you explain that? >> I can't because I don't I have no again I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
So, I know I said that this is not a body language video, but there are so many signs of deception right here. So many signs of stress. I do not believe a word he's saying right now.
">> I've never seen Epstein with a camera in my life. >> I think it was Virginia Roberts camera. She said a little Kodak one that she lent to Epstein. He took a photo and your arm is around her waist. >> I don't remember. I don't remember uh that photograph."
"I don't remember" is also a phrase that Maxwell uses over and over again during her interviews.
">> I'm just trying to understand. There's a photo inside Ghislaine Maxwell's house. Ghislaine herself is in the background. Why would people not believe that you were there with her that night? Um, they might well wish to believe it, but there's the the the photograph is taken upstairs and I don't think I ever went upstairs. So, I don't remember ever going up there. I'm at a loss to explain this particular photograph. Um, if the if the original was ever produced, then perhaps we might be able to solve it. But I can't. >> You you can."
Now, both Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell have talked about the original on multiple occasions. She's talked about it many times. So, there's something about the fact that they keep going, "Well, if you can find the original, then maybe we could prove it." To me, that says, in my own personal belief, I don't have any evidence of this, but I'm just telling you what I think. I think that probably means that they had the original and they know that that's destroyed because both of them, for whatever reason, always think about the original photograph, and if you could find it, maybe it would be different, but there isn't one. The strange part of that being that it wouldn't be that hard if you were going to fake a photograph to have a printed out original, so to speak. So the idea that that's what they think about to me suggests they know something about what happened to the original.
Now we're going to listen to Ghislaine Maxwell talking about the Epstein list.
">> Did you know of the existence of any such list? >> There is no list. We'll start with that. The genesis of that story I can actually trace for you from its absolute inception if that is what you're interested in. Well, first first you know to to be sure there is no list. There's no client list. Nothing like that. >> No, there is nothing like that >> that you know >> that obviously. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So you say you think you know that Genesis. Well, go ahead. Tell us. >> Um I'd like you to know that I have brought some supporting corroborative evidence to >> Well, tell me what it is too and then we'll get the cooperation. >> Is this is this Do you want to take a break here because this is a long It's a long story. Let's take a break. Yeah. Yeah. Let's Let's take a break. >> All right. The time is 2:03 and we're going to take a break right now."
Very interesting that that's when they chose to take a break. There's another spot later on. We're going to see where when the timing of the breaks is always around the most important things. October of 2009 from Brad Edwards and he allegedly tells them that he has come across a piece of evidence that belongs to Epstein that contains a list of all of his clients and victims, underage girls, massage therapists, and his uh and the men who are having sex with them. And he becomes he Brad Edwards becomes a cooperating witness cooperating >> confidential >> confidential informant, sorry, confidential informant for them.
All right, all right. So, what we're hearing right now is that there in fact is a list. Whether or not she thinks it's legitimate, there unequivocally unequivocally is a list of exactly what everybody has always said the Epstein list is. So, we're going to skip ahead a bit because it's a very complex story, but in essence, she's saying that someone created a fake list. They were they admitted to creating fake evidence in the Epstein case. And then we're going to hear the last part she has to say about it.
">> Facture. I mean, have you seen the the the list even fake? Like, do you know? >> I I haven't seen it, but but >> I just I was >> I guess my my thing is that what Brett Edwards says in all of these things. >> So she just said she hasn't seen it. It's going to get more complicated. Let's keep going. >> In in the paperwork and whatnot and then so all this story is basically controlled by five people. There's four alleged victims that speak about the list and the blackmail and the men and the sex and whatnot and and the lawyers and now the prosecutors, sorry, the Southern District of New York for sure, but no one else. None of these stories carry from any of the 44 alleged original victims. They never ever say that they were farmed out to anybody. >> But the list itself, >> yes, >> where is it? >> That there is no list. But Brad Brad Brad Edwards said that he created a list >> confused about >> sorry he created a list. He so in that book that Alfredo Rodriguez produced that became evidence exhibit 52 in my trial has markings all over it circles and dots and whatnot and al uh Brad Edwards >> so she just says she has not seen this list and yet right here she's describing it. She is remarkably inconsistent. says that he got Alfredo Rodriguez to mark up the book of all the people who were involved. It includes Alan Dershowitz for the record who's marked. I don't remember what it does with Donald Trump. I I don't I don't know. You'd have to look. I don't have it. But um >> so so the list that everybody the black book the list what what you're saying is that you're you're you're exhibit 52 from your trial which is like an more of an address book a rolodex type thing that Mr. Rodriguez. Alfredo Rodriguez. Your understanding is that somewhere along the way he went through and kind of marked that list to say >> I don't know where that book actually comes from. >> Okay. >> I don't know what that book is. That book is some type of a compilation. But what it is is it's just pieces of paper with type. So if you had you could have made a list. I could put"
So she's all over the place. It's a fake list. There is no list. The list was made up by Brett Edwards and then marked up by this person, but I don't know who marked it up and so on and so forth. She's so remarkably inconsistent. You cannot take anything she says seriously. But one thing that's very clear is there's some kind of list that's got some kind of markings on it that were somehow meaningful to her. Even though she claimed it didn't mean anything, she had attributed some kind of meaning to it. So, you just can't trust what Ghislaine Maxwell says. Nothing she says is consistent or trustworthy.
