The Justice Department prosecutors in Ghislaine Maxwell's 2021 trial did accuse her of being willing to brazenly lie under oath about her conduct, as reflected in their statements to the presiding judge.
The Justice Department has already accused Maxwell of being a pervasive liar. The prosecutors who brought charges against Maxwell repeatedly told the judge overseeing her 2021 trial that she was willing to “brazenly lie under oath about her conduct.

Can Ghislaine Maxwell be trusted to tell the truth about Jeffrey Epstein? - NBC News
Source: nbcnews.com
Key Evidence
Prosecutors told the judge overseeing Maxwell’s 2021 trial that she was willing to 'brazenly lie under oath about her conduct,' which formed the basis for two perjury counts (later dropped).
politico.compolitico.com4 key questions about DOJ’s move to interview Ghislaine Maxwell
politico.compolitico.comWhy is DOJ speaking with Ghislaine Maxwell? This characterization has been reported consistently by multiple reputable news organizations.
What the Evidence Shows
The claim consists of two main factual components: first, that the Justice Department accused Maxwell of being a pervasive liar, and second, that prosecutors repeatedly told the judge during her 2021 trial that she was willing to brazenly lie under oath about her conduct. Multiple credible sources confirm these assertions. According to reports from Politico and NBC News, prosecutors explicitly stated in pretrial motions that Maxwell had been willing to lie under oath, which was the basis for two perjury counts initially charged against her.politico.compolitico.com4 key questions about DOJ’s move to interview Ghislaine Maxwell
politico.compolitico.comWhy is DOJ speaking with Ghislaine Maxwell?
These perjury charges were later dropped following her sex trafficking conviction, but the characterization of her willingness to lie remained part of the official record. The language used by prosecutors was strong and unambiguous, describing her as brazenly lying under oath. This is consistent across multiple independent news outlets with high editorial standards.
There is no evidence contradicting this claim or suggesting it is taken out of context. The claim does not imply guilt beyond what was established in court but accurately reflects prosecutorial statements made during legal proceedings. Given the consistency and specificity of the sources, and the fact that these statements were made in a formal judicial context, the claim is well-supported and factually accurate.