By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Beatrice Keul, a former Miss Switzerland and Miss Europe contestant, claims in an interview that vulnerable young women at Donald Trump’s 1990s pageants were steered towards Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking network. Keul alleges she witnessed fellow contestants being singled out and pressured into private meetings with unknown men by Epstein and another individual in the modeling industry, describing the environment as a “playground” where powerful men “knew exactly what they wanted.” While there is no evidence Trump was aware of or facilitated these actions, he has consistently denied all sexual assault allegations. The article notes that Trump and Epstein were friends and that Trump’s campaign states he has been “totally exonerated on anything related to Epstein.”
Read the original article here
The allegations that Jeffrey Epstein utilized Donald Trump’s beauty pageants as a recruitment ground for his sex trafficking operation have resurfaced, casting a disturbing shadow over a period of Trump’s business dealings. It appears to be a widely held belief, bordering on common knowledge for many, that these pageants, specifically those involving young contestants, served as a convenient and exploitative front.
The core of these allegations suggests a direct link between Epstein and the Miss Teen USA and Miss Universe pageants, which were once owned by Trump. The implication is that these events, with their focus on young, aspiring women and girls, provided Epstein and his associates with a readily available pool of potential victims. Reports indicate that some individuals were initially recruited into roles within the pageants themselves, or within establishments associated with Trump, such as the Mar-a-Lago spa, before being drawn into Epstein’s illicit network.
Many of the victims involved were reported to be as young as 15 or 16, working in roles like cleaning staff or masseuses. These young individuals were allegedly lured away from these initial positions by managers or associates connected to Epstein, who would then exploit them. The sheer duration and consistency of these alleged predatory practices over many years within these spaces are a stark and horrifying aspect of the claims.
There’s a strong sentiment that the pageants weren’t just a tangential connection but a deliberate tool. The argument presented is that the very nature of Trump’s pageants, catering to a specific age range of young girls, made them an ideal “shop window” for individuals like Epstein seeking to groom and traffic them. The suggestion is that this was an open secret, something many people in certain circles understood, yet little to no action was taken to investigate or stop it.
The focus on the age of the victims is a crucial element, with a push to accurately describe them as “young girls” rather than “women” when they were not of legal age. This distinction highlights the severity of the abuse and exploitation, emphasizing that these were not consenting adults but minors. The idea that these pageants were a “front to traffic women/girls” is presented as a widely understood reality, rather than a novel accusation.
The fear surrounding the release of further information related to Epstein is often linked to Trump’s potential complicity. The speculation is that the true danger for Trump isn’t necessarily the revelation of his own alleged direct abuse, which some believe he could evade consequences for, but rather proof of his active involvement as a “co-conspirator.” This level of involvement, potentially tying his finances to criminal activities, is seen as a significant threat, as it could lead to asset seizure and a more profound legal reckoning.
Some have gone further, directly accusing Trump of operating a “worldwide child rape and young women-pimping, visa fraud, trafficking, intelligence, blackmail, and money laundering operation through his pageants and ‘modeling agency.'” The narrative suggests that after a supposed “falling out” with Epstein, Trump’s involvement might have shifted, or that Epstein subsequently established his own operations to continue the same exploitative practices.
The sentiment that this information is not new but rather “old news” is prevalent. Many feel that the connections and alleged complicity have been discussed and understood for years, even decades. The frustration stems from the perceived lack of accountability and the ongoing efforts to downplay or dismiss these serious allegations. The call for action is palpable, with individuals questioning why, despite the widespread belief and alleged evidence, no significant legal repercussions have followed for those implicated.
The term “allegedly” is often challenged when it comes to Trump’s connection to these events, with many feeling the evidence and sentiment are strong enough to move past mere accusation. The question of “at what point are we past the ‘allegedly’ stage?” is frequently raised. The idea that Trump might have used his own private plane to avoid being listed on Epstein’s infamous “Lolita Express” flight logs also points to a perceived deliberate effort to obscure his involvement. Ultimately, the prevailing mood is one of disbelief and frustration that such serious allegations, seemingly supported by victim testimony and widespread understanding, have not resulted in more decisive action or transparency.