By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In a recent interview, former President Trump stated that Jeffrey Epstein “stole” Virginia Roberts Giuffre from Mar-a-Lago, prompting a response from Giuffre’s siblings, who expressed shock and raised concerns about Trump’s potential knowledge of Epstein’s actions. Giuffre’s family emphasized that her work at Mar-a-Lago was meant to be a fun summertime job but instead led to her being sex trafficked, according to her allegations. Trump has denied any wrongdoing related to Epstein, and the White House maintains that Trump was merely responding to a reporter’s question. Giuffre’s family hopes the Trump administration will follow through on its stated promises of transparency and accountability.
Read the original article here
Virginia Giuffre’s family was undoubtedly shocked, and rightfully so, at Donald Trump’s choice of words to describe her. The statement, “stolen,” paints a chilling picture of a mindset where women, and particularly victims of sex trafficking, are viewed as possessions. It’s a word that implies ownership, control, and a complete disregard for the humanity of the individual involved.
This choice of words doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It’s consistent with a pattern of behavior and comments where Trump has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of empathy and a dehumanizing view of women. It aligns with a history of alleged inappropriate actions and statements about women’s appearances and value, suggesting a worldview where women are often seen as objects.
Furthermore, the implication that Giuffre was “stolen” from Trump, rather than focusing on the egregious nature of her alleged abuse and exploitation within Jeffrey Epstein’s network, speaks volumes. It’s a subtle shifting of the focus from the criminal acts committed against her to the perceived infringement on Trump’s own desires or “ownership” of her. This is a blatant disregard for her suffering and further evidence of his distorted view of the situation.
The use of the word “stolen” immediately brings up the specter of chattel slavery where people are property. It’s difficult to ignore this aspect, especially when considering the power dynamics and the vulnerabilities of the individuals involved. The echoes of ownership and control are undeniable.
The context in which this statement was made is also crucial. It arises amid allegations of Trump’s involvement in Epstein’s activities and his association with Ghislaine Maxwell. It’s important to remember that these connections include numerous flights on the “Lolita Express,” and Maxwell’s sympathetic treatment from Trump. It is highly likely that Trump was in communication with and likely knew about the sex trafficking of minors.
The fact that some people, including individuals with ties to Trump, are still trying to defend or downplay this statement is deeply concerning. It highlights a willingness to prioritize loyalty to Trump above all else. It also shows a disturbing level of insensitivity toward the victims of sex trafficking. It’s hard to argue that it’s simply a matter of “poaching” an employee, which does happen in business.
The situation is far from a simple misunderstanding or a misinterpreted phrase. It’s part of a larger pattern of behavior that should be thoroughly scrutinized. The idea that Trump has a team around him trying to find a way to defend him by playing the victim is not completely unreasonable. The more he tries to deny involvement, the deeper he shows how involved he was.
This whole situation warrants a level of transparency that is hard to find. Considering that Trump is alleged to have been involved with the crimes, the lack of transparency and the fact that the DOJ is essentially operating as Trump’s personal legal arm, should raise serious alarm bells for anyone.
Ultimately, the family’s shock underscores the profound offense and disrespect inherent in Trump’s statement. It’s a painful reminder of the callousness with which some powerful individuals view those they perceive to be beneath them.