All posts by Dr. ESP

The Wall Street Enquirer

Media

The Past Is Prologue.

~William Shakespeare/The Tempest

For those with very short-term memory issues, let me remind you of the three key elements in the conspiracy between Donald Trump and America Media, Inc. publisher David Pecker for which Trump was convicted on 34 felony charges.

  • Publish good stories about Trump.
  • Kill bad stories about Trump.
  • Make up stories about Trump’s opponents.

After such a decisive verdict from 12 of Mr. Trump’s peers, one would think “main stream media” outlets would understand the difference between journalism and propaganda.  Based on the June 6, 2024 front-page article about President Joe Biden’s mental acuity in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), it is obvious publisher Almar Latour and editor-in-chief Emma Tucker did not get that message.

The article titled “Behind Closed Doors, Biden Shows Signs of Slipping,” according to the WSJ, is based on “accounts from both Republicans and Democrats.” It did not take long for real investigative journalists to provide evidence that the only thing happening behind closed doors is that MAGA interviewees were telling the WSJ the exact opposite what THEY were saying in private.  The best example involves former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. He told the WSJ that “[Biden] would ramble.  He always had cards.  He couldn’t negotiate another way.”

Kevin, it was a frigging budget/debt ceiling negotiation.  Could you reel off revenue, expense and interest numbers from memory?  And there are innumerable photographs with you speaking from cards.  Then you complained that he seemed to rely on staff.  If it was so important that the president be the only spokesman for the administration, was not the same true for you?  Yet you delegated further negotiations to representatives Garret Graves (LA) and Patrick McHenry (NC).  But don’t take my word for it.  Immediately following the debt agreement, McCarthy told Capitol Hill reporters that Biden had been “…very professional, very smart.  Very tough at the same time.”

And look at the results. Biden got a two-year debt ceiling deal the House Democratic caucus would support, and Kevin McCarthy lost his job.  How ironic is it the Wall Street Enquirer questioned Michael Cohen’s veracity in order to exact revenge against Trump because the latter did not offer him a White House job?  Yet, never considered McCarthy’s motive for changing his tune to bolster the WSJ’s hit job might be the fact Biden ate his lunch and cost him the third most powerful position in America.  Is this not just one degree of separation from the National Enquirer’s making up stories about Trump’s opponents?

To recap, Rupert Murdoch and the WSJ have grabbed the baton from David Pecker and the actual Enquirer.  In fact you can make the case based solely on one edition (June 14, 2024).

  • Print good stories about Trump.  “Virginia Hasn’t Backed a Republican for President in Two Decades. Is It About to Flip?”
  • Kill bad stories about Trump. No mention of Trump’s calling Milwaukee, the site of the Republican National Convention, a “horrible city.”
  • Print bad stories about Trump opponents. “Merrick Garland Earned Congress’s Contempt.”

The only difference is we do not know (yet) if the similarity is based on a unilateral decision by Murdoch and the WSJ to boost their preferred candidate or a meeting between WSJ operatives and the Trump campaign.  For all we know it might have been hosted by Harlan Crow at Bohemian Grove.

POSTSCRIPT: I KNOW IT’S WRONG

Georgia O'Keeffe on the Art of Seeing – The MarginalianI find it hard to pass up a great joke just because it is politically incorrect.  This morning I crossed that red line when I learned that Georgia O’Keeffe was born in Sun Prairie, Wisconsin, a one-hour drive on I-94. west of Milwaukee.  My first thought?  Instead of the actual headline in yesterday’s Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “Donald Trump calls Milwaukee ‘a  horrible city’ weeks before RNC comes to town,” would a more appropriate headline be, “Trump Grabs Milwaukee by the O’Keeffe.”

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

Two Verdicts

Culture

This post is not a comparison of the verdicts in New York and Delaware.  It is about the second verdict delivered by a jury of Hunter Biden’s peers.  One completely overlooked by the post-verdict analysts on every major news outlet.

Most of the attention is being paid to the political impacts, especially which of the two major presidential candidates is the beneficiary of the guilty verdict.  The early consensus was Joe Biden, for the following reasons.

  • The split screen with Biden’s respect for the rule of law on one side versus Donald Trump’s ranting about a rigged system on the other, a contrast that should resonate with still undecided voters.
  • Voters with family members and friends who are dealing with drug addiction will identify with the pain the Biden family faces in the wake of the guilty verdict.
  • A guilty verdict in the “friendly confines” of Delaware undercuts Trump’s and his lemmings’ malarky that Hunter had the benefit of a venue populated by individuals who likely had voted for a Biden (Joe or Beau) at least once.

However, there is one more reason.  With this jury’s demographics, most legal pundits thought a hung jury was likely.  And were surprised it took just three hours of deliberations for the panel to reach a unanimous decision.  I would argue the quick result was due largely to those very demographics and the fact that members of a  jury can put aside their partisan loyalties, but it is infinitesimally harder to cast out their values.