Now, we're going to listen to her respond to questions about Jeffrey Epstein's death.
">> I think you said this in an interview, but if I'm wrong, forgive me. Um, do you do you have a view of of Mr. Epstein um of of whether he committed suicide or whether something else happened? >> Can Can we take a break? >> Yeah, sure. Yeah, we can take a break."
Once again, another convenient break with another incredibly important question. So once they come back, we actually have to skip ahead a couple of minutes before they get back to that question.
">> Do you think that the the third point you say which is which is kind of a failure by the BOP, there's been a lot of there's an OIG report, there's SDNY investigation about that. Um, do you so you think he was he was he did not die by suicide? I do not believe he died by No. >> And do you believe that um do you have any speculation or view of who killed him? >> I No, I don't. And I asked that because if you don't believe that there's any truth to the allegations of blackmail or um that he had kind of a list or that he had reasons to um have people hate him um why would somebody kill him in prison? in prison."
You notice how long that pause was? She is trying to gather her thoughts because she just he just asked her very directly. Do you have any speculation as to who it was? She's saying she doesn't. And now she's going to speculate as to who it was.
">> Where I am. They will kill you or they will pay somebody can pay a prisoner to kill you for $25 worth of commissary. >> Do you think there was somebody on the outside of prison? So putting aside what what could happen on the inside on the outside of prison who would who wanted him dead so badly that he would have or she would have you know caused him to be killed on the inside. >> I think that's I I don't see that. I think is it possible? Of course it's possible but I don't know of any reason why and I don't believe in the blackmail or in any of this. I don't think Epstein had a hit on like that. If it if it is indeed murder, I believe it was an internal situation."
All right. So, I don't think once again that anybody buys that either. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. She was asked in a previous interview about his death and she once again had reiterated the fact she thinks he was murdered. But she didn't say, "I think he was murdered by another inmate because that happens so much in prisons." She just said that she believed he was murdered. So, to me, this seems like this is her signal that she's not a threat to anybody, that she's not talking. She's keeping her mouth shut and she's not going to speculate that it was anybody that she knows or anybody that it could be. So, do I think that she actually believes that it was another inmate just because somebody wanted to kill him for no reason? That seems exceptionally unlikely, particularly given her previous interview.
">> To the extent that folks believe that he was murdered to keep him quiet or because he had information on rich and powerful people, that's what I do. Do you have any reason to believe that that's true? I do not have any reason to believe that. And I I also think it's ludicrous because if that I also happen to think if that is what they wanted, they would have had plenty of opportunity when he wasn't in jail. If they were worried about blackmail or anything from him, he would have been a very easy target."
And she knows that this isn't true. If in fact he kept blackmail material on people, he probably had some reasons and some ability to release those blackmail materials if something happened to him. However, when he was behind bars, he could have cut a deal. He could have talked to somebody. The dynamic was completely different. So, her suggesting this, it seems completely ludicrous. And this is but this is what she does. She talks about these ideas that are ludicrous as though it's totally normal and just makes things up. She just manipulates. She lies constantly.
Now, we're going to listen to her briefly talk about President Trump as as well as whether or not any masseuses were recruited from Mar-a-Lago.
">> And did you ever hear Mr. Epstein or anybody say that President Trump had done anything inappropriate with masseuses or with anybody in your world? >> Absolutely never. >> In any context. Um, do you know whether masseuses from Mar-a-Lago spa ended up giving massages to um private massages to Mr. Epstein? And I'm not asking about what you may have read, but from at the time from your personal knowledge, do you know whether that's true? I >> I don't I don't recall. Is it possible? Yes. But I don't remember. I don't remember that. So I don't want to I don't recall that. But it's possible. >> Do you have a recollection of you ever recruiting a masseuse from uh Mar-a-Lago spa to give to go give a private massage to Mr. >> I've never recruited a masseuse from Mar-a-Lago for that as far as I remember. I can't ever recollect doing that."
