Bombshell Uncovered: Evidence Shows Blanche Likely Committed Witness Bribery, Evidence Tampering, and Conspiracy in New Mexico. Those Crimes Carry at Least Seven and a Half Years in State Prison.
Sufficient evidence rests in the public record, and opening a criminal investigation requires far less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. This all rests on the New Mexico Attorney General.
The President’s personal attorney now serves as the 88th US Attorney General of the United States of America.
This article makes the case that New Mexico has sufficient public evidence, today, to open a criminal investigation into Attorney General Todd Blanche for bribery of a witness, tampering with evidence, and conspiracy, and that opening one requires nothing but a decision by elected officials who answer to the public.
As Deputy Attorney General, Blanche spent nine hours across two days interviewing Ghislaine Maxwell under limited immunity, three years into her twenty-year sentence for trafficking the children Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump abused.
About a week after Maxwell handed her fresh lies to Trump's eternally loyal attorney, the Bureau of Prisons transferred her from the correctional institution in Tallahassee to a minimum-security prison camp in Bryan, Texas.
Under Section 30-24-3 of New Mexico law, knowingly giving anything of value to a person likely to become a witness is a third degree felony, and Maxwell is the central living witness to the trafficking of children at Zorro Ranch, Epstein’s New Mexico property, where the state reopened its criminal investigation in February.
The department has not identified who ordered the transfer. House Judiciary Democrats found no record authorizing it in the 3.5 million pages that federal law compelled the department to release, and ten requests for the case file have produced about 31 pages. Hiding evidence to prevent a prosecution is a felony in New Mexico, and knowingly combining with another for that purpose is a separate felony.
On Wednesday, New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez sued the department and named Blanche as a defendant; the Senate confirmed Blanche 3 days later.
Opening a criminal investigation requires credible evidence that felonies may have occurred, a far lower standard than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
The relevant law runs three sentences, all from the New Mexico criminal code.
Section 30-24-3 makes it a third degree felony to knowingly give or offer “anything of value” to “any witness or to any person likely to become a witness in any judicial, administrative, legislative or other official cause or proceeding” to testify falsely or to abstain from testifying.
Tampering with evidence, under Section 30-22-5, consists of “destroying, changing, hiding, placing or fabricating any physical evidence with intent to prevent the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of any person”; the offense is a third degree felony when the underlying crime is a first degree felony, and criminal sexual penetration of a child is a first degree felony in New Mexico.
The third sentence is Section 30-28-2: “Conspiracy consists of knowingly combining with another for the purpose of committing a felony within or without this state,” and New Mexico law makes each member of the combination answerable for the offenses of the others.
Under Section 31-18-15, each third degree count carries a basic sentence of three years and the conspiracy count carries eighteen months, so one count of each, served consecutively, reaches seven and a half years in state prison. A finding of aggravating circumstances lets the court add up to a third to each sentence, and each separate benefit and each separate act of concealment can charge as its own count.
Watch for three phrases as the evidence comes in: anything of value, hiding any physical evidence, and combining with another.
Blanche, then the Deputy Attorney General, questioned Maxwell in Tallahassee on July 24 and 25 of last year. He brought no line prosecutor into the room.
If the President and his personal defense attorney had written out the perfect answers for Maxwell to give, those answers would look exactly like the ones she gave, even where they wholly contradict the extensive and well-documented evidentiary record. She provided those responses in a room with no independent party present, to that same former personal defense lawyer, under an immunity he granted: she claimed to know of no wrongdoing by the President or by any of the well-known men around Epstein.
Epstein’s own emails to her contradict those answers. In April 2011, in a message the House Oversight Committee released last November, Epstein wrote to Maxwell that “that dog that hasn’t barked is trump,” the conspicuously silent one, and that a victim, identified in later reporting as Virginia Giuffre, “spent hours at my house with him.” Maxwell replied the same day: “I have been thinking about that.” The subject of Trump and the girls was live between the two of them, in writing. Eight years later, Epstein put the claim in an email to the author Michael Wolff: “of course he knew about the girls as he asked Ghislaine to stop.” Whatever Epstein meant by stop, his claim is that Trump knew about the girls and spoke to Maxwell herself about them, and her answers to Blanche directly contradicted the documentary record and the evidence a jury already accepted at her trial.
Her own sworn record contradicts her too. Federal prosecutors charged Maxwell with two counts of perjury over her 2016 deposition testimony, alleging she lied under oath when she claimed no awareness of Epstein’s recruitment of underage girls. That is the same kind of false claim she repeated to Blanche. The prosecutors who convicted her told the court she had shown a “willingness to lie brazenly under oath about her conduct,” and they dropped the perjury counts only after the trafficking conviction.
About a week after she fed those lies to the President's eternally loyal attorney, the Bureau of Prisons moved her down a custody level, out of the low-security institution in Tallahassee and into the camp at Bryan, Texas, the least restrictive custody the federal system has and a placement her sex offense conviction barred her from.