Delaware is ranked #12 in the U.S. for gun law strength, according to the non-profit Everytown for Gun Safety.  In recent years, the state legislature has enacted laws that include:

  • Increasing the age for handgun ownership from 18 to 21.
  • Requiring a permit to purchase a gun.  To obtain a permit, applicants must provide their fingerprints and attend gun safety training.
  • Increasing protection for victims of domestic violence.
  • Requiring secure storage and preventing child access.
  • Prohibiting certain assault weapons originally designed for military use.
  • Limiting magazine capacity to 17 rounds.
  • Repealing special immunity for gun manufacturers.

In other words, it did not matter who the defendant might be.  Delaware residents favor sensible gun safety regulation, and their 12 representatives on the Hunter Biden jury would not be hypocrites and selectively apply this core value.  As another recently convicted felon would say, “This jury would convict Mother Teresa of violating gun laws in Delaware.”

This jury, by convicting the president’s son, may have further tilted the sanity scale in favor of a Biden victory in November.  A recent decision by the 5th District U.S. Court of Appeals, “ruled that drug users shouldn’t automatically be banned from having guns.” (NBC News) If affirmed by the Supreme Court, the justices will again be siding with a minority, Americans who believe the Second Amendment is absolute.  Today, a carefully vetted sample of Delaware voters, told America they believe universal background checks are not too much to ask of someone who wants to own and operate a deadly weapon.  They believe no one needs an assault weapon to ensure their personal safety.  They believe law enforcement, following due process, should be able to confiscate guns from individuals who represent an imminent danger to themselves and others.

In short, MAGA world believes drug addicts should be able to purchase firearms.  Joe Biden supports sensible gun safety laws.  And his refusal to intervene in his own son’s violation of such laws is proof positive of his commitment to this position.  One more irrefutable side-by-side comparison of the choices voters face this November. 

Ironically, Biden previously scheduled an address at a Washington, D.C. training session for gun safety activists, sponsored by Everytown for Gun Safety, three hours after his son was convicted of violating federal gun purchase and ownership laws.  Attendees would have understood if he cancelled and went to be with his son in Delaware.  But that’s not who he is.  Unlike his presumptive opponent, being president is not about public versus personal interests.  Joe Biden understands the connection between the two and that there is time for both.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

In the National Interest II

Random Thoughts

Based on the success of my first novel In the National  Interest, I wondered if there was room for a new fictional genre, implausible conspiracy theories in which the motive and participants were unimaginable.  However, as with my account of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, making the implausible possible depended on the use of the public record to back up the story.  In the National Interest, the counter-intuitive narrative that Kennedy’s death was engineered, not by enemies, but a close advisor at the request of the president himself.  The details are laid out in a contemporaneous journal maintained by one of the individuals tasked with planning and carrying out the events in Dallas on November 22, 1963.

Following last Thursday conviction of Donald Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business documents to coverup a sexual encounter with an adult film actress right before the 2016 presidential election, I wondered if this format that worked once, might work again.  The premise was simple.  Was there something not quite kosher about the relative ease with which the jury so quickly came to a unanimous verdict on all counts?  If so, had someone who put a thumb on the scale kept a journal of the process he or she used?  And who might that be, especially if it was someone least expected to want to see the ex-president go down?

NOTE:  The following is an abridged version of a fictional account of the behind the scenes conspiracy to ensure Donald Trump would be convicted using the public record including transcripts of the trial.

My first clue something was afoot came when, the evening after Donald Trump’s conviction, CNN anchor Kaitlin Collins asked lead defense attorney Todd Blanche whether he or his client was responsible for the defense strategy.  In response Blanche told Collins he and Trump made decisions as a team, adding the following justification which was contrary to everything I had ever heard about the attorney/client relationship in a criminal trial.

It was both of us.  If there’s a lawyer that comes in and says that they’re in charge of their defense strategy, they’re not doing a service to their client.

Todd Blanche is no Rudy Giuliani or Jenna Ellis, both of whom have lost their licenses to practice law for malpractice in the service of Trump.  He had experience as a prosecutor and was well thought of in New York legal circles.  Moreover, he had resigned as a partner in one of Wall Street’s most prestigious firms, moved to Florida, bought a home near Mar-a-Lago and started his own firm where Donald Trump would become his primary client.  According to the New York Times, Blanche’s former colleagues during his tenure as prosecutor in the U.S. attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York are baffled by “a striking career move–forfeiting a lucrative law firm partnership to represent a man notorious for cycling through lawyers and ignoring their bills.”

The New York trial is only one of three in which Blanche Law (his new firm) is representing Trump including the Mar-a-Lago documents and the federal January 6 cases.  In these cases, Blanche and his team have focused on ensuring neither goes to trial before the November 5, 2024 election.  One can only imagine why a lawyer who had to deal with Trump’s in-court and out-of-court behavior in a case he had the best chance of winning would want to risk becoming known as a three time loser if the Supreme Court and Aileen Cannon ever let the either two go to trial.  UNLESS, having played in Trump’s legal sandbox for years before the current spate of indictments–he also represented Paul Manafort–he decides, in the national interest, maybe I should help take down this narcissistic psychopath.