So per usual, she doesn't recall whether or not she recruited anybody. Let's hear what President Trump has to say about it.
">> This guy is taking people from the spa. I didn't know that. And then when I heard about it, I told him. I said, "Listen, we don't want you taking our people." whether it was spa or not spa, I don't want him taking people. And he was fine. And then not too long after that, he did it again and I said, "Out of here, >> Mr. President, did one of those stolen um you know, persons that include Virginia?" >> Uh I don't know. I think she worked at the spa."
So, it seems pretty clear that Ghislaine Maxwell has once again a big lapse in memory with something that is in fact verifiably true. Now, the question is is why does she lie about this? And as I've said before, I think it's because she doesn't know what is and isn't public at this point. She's having a hard time keeping track of everything. When Todd Blanch challenges her or gives her a little more information, then she's able to correct her lies. But without it, she just lies.
Now, all that being said, one thing that we're not really covering is what she says about President Trump, because most of it is just him saying her saying, "I've never seen anything inappropriate. He's never done anything bad. He's great." And all of those kinds of things, which may very well be true, but she's so unreliable and so untrustworthy. There's just no point in going over what she has to say about it because none of it can be trusted anyway. There's no proof one way or the other about anything related to that. So, I chose not to bother wasting your time covering it because basically all she says is that he's wonderful and that there's never been any sort of negative interaction, which like I said may very well be true, but who would know because she lies constantly.
Now, we're going to listen to Ghislaine Maxwell talk a little bit about President Clinton. We're going to watch two parts. The first one is talking about whether or not he ever got a massage.
">> Do you know whether, for example, President Clinton ever received a massage? >> I don't believe he did. >> And what makes you say you don't believe he did? >> Well, because I don't. So, that's a good question. uh the time that Epstein and President Clinton spent together. >> So when someone says that's a good question, particularly the way that she did follow followed by laughter means I don't have an answer prepared for you. >> The only times I believe well obviously they traveled those that you know they came they went on the plane 26 times or whatever that would be one journey. So they spent time on the plane together and I don't believe there was ever a massage on the plane. So that would have been the only time that I think that President Clinton could have even received a massage and he didn't because I was there."
So here is a picture of President Clinton getting a massage from someone who worked for Jeffrey Epstein. This is when he was hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein. He clearly got massages literally in public. So you you think he would do this but not do it on the plane? That seems highly unlikely. But here's the bigger issue. Why would she lie about it? Why would she deny that he got a massage? Because she said the massages were no big deal. There was nothing inappropriate about them. She never saw a single thing that was inappropriate. It was all above board. No big deal. So why would she deny that President Clinton ever got massages when he was around Jeffrey Epstein?
">> Do you know one way or the other whether their relationship continued without you? Like when you kind of moved on past Mr. Epstein? >> I don't believe so. >> Why do you say that? You don't believe so? >> Because I don't think they had a relationship even when I was there. I was I President Clinton liked me and we got along terribly well, but I never saw that warmth or that that warmth like however you want to characterize it with Mr. Epstein and Mr. So I didn't see that. I didn't see any interest in I didn't see President Clinton being interested in Epstein. He was just a rich guy with a plane."
Despite what Ghislaine just said, this looks pretty warm to me. So why is it that she would lie? Because this looks like it's a trip when they're in Hong Kong. If you look at that logo in the background, it appears that they're in Hong Kong at this time. So why would she lie about this? Why would she say there wasn't a warm relationship between them? In my opinion, she's probably lying about these things because she wants the powerful people whose secrets she knows to know that she is not going to turn on them, that she will continue to lie. She will keep up all of these lies and that she is not going to change her story.
All right, we're going to go ahead and stop here. Hopefully, this is helping you better understand some of the lies and manipulation that she told. I really want you to keep in mind the awful things that Ghislaine Maxwell did. She is just as bad as Jeffrey Epstein. She engaged in the same acts as Jeffrey Epstein differently, but she was a part of this. She recruited people for Jeffrey Epstein, recruited children for him. So, I want you to keep in mind she is in prison for that right now. She is a sex trafficker. Nothing she said today can truly be trusted. She was completely inconsistent. She verifiably lied about certain things and not much of what she said tended to add up. I frankly wouldn't believe a word she says about anything. So, I think that her word at this point is useless. My hope is that this somehow does not lead to a pardon. That would be completely insane. But, you never know.
If you have any thoughts about this or if there's anything else you want me to analyze or there's any other aspects of this you want me to take a look at, please let me know in the comments below. Last thing before we get finished up is I do want to remind you to like and subscribe if you want to see more content just like this. All right, thanks for watching.