Jeffrey Epstein introduced Melania to Trump? President's longtime biographer makes startling claim
Jeffrey Epstein
morass surrounding
Donald Trump
is deepening amid growing defiance by some Republicans, US President's longtime biographer
Michael Wolff
has re-ignited controversy. He claimed that the late disgraced financer played a key role in introducing
Melania Trump
to her future husband.
Wolff, in a startling claim, stated that long before she became the First Lady of the United States (POTUS)- Melania Knauss- she was "very involved" in convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's social circle, and that is how she was introduced to Donald Trump.
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Please select course:
Select a Course Category
Data Science
Others
MCA
Public Policy
Degree
Project Management
Operations Management
others
Product Management
healthcare
Leadership
Data Analytics
Finance
Artificial Intelligence
Technology
CXO
Data Science
Design Thinking
Cybersecurity
Management
MBA
Digital Marketing
PGDM
Skills you'll gain:
Data Analysis & Interpretation
Programming Proficiency
Problem-Solving Skills
Machine Learning & Artificial Intelligence
Duration:
24 Months
Vellore Institute of Technology
VIT MSc in Data Science
Starts on
Aug 14, 2024
Get Details
ALSO READ:
Social Security eyes massive reform in US: New policy could hit 3.4 million Americans this month
Melania and Jeffrey Epstein link revealed?
Speaking on The Daily Beast podcast, Michael Wolff claimed that Melania was introduced to Trump through
Paolo Zampolli
, founder of ID Models, who helped Melania move to the US. They met in 1998. Zampolli, who had ties with both Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, played a key role in helping Melania immigrate to the US.
"Where does [Melania] fit into the Epstein story? Where does she fit into this, into this whole culture of models of indeterminate age?" Wolff asked. "So this is another complicated dimension in this."
Live Events
"She's introduced by a model agent, both of whom Trump and Epstein are involved with. Epstein knew her well. She's introduced to Trump that way. Epstein [knew] her well," Michael Wolff said.
ALSO READ:
As Covid surge sparks alarm in US, Trump admin's big step worries local governments. What you need to know
Melania was part of the same modelling and social circles frequented by both Trump and Epstein, he added. He also questioned Melania's ties to what he called a 'culture of models of indeterminate age.'
Epstein spoke at length about Trump with the author Michael Wolff in August 2017, two years before being found dead in his jail cell and the recordings cast more light on Trump's long relationship with Epstein, The Daily Beast said in a report.
What has Melania Trump said?
The US First Lady has denied the Epstein link. Last week, she shared an excerpt from her bestselling memoir 'Melania', writing that she met Trump at New York City's Kit Kat Club, not through Epstein.
In her book, Melania describes how Trump, already twice divorced, was there with a date but spent the evening talking to her. 'It was a refreshing departure from the usual superficial small talk,' she writes.
ALSO READ:
Dr Vinay Prasad's FDA exit in less than 3 months linked to Sarepta gene therapy controversy? Check details
Wolff also described the first lady as someone who prefers to remain out of the spotlight. "She never is by his side," he said.
Despite Trump's efforts to distance himself from Epstein, a photo from 2000 shows Donald and Melania at Mar-a-Lago alongside Epstein and Maxwell. Epstein himself once claimed that he introduced the couple. Donald Trump's links to Jeffrey Epstein came to the spotlight after The Wall Street Journal reported that attorney general Pam Bondi told Trump during a May briefing that his name had come up in justice department files connected to Epstein.
Amid growing attention on the Epstein case, the Trump administration has faced renewed scrutiny after a July 6 memo from the Justice Department and FBI said that no "client list" exists.
Last Tuesday, the Department of Justice sought an interview with Ghislaine Maxwell, the former accomplice of Epstein, currently in jail. She was convicted in 2021 of sex trafficking minors on behalf of the disgraced billionaire, who died in custody in 2019.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
6 minutes ago
- Time of India
Tariffs may go either way but stay fully invested and avoid frequent portfolio churning based on news: Prashant Khemka
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads , Founder,, says market uncertainty is a constant, with major events overshadowing the frequent fluctuations. The advice is to remain fully invested and avoid frequent portfolio churning based on news, as this primarily benefits brokers. A balanced portfolio with a mix of domestic and export-oriented names across various sectors like IT, pharma, and chemicals is recommended to outperform the my assessment, despite the market reaction of the last few days, the base case expectation is that these are not the final tariffs. It is more of a negotiating tactic. Donald Trump is negotiating on two fronts with Russia over the Ukraine war and with India on the trade talks. So, he is using the same arrow to hit two targets. Using some leverage from this for the Russia-Ukraine war as well. His behaviour has been quite predictable. In the past also, if you see, whenever the negotiations come to final stages, he just ramps up what is at stake and then he has no ego or problem in backing down. I hope and I assume that is the base case here as has given 3 weeks, for the 21 days before this, extra 25% becomes applicable, and that also is an indication in my view that between now and then, we should see some further developments that would result in final tariffs that are well below the announced 25 plus 25. Having said that, there is some uncertainty and that is what the market is reflecting right you said, it can pan out either way. But from here on, going by the pattern in the past that Trump has exhibited, it seems more reasonable to assume that we would settle back somewhere below what he had originally announced which was 25%. Originally meaning, a week ago or so, he announced 25%. I doubt it would settle anywhere near at 50%. Though between now and three weeks' time, he might even ratchet up further the way the negotiating team is responding with patience and keeping our interests at the forefront because even if you agree to something, let us say, we signed a deal a few months back, there is nothing to say that he would not on top of that come out with further tariffs. We could have agreed a few months ago and he could have still slapped additional tariffs for buying Russian oil. He has done this with other countries with none other than Canada itself adding additional tariffs at a later point in have to give some more time and get used to some of this uncertainty. It is not easy. Obviously, the market can get used to it, but it is not easy on the