An August 13, 2025 letter from Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, signed by every Democrat on the committee and addressed to then Attorney General Pam Bondi and Bureau of Prisons Director William K. Marshall III, describes the camp as “categorically off limits to sex offenders” before her arrival, and describes camp transfers as requiring “multiple levels of review that would ordinarily take months to complete,” followed by a months-long waitlist. “Ms. Maxwell, however, appears to have short-circuited the entire review process and jumped the queue, receiving a place in Federal Prison Camp (FPC) Bryan within a matter of days,” the letter reads. The transfer occurred days before Maxwell was scheduled to sit for a deposition under a bipartisan congressional subpoena.
The letter’s central sentence: “These actions raise substantial concerns that the Administration may now be attempting to tamper with a crucial witness, conceal President Trump’s relationship with convicted sex offenders, and coax Ms. Maxwell into providing false or misleading testimony in order to protect the President.” The members demanded a list of every official who “were aware of, were involved in, or approved” the transfer, and information on “any possible benefits to Ms. Maxwell, including transfers, changes to conditions of confinement, pardons, commutation, or changes to DOJ positions in ongoing matters.” Maxwell’s clemency request is now pending before the President.
In February of this year, Bondi testified before the House Judiciary Committee and claimed she did not authorize Maxwell’s transfer and does not know who did. The department has still not produced the list of officials the letter demanded. The lawmakers then checked the 3.5 million pages the department was compelled to release under the Epstein Files Transparency Act and reported that “there does not appear to be a single record documenting her transfer or who authorized it.” The records exist, because bureau policy requires them, but they are missing from a production that federal law requires. In June, the same members disclosed a previously undisclosed policy change granting the Attorney General new authority over inmate placement decisions.
The office that has not explained the transfer now formally controls inmate placement decisions, and Blanche is in charge of that office.
The sequence we just outlined has the appearance of a quid pro quo. Maxwell gave demonstrably false testimony clearing the President and within days the bureau delivered her a transfer against their own rules.
Section 30-24-3 covers the offer as well as the delivery, so an investigation does not need a spoken agreement to charge. The department’s official story does not match the department’s conduct, though “trust me bro” seems sufficient evidence for the GOP members of the U.S. Senate and the Fox News crowd.
Whether or not something was explicitly promised, the benefits arrived on a clear schedule.
The mob runs the same way. Nobody says the deal aloud, especially if there are recording devices around. Generally, the participants talk around the deal, and the benefits are made clear. Conspiracy law developed specifically to address this pattern, because organized crime rarely leaves an intentionally recorded and explicit agreement. The evidence here points to coordinated conduct: who delivered what, in what order, for whose benefit. New Mexico’s statute reaches “knowingly combining with another,” and a combination is proven by conduct.
On February 19, Torrez reopened the state’s criminal investigation into Epstein’s Zorro Ranch, because “revelations outlined in the previously sealed FBI files warrant further examination.” His office asked the department for the case file ten times. A department spokesperson answered in July that the department “welcomes New Mexico undertaking additional investigation of the Zorro Ranch and stands ready to provide necessary assistance.” Zorro Ranch appears roughly 13,000 times in the released files; the department has sent Torrez about 31 pages, mainly media clippings and his office’s own past letters.
On August 5, Torrez sued. The 40-page complaint accuses the department of obstruction and includes Blanche among the defendants: “USDOJ and Acting Attorney General Blanche are refusing to facilitate the investigation of state law crimes by hiding information about Epstein and his co-conspirators from Attorney General Torrez and state law enforcement, when New Mexico is one of few jurisdictions that still may have an opportunity to hold Epstein’s associates accountable or otherwise provide some sense of justice to survivors.” Three days after the complaint named him, the Senate confirmed Blanche as Attorney General, 50 to 49, at 4:31 in the morning. He posted within hours: “I am deeply honored by the trust and confidence President Trump has placed in me to lead the Department of Justice as our great nation’s 88th Attorney General.”
So are Blanche’s violations of state law protected acts under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution? Under Gamble v. United States, the federal government and the states are seen as separate legal entities, each with authority for creating and enforcing its own criminal law; a federal decision not to prosecute does not mean a state cannot pursue charges, and the Constitution's authors did this intentionally because they understood that states act as additional checks and balances on federal power.
In Trump v. Vance, the Court held that a sitting president must answer a state grand jury subpoena, writing that “the public has a right to every man’s evidence” and that since the earliest days of the Republic “’every man’ has included the President of the United States”; a cabinet officer possesses no greater protection than the President who appointed him. A federal officer charged under state law can remove the case to federal court, where a federal judge, and not the officer’s own department, decides whether the conduct was part of a lawful federal duty. Interviewing a witness is such a duty. Conferring benefits for favorable testimony is not.
The House Judiciary Committee has demanded the prison transfer list for a year and received no document in response, because a Congressional committee letter carries no enforcement or compliance mechanism. It has never needed one, until now.