If so, he then had to ask, how could I do this?  To see the answer, all you have to do follow the New York falsified business records trial.  Consider the following lists of behaviors and arguments which certainly contributed the jury’s guilty verdict.

  1. Involve Trump in decisions related to his defense knowing he will “direct” you to focus on messaging rather than the evidence and the law.
  2. Let Trump think that Juror #2’s presence on the panel, because he included Truth Social as one of his news sources, made a hung jury a slam dunk.  On that assumption, Trump was convinced he could now use the trial for political messaging without fear of a conviction.
  3. Unleash Trump to attack the judge, judge’s staff, witnesses and jury knowing it would result in a gag order his client would violate, irritating the judge.  All the while, standing stoically beside him to cover his complicity in Trump’s self-destructive behavior.
  4. In your opening statement, tell the jury Trump did not have sex with Stormy Daniels.  The jury would know it was a lie, and therefore could not trust anything else Blanche said.
  5. When Trump, for some reason, does not demand that his defense team challenge the accounts offered by David Pecker and Hope Hicks, let him have his way.  Was Trump afraid they, especially Pecker, had even more dirt on him?
  6. Obviously, vendetta-seeking Trump wanted to use the trial to destroy Stormy Daniels?  Instead, Blanche and his co-counsel Susan Necheles decided to slut-shame her, making her more of a sympathetic witness than she deserved to be.
  7. Trump’s motive for dealing with Michael Cohen was the same.  How could Blanche make this backfire?  First, bore the jury to sleep with hours of cross-examination that achieved nothing except to have Cohen simply confirm everything he had admitted during direct questioning.  Second, set up a “gotcha” moment which, maybe just maybe, Blanche suspected the prosecution could undercut with a time-synced video of Trump and his “bag man” Keith Shiller.
  8. Trump tells the defense team they have to call Robert Costello to bury Cohen, based on Costello fiery testimony before House Republicans accusing the Biden Administration (without evidence) of weaponizing the Department of Justice.  Blanche knows it will be a disaster based on the emails and text messages provided by the DA’s office during discovery.  But he gives Trump his wish anyway.
  9. In his final summation, Blanche continues to tell the jury the payments are for legitimate legal services, something he knows is not true and nobody on the jury will believe.
  10. Still unsure if he has convinced the jurors that Trump should be found guilty, Blanche hammers the final nail into his client’s coffin.  In his closing he says, “You cannot send someone to prison, you cannot convict somebody based upon the words of Michael Cohen.”  Blanche knew this inappropriate behavior, referencing sentencing when the juror has no role in that process, would infuriate Judge Merchan.  And Merchan would give the jury curative instructions which would telegraph his displeasure.

One or two unintentional mistakes by a legal team are understandable during a seven week trial.  But ten suggests a strategy.  And there are only two explanations.  Knowing they could not win on the evidence, Blanche risked his reputation so Trump’s appeal lawyers could point to these “errors” and suggest Blanche and his team were guilty of malpractice.  Or, having become frustrated with Trump’s trying to play lawyer, Blanche decided, “I’ll show this know-it-all SOB just how stupid he is.  And I dare him to accuse us of misrepresenting him.”

Where is Occam and his razor when we really need them.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

The Truth and Consequences

Media

Like many anxious Americans, I spent much of this past week flipping between MSNBC and CNN looking for the best coverage of the Trump falsified business records/hush money/election interference trial.  MSNBC provided the best analysis with its stable of experienced former prosecutors and defense lawyers including Lisa Rubin, Neal Katyal, Harry Littman, Joyce Vance and Barbara McQuade.  However, the quality of their coverage depended on a full house of distinguished attorneys and journalists, who not only knew the law, but knew how Donald Trump responds to it.  Andrew Weissman, lead investigator for special counsel Robert Mueller.  New York Times investigative reporter Susanne Craig, who shared a Pulitzer Prize, with two colleagues, for their coverage of Trump’s finances including the fact he paid a total of $750 in federal income taxes in 2016 and paid none in 10 of the 15 previous years.  Tristan Snell, a former New York state assistant attorney general, who lead the successful prosecution of Trump University which resulted in a $25 million settlement to the enrollees he defrauded.

The MSNBC coup d’état was snagging Lachlan Cartwright, the assistant editor at the National Enquirer during the period publisher David Pecker and editor Dylan Howard, in his words, “…transformed the grocery store tabloid into a criminal enterprise.”  He wrote a detailed memoir of his time at the National Enquirer in an April 2024 New York Times Magazine article “What I Saw Working at the National Enquirer during Donald Trump’s Rise.”  On Friday’s edition of “Deadline White House with Nicolle Wallace