Trump claims Epstein 'stole' Virginia Giuffre and Mar-a-Lago staff
Trump told Daily Mail on Monday that he fell out with Epstein because the financer poached many of his Mar-a-Lago staff. But he's now offered more details about what happened between the two men. 'Everyone knows the people that were taken,' he told reporters on Air Force One on his way back from a five-day trip to Scotland. 'People were taken out of the spa hired by him.'
Trump went on to say: '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 to taking people. And he was fine. And then not too long after that, he did it again. And I said, out of here.'
Giuffre (pictured) said she was recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell to Epstein's ring in 2000, when she was 16 years old and working as a locker room attendant at the spa at Mar-a-Lago. Before her death earlier this year, Giuffre was one of the most prominent and vocal accusers of Epstein and Maxwell. Trump noted Giuffre had nothing bad to say about her time working for his Palm Beach Club. 'She had no complaints about us, as you know, none whatsoever,' he pointed out.
Trump banned Epstein from his Mar-a-Lago Club in 2004 but, before that time, both Epstein and Maxwell were photographed partying at the Palm Beach social club including with Trump's then girlfriend Melania Trump. The president has offered a variety of reasons for his disassociation with Epstein, who died in a New York prison in 2019 while awaiting trial on trafficking charges. He previously said he cut off contact with Epstein because he was a 'creep.'
Other reports say the two men fell out over an oceanfront Palm Beach property that was being sold out of bankruptcy that each man wanted. Giuffre, who claimed she was passed around as a teenager to rich and powerful predators, died in April by suicide, according to a statement by the family. But conspiracy theories continue to swirl around both her and Epstein's deaths.
Trump's MAGA loyalists have questioned if the deaths were [self-murder] or murder in order to keep them silenced. Additionally, the MAGA grew have long believed there is a list of rich and powerful people for whom Epstein is alleged to have trafficked young girls and it's fueled their feverish calls for the Department of Justice to release files around the case.
The lack of new information has been a source of frustration for both them and the president, who cannot escape questions on the matter. Questions about Epstein and queries about his relationship with the notorious financer followed Trump from the United States to his trip to Scotland.
The queries come as Maxwell met with Justice Department officials last week to discuss the case. She is also scheduled to testify before Congress on August 11th but her lawyer asked for immunity in exchange for her testimony.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
a few seconds ago
- Reuters
Judges question whether Trump tariffs are authorized by emergency powers
July 31 (Reuters) - U.S. appeals court judges sharply questioned on Thursday whether President Donald Trump's tariffs were justified by the president's emergency powers, after a lower court said he exceeded his authority with sweeping levies on imported goods. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., is considering the legality of "reciprocal" tariffs that Trump imposed on a broad range of U.S. trading partners in April, as well as tariffs imposed in February against China, Canada and Mexico. In hearing arguments in two cases brought by five small U.S. businesses and 12 Democratic-led U.S. states, judges pressed government lawyer Brett Shumate to explain how the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law historically used for sanctioning enemies or freezing their assets, gave Trump the power to impose tariffs. Trump is the first president to use IEEPA to impose tariffs. "IEEPA doesn't even say tariffs, doesn't even mention them," one of the judges said. Shumate said that the law allows for "extraordinary" authority in an emergency, including the ability to stop imports completely. He said IEEPA authorizes tariffs because it allows a president to "regulate" imports in a crisis. The arguments - one day before Trump plans to increase tariff rates on imported goods from nearly all U.S. trading partners - mark the first test before a U.S. appeals court of the scope of his tariff authority. The president has made tariffs a central instrument of his foreign policy, wielding them aggressively in his second term as leverage in trade negotiations and to push back against what he has called unfair practices. Trump has said the April tariffs were a response to persistent U.S. trade imbalances and declining U.S. manufacturing power. He said the tariffs against China, Canada and Mexico were appropriate because those countries were not doing enough to stop illegal fentanyl from crossing U.S. borders. The countries have denied that claim. "Tariffs are making America GREAT & RICH Again," Trump wrote in a social media post on Thursday. "To all of my great lawyers who have fought so hard to save our Country, good luck in America's big case today." The states and businesses challenging the tariffs argued that they are not permissible under IEEPA and that the U.S. Constitution grants Congress, and not the president, authority over tariffs and other taxes. The case is being heard by a panel of all of the court's active judges, eight appointed by Democratic presidents and three appointed by former Republican presidents. The timing of the court's decision is uncertain, and the losing side will likely appeal quickly to the U.S. Supreme Court. Tariffs are starting to build into a significant revenue source for the federal government, with customs duties in June quadrupling to about $27 billion, a record, and through June have topped $100 billion for the current fiscal year. That income could be crucial to offset lost revenue from Trump's tax bill passed into law earlier this month. But economists say the duties threaten to raise prices for U.S. consumers and reduce corporate profits. Trump's on-again, off-again tariff threats have roiled financial markets and disrupted U.S. companies' ability to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. Dan Rayfield, the attorney general of Oregon, one of the states challenging the levies, said that the tariffs were a "regressive tax" that is making household items more expensive. On May 28, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade sided with the Democratic states and small businesses that challenged Trump. It said that the IEEPA did not authorize tariffs related to longstanding trade deficits. The Federal Circuit has allowed the tariffs to remain in place while it considers the administration's appeal. The case will have no impact on tariffs levied under more traditional legal authority, such as duties on steel and aluminum imports. The president recently announced trade deals that set tariff rates on goods from the European Union and Japan, following smaller trade agreements with Britain, Indonesia and Vietnam. Trump's Department of Justice has argued that limiting the president's tariff authority could undermine ongoing trade negotiations, while other Trump officials have said that negotiations have continued with little change after the initial setback in court. Trump has set an August 1 date for higher tariffs on countries that don't negotiate new trade deals. There are at least seven other lawsuits challenging Trump's invocation of IEEPA, including cases brought by other small businesses and California. A federal judge in Washington, D.C., ruled against Trump in one of those cases, and no judge has yet backed Trump's claim of unlimited emergency tariff authority.