A state can lawfully force the release of that list, as in people get brought into court and potentially face criminally charges for refusing to hand that information over.
Here’s how that works. A state grand jury operates under different laws than U.S. Congress. Its subpoenas are enforceable through contempt in a way that Congressional subpoenas are not, and testimony before those grand juries is given under penalty of perjury. Once New Mexico opened its investigation on February 19, continued withholding of the case file became conduct chargeable under Section 30-22-5.
In 2019, New Mexico closed its Zorro Ranch investigation at federal request and in exchange for information about crimes committed in the state.
Then the federal government sent nothing back.
They said drop the legitimate case and we will give you something in return; the state dropped the case. Then the federal government never gave the thing they promised. And what’s been done about that? Better seven years later than never, the case is being pursued again.
The files the department withholds today reportedly include evidence of “grooming, trafficking, sexual abuse and other misconduct tied to the property.” On Wednesday, announcing the lawsuit, Torrez said: “New Mexico has a duty to protect survivors and investigate crimes committed in our state so that perpetrators can be held accountable.”
I wrote this article because the Epstein Class cannot be above the law, and they only are so long as convenient deferrals of authority are allowed to continue unimpeded.
We can go after these criminals in office, but going after them takes a serious shift in how justice and law are dispensed in this country. The political and legal classes are scared that enforcing the rules on their colleagues is bad for all of them. Good. If that scares a District Attorney or Attorney General, then we are going to shine the light on them too, because they are not allies, and they have failed to follow their oath to the American people and to the Constitution, no matter what letter is next to their name. Those individuals refusing to do their jobs are protecting a murderous gang of seditious human traffickers. We will work to ensure they lose their seats for it, and even to have them taken to account legally, right beside the monsters they shielded. In this nation's hour of need, they aided the enemies of freedom and justice.
And let their legacy be that: losing their career and gaining the ire of the public because they chose to protect seditious pedophiles like Donald J. Trump.
So what can you do about all this?
Check out the call to action below and the Existentialist Republic library at the bottom of this page.
If you find our work at The Existentialist Republic of value and you want to see it not just reach more people and more legislators, we need subscribers to keep growing!
We want to have staff and volunteers communicating full time with activists, legislators, and community organizers, and that growth all moves far more quickly if funded! Don’t let this be the reason you skip a meal or miss rent, but if you can subscribe or buy us a cup of coffee then you give this fascism destroying machine more capacity!
Call To Action
The ask takes ten minutes: email, in your own words, and tell them to investigate Todd Blanche for bribery of a witness, tampering with evidence, and conspiracy under Sections 30-24-3, 30-22-5, and 30-28-2. Do as many as you want:
New Mexico Department of Justice, the office with the investigation open and the lawsuit filed.
Your own state attorney general, to open under your state’s law and to publicly back New Mexico’s demand for the file.
Post the ask publicly and tag the offices, starting with the New Mexico Department of Justice on Facebook and your own attorney general’s accounts, so the ask and any non-answer are both public.
Tag your state Democratic Party and your own state legislators, and ask them to publicly call for the investigation, because officials who cannot open one can still demand one.
Your own words are what works; identical messages get counted once and filed. A form letter back is a lack of courage, and you can say so publicly.
The Existentialist Republic drafts model state legislation, and one of our state bills addresses this exact conduct: the Epstein Survivors Justice Act.
Everything we publish is available for free in the shop at BuyMeACoffee.com/TheER, all listed at $0.00.
Books, shirts, bumper stickers, and physical booklets are at TheExistentialistRepublic.com, and those purchases help keep this machine destroying fascism.
THE EXISTENTIALIST REPUBLIC LIBRARY
You can get a FREE PDF of the book in the BMAC shop for $0.00 by clicking on this sentence.
The Existentialist Republic Library
Conservatism: America’s Personality Disorder — physical copy / free download
Intro to Soft Secession — physical copy / free download
Oppositional Federalism and You — physical copy / free download
Toppling Tyrants: A Field Guide to Dismantling American Fascism — physical copy / free download
Grab Them By The E.A.R.R.: How to Get Politicians to Do What You Want — physical copy / free download
Being Dangerous: Go From Activist to Operative
More Free downloads:
Soft Secession: 100 Policies That Pass
All Four Completed Model Legislation Bills
The Opposition Guide to Tax Warfare
Six-Panel Soft Secession Brochure
This is the type of f*ckery that turns my insides incandescent with rage. I have lived experience with child sexual abuse and to see this happening on an industrial level is most shocking! I could never trust anyone who repeatedly says things like "trust me bro" as a matter of course in the cover-up of crimes regardless of who committed them. Naked ambition and self-enrichment are equally horrible traits of the lack of fixed-star character and values. Wielding power against the weak is the pinnacle of cowardice, reprehensible in every way.
Every one of those senators who voted for Blanche are criminals in my view as they are ACCESSORIES to his criminal activities‼️ They apparently LIED in taking their oath.