individual sectors where it impacts the most. But that is the way the last few months have been and possibly for some time it could remain this first of all, the market-wide level uncertainty should not be new to any investor. Whether you look at it over the last 5 years, 10 years, 20 years or longer, there has always been a great degree of uncertainty almost at all times, consistently and persistently. In the recent past, we only remember the major ones like the COVID, the Russia-Ukraine war and now the tariffs in April and so on. But between these events, there would be a great degree of uncertainty as well. It is just that you tend to not remember them at a later point in time and believe me in a few years' time, you would not remember today. It would be lost amongst the major milestones or markers such as COVID and Russia-Ukraine war or so on and so forth. So, this kind of uncertainty is normal at all times though it seems extremely high while you are living through those periods. In terms of portfolio, we remain fully second question was whether we churn from one sector to another on the back of such announcements. The reality is if you were to churn every time something like this happens, I have not seen anyone who makes money doing that. Only people who make money are the brokers because they get brokerage fees in these moves but investors cannot make money churning their portfolios on such news, and certainly not fund managers. If you start churning on the basis of such news, you will completely drive the market against yourself with the impact cost. Even individual investors cannot make money out of such macro if tomorrow or next week or two weeks later, the tariffs are revised down to more acceptable levels and then you will have the reverse and then you will sell what you just bought today and buy the opposite. So that would not make money is our view. Stay fully invested and maintain a balanced portfolio; do not have just domestic names, do not have just export-oriented names, have a good balance. Obviously predominantly it would be domestic oriented names because that is where bulk of the market itself is, bulk of the opportunities are, and bulk of sectors are but we have IT services sector, pharma, chemicals and some of those would be on pressure certain days while others would do well and then it would be the other way around another day. On the whole the idea is to beat the market.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
6 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Trump's birthright order barred nationally, fourth ruling since SC decision
A federal judge in Maryland late on Thursday ruled that President Donald Trump's administration cannot withhold citizenship from children born to people in the country illegally or temporarily, issuing the fourth court decision blocking the president's birthright citizenship order nationwide since a key US Supreme Court ruling in June. US District Judge Deborah Boardman's preliminary injunction was expected after the judge said last month she would issue such an order if the case were returned to her by an appeals court. The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals sent the case back to her later in July. Since June, two other district courts, as well as an appellate panel of judges, have also blocked the birthright order nationwide. An email to the White House for comment was not immediately returned. Trump's January order would deny citizenship to children born to parents living in the US illegally or temporarily. Boardman in February issued a preliminary injunction blocking it nationwide. But the June ruling by the US Supreme Court upended that decision and other court rulings blocking the order across the nation. The justices ruled that lower courts generally cannot issue nationwide injunctions, but they did not rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by states. In her ruling on Thursday, Boardman certified a class of all children who have been born or will be born in the United States after February 19, 2025, who would be affected by Trump's order. She said the plaintiffs in the lawsuit before her were extremely likely to win their argument that the birthright order violates the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, which includes a citizenship clause that says all people born or naturalised in the United States, and subject to US jurisdiction, are citizens. They were also likely to suffer irreparable harm if the order went into effect, she wrote.
Mint
6 minutes ago
- Mint
'President has been clear on this': US calls India key strategic partner amid Trump tariff war
An official of the US State Department called India 'a strategic partner with whom the US engages in a 'full and frank' dialogue'. He contended that US President Donald Trump has been very clear with New Delhi on his concerns over its purchase of Russian oil and trade imbalance with Washington. 'What I can say in terms of India is that the President has been very clear in terms of the concerns he has regarding the trade imbalance, regarding the concerns he has when it comes to the purchase of Russian oil. You have seen him take action directly on that,' State Department Principal Deputy spokesperson Tommy Pigott said at a press briefing on Thursday. Pigott's statement came as he was asked, 'Is there any concern about the overall worsening of the [US] relationship with India and potential for India to be turning more to China and away from the US…' amid Trump's tariff threats. Days after Trump doubled tariff on India products to 50 percent, it was reported that Prime Minister Narendra Modi may visit China for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit from August 31 to September 1, his first visit to the country in seven years. 'India is a strategic partner with whom we engage in a full and frank dialogue. That will continue,' Pigott said, adding that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also spoken about it. 'Like anything in foreign policy, you are not going to align 100 per cent of the time on everything. But it is very clear. The President has been clear (about) the concerns that he has with the trade imbalance, the concerns he has with India purchasing Russian oil. He has taken action,' Pigott said. In response to another question on whether there is concern about an overall worsening in America's relationship with India and the potential for Delhi turning more towards China, Pigott stressed that this is about an 'honest, full and frank dialogue' about real concerns that this administration has, which the President has outlined very clearly and has been addressing through his actions. 'Addressing those concerns is important. That is part of what it means to have a frank dialogue," he said. 'Ultimately, this is about a frank and full dialogue, and that is what it means to advance American interests. That is what it means to really have full diplomatic dialogue with partners to address concerns that we need to see addressed,' he said.