Reuters
a few seconds ago
- Reuters
Poland last on list for US troop cuts in Europe, Polish defence ministry says
WARSAW, July 31 (Reuters) - Poland, Ukraine's western neighbour, is expected to be the last country in Europe to face U.S. troop reductions, Poland's top defence official said, as Washington weighs scaling back its military presence across the continent. The prospect of a U.S. troop drawdown in Europe has been a recurring topic since the start of Donald Trump's presidency, when Washington began pressing allies to shoulder more of the defence burden. "All the conversations we have with the Americans indicate that Poland is the last country from which the Americans would want to withdraw (its troops)," Deputy Defence Minister Pawel Zalewski told Reuters in an interview on Thursday. Zalewski said there is a strategic rationale for the presence of American troops in Poland, on NATO's eastern flank, to serve as a deterrent against Russia after Moscow's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Zalewski said Poland is seeking to be the hub of the U.S. presence in Europe, potentially serving as a logistics, service or even production centre for the U.S. defence industry. "We are talking about the upgrade of F-16 aircraft or a service centre for all types of American combat vehicles, including Abrams tanks," he said. While Germany played such a role during the Cold War, he said it was logical for countries closer to the conflict in Ukraine to be the base for U.S. and allied military operations. Poland has ramped up defence spending and accelerated efforts to modernise its military, becoming NATO's top spender on defence in terms of the proportion of its national wealth. As the largest buyer of U.S. weapons in Europe, according to the Polish defence ministry, the country is positioning itself as a key player in the face of an assertive Russia. The arsenal includes Abrams tanks, HIMARS rocket systems, and air defence assets like the Patriot missile system, modern F-16 and F-35 fighter jets and Apache helicopters. As a leading voice calling for members of NATO to spend more on defence, Poland, which borders Ukraine, Russia and Belarus, has allocated 4.7% of gross domestic product to boosting its armed forces in 2025 with a pledge to increase to 5% in 2026.
The Independent
30 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump donor swindled more than $30 million from people thinking they were getting access and visas
A Trump donor orchestrated a $30 million scheme that promised foreign investors permanent residency and access to U.S. politicians in exchange for their money. Sherry Xue Li, 53, pleaded guilty on Wednesday to money laundering conspiracy and conspiracy to defraud the United States by obstructing the Federal Election Commission 's administration of campaign finance laws, the New York Times reports. In her decade-long scheme, Li and her co-defendant Lianbo Wang defrauded investors out of more than $30 million through a fictitious development project called the Thompson Education Center based in Sullivan County, New York, federal prosecutors said. The pair marketed the project as a 'Chinese Disneyland' that would include an amusement park, medical center, business center, a college, and homes, the federal complaint states. They told the investors, mainly foreign nationals from China, that if they contributed $500,000, they would be guaranteed lawful permanent residence in the United States through the EB-5 investment visa program. To make the fictitious project seem more real, the pair distributed promotional materials that contained photographs of Li with prominent U.S. politicians to falsely convey government support for the Thompson Education Center. In some cases, they also sold access to prominent politicians by collecting foreign investors' money and 'unlawfully contributing' it to U.S. political campaigns and committees, prosecutors said. For example, in June 2017, Li attended a fundraiser dinner to support the re-election of President Donald Trump. The cost of admission was $35,000 per person, the complaint states. Li planned to bring a dozen foreigners with her to the ritzy event. Li and Wang, however, then told the attendees they must each pay $93,000 — $80,000 to attend plus nearly $14,000 for food and travel expenses. They then sent instructions on how to wire transfer the money to bank accounts tied to Li, according to prosecutors. The pair then used the money they collected from the foreigners to contribute $600,000 in their own names. At the Washington, D.C. event, Li posed with the president and First Lady Melania Trump. They later used this photo to promote their development project. Federal law prohibits foreigners from making contributions in connections to U.S. elections. The president, his campaign and first lady have not been accused of wrongdoing in connection with this case. Throughout the years-long scheme, Li used the funds she collected to bankroll her own personal expenses, like casinos, jewelry, high-end retailers and upscale restaurants. Some of the money was used to 'create and perpetuate the fiction' of the Thompson Education Center's development, making it appear as though the project was actually underway, prosecutors said. In reality, Li and Wang hired contractors, engineers, and other workers to draw up architectural plans to keep up the illusion. Sometimes, when pressed about updates on the development, Li sent photos of a different construction site to investors. Wang pleaded guilty in 2024 to engaging in unlawful monetary transactions and conspiracy to defraud the United States. He was sentenced to five years behind bars. Li now faces up to 20 years in prison. As part of her plea agreement, Li agreed to forfeit $31.5 million, as well as property at three locations, prosecutors said. In total, more than 150 investors invested at least $31.5 million in the development project. Roughly half of that amount came from EB-5 investors who were promised green cards in return for their investments. None of them were granted green cards. 'Li defrauded more than 150 victims in the United States and abroad through years of lies and deception and sought to profit by selling access to the democratic process,' United States Attorney Nocella said in a statement. 'In doing so, she attempted to corrupt a fundamental institution in this country—fair and transparent elections free from unlawful foreign influence. Our Office is committed to investigating and prosecuting predatory fraudsters who steal victims' hard-earned money.'
