In the summer of 2000, Virginia Giuffre, a 16-year-old with no formal training, worked as a spa attendant at Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida. A minor in an environment serving affluent men averaging 60 to 65 years old, she was uniquely vulnerable. Within months, Giuffre was recruited by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, beginning a two-year ordeal of sexual trafficking and abuse from 2000 to 2002. Giuffre, who took her own life in April 2025, became one of Epstein’s most prominent victims. Now, President Trump’s recent statements reveal he was aware that Giuffre was “stolen” from Mar-a-Lago’s spa by Epstein in 2000—years before he banned Epstein from the club in 2007. His use of “stole,” framing a minor as property, raises disturbing questions about what Trump knew, what occurred at the spa, and why he failed to act sooner to protect vulnerable young workers.
Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Tuesday, Trump claimed his falling out with Epstein stemmed from Epstein’s recruitment of spa workers, including Giuffre. “People were taken out of the spa,” Trump said. “In other words, gone. And other people would come and complain this guy is taking people from the spa.” He specifically noted Giuffre, saying, “He stole her,” and indicated that Epstein “did it again” after being warned, prompting Trump to expel him. The word “stole” chillingly suggests Giuffre was treated as an object of possession, not a teenager exploited by a predator. Given Epstein’s history of targeting young girls, Trump’s reference to others being taken raises the possibility of additional victims. His acknowledgment that he knew of these actions in 2000—seven years before Epstein’s ban—casts a troubling light on the club’s oversight and Trump’s response.
A Minor in a World of Power
Mar-a-Lago, an exclusive private club, commands initiation fees of $1 million as of October 2024 and annual dues around $20,000. Its membership, primarily older men including real estate tycoons and political donors, averages 60 to 65 years old. The club’s spa, which Trump has called “one of the best in the world,” provides intimate luxury services to this clientele. Giuffre’s employment there at 16, untrained and unqualified for professional spa work, placed her in a precarious position, serving powerful men decades her senior. The suggestion that others were also targeted by Epstein amplifies concerns about the spa’s environment. How were teenagers allowed to work in such a setting, and what vulnerabilities did this create?
Epstein’s predation of young girls, often teenagers, is well-documented. Trump’s admission that he was aware of Epstein’s recruitment of Giuffre and others around 2000 indicates he knew minors were being targeted from his club. Yet, Epstein remained a Mar-a-Lago member until October 2007, according to a 2020 book, The Grifter’s Club. Why did Trump allow Epstein to remain for seven years after learning of his actions against underage spa workers?
The Language of “Stole”: A Minor Treated as Property
Trump’s choice of the word “stole” to describe Epstein’s recruitment of Virginia Giuffre is jarring, casting a 16-year-old girl as an object of possession rather than a vulnerable minor ensnared by a predator. The term, used in his Tuesday remarks aboard Air Force One, implies that Giuffre was a commodity—akin to property taken from Mar-a-Lago’s spa—rather than a teenager exploited in a setting that should have protected her. This framing reveals a disturbing perspective on the power dynamics at play, where a minor’s agency is erased, and her exploitation is reduced to a transactional dispute between powerful men.
Giuffre’s role as a spa attendant at 16, serving a clientele of wealthy men averaging 60 to 65 years old, amplifies the ethical concerns. The spa, a private enclave within Mar-a-Lago’s opulent grounds, provided intimate services to an elite membership of real estate moguls, Wall Street executives, and political donors. Employing an untrained teenager in such a setting raises questions about oversight and intent. Was Giuffre’s youth seen as an asset in this environment? Did the club’s culture normalize the presence of minors in roles that exposed them to older, influential men? Trump’s use of “stole” suggests he viewed her departure as a loss to his business rather than a safeguarding failure, a perspective that sidesteps the moral weight of a minor’s vulnerability to Epstein’s predation.
The implications extend beyond Giuffre. Trump’s statement that Epstein “did it again” and took “people” from the spa hints at a pattern of recruitment. Given Epstein’s documented history of targeting young girls, often teenagers, the possibility that others were similarly vulnerable cannot be dismissed. The word “stole” not only dehumanizes Giuffre but also obscures the gravity of what was taken: the safety and autonomy of a teenager in an environment that failed to shield her from harm.
A Contradictory Timeline
Trump’s claim that he confronted Epstein in 2000 over the recruitment of spa workers conflicts with his documented interactions with Epstein in subsequent years. In an October 2002 New York Magazine profile, Trump called Epstein “a terrific guy” who is “a lot of fun to be with,” noting that he “likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.” These remarks, made two years after Trump says he learned of Giuffre’s recruitment, suggest no rift. In 2003, Trump wrote Epstein a birthday message, later obtained by investigators, calling him a “pal” and wishing him “another wonderful secret.” Message pads from Epstein’s Palm Beach mansion, published by Vice News in 2016, show Trump called Epstein at least twice in November 2004 during a bidding war for a Palm Beach mansion, which Trump won for $41.35 million—four years after the supposed falling out.
In July 2019, after Epstein’s second arrest, Trump claimed he hadn’t spoken to him in “15 years” and cited a “falling out.” Trump Organization attorney Alan Garten told the Washington Post in 2019 that Epstein was banned from Mar-a-Lago in 2007, in response to criminal charges filed against him in 2006. A 2020 book, The Grifter’s Club, confirms Epstein remained a member until October 2007. Neither Garten nor Trump previously mentioned Epstein targeting spa workers. Earlier this month, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump expelled Epstein for “being a creep,” without referencing Giuffre or others. Trump’s Tuesday admission that he knew of Epstein’s actions in 2000, yet allowed him to remain a member until 2007, deepens the contradictions.
Urgent Questions
Trump’s acknowledgment that he was aware of Epstein’s recruitment of Giuffre in 2000, framed as “stealing” a minor, raises critical questions. Why did he describe a teenager’s exploitation in terms of property loss? If he knew spa workers were being targeted, why was no action reported to authorities? Why was Epstein allowed to remain a Mar-a-Lago member for seven more years? Were others employed at the spa similarly vulnerable, and what oversight failed to protect them?
Ghislaine Maxwell, who recruited Giuffre at Mar-a-Lago and was convicted of sex trafficking in 2021, adds another dimension. As a frequent club guest, Maxwell personally approached Giuffre. Trump has suggested he may pardon Maxwell, prompting questions about what she might reveal about the spa’s operations or Epstein’s activities there. Did Mar-a-Lago’s elite social environment facilitate such predation? And what accountability existed for protecting young workers?
A Legacy of Trauma
Giuffre’s story is a chilling reminder of the dangers faced by young people in settings of unchecked power. After escaping Epstein in 2002, following massage training in Thailand, she became a vocal advocate for survivors, detailing her abuse in lawsuits and public statements. Her suicide in April 2025 underscored the lasting trauma of her experience. The implication that others were recruited from Mar-a-Lago’s spa, as Trump’s comments suggest, points to a broader pattern of exploitation.
Mar-a-Lago, a symbol of wealth, now looms as a backdrop to a story of predation and inaction. Trump’s use of “stole” to describe a minor’s exploitation demands scrutiny. How many others were vulnerable at the club? What did Trump know, and why did he wait until 2007 to act? As his contradictory accounts fuel questions, the truth about Mar-a-Lago’s spa and its role in Epstein’s crimes remains disturbingly unclear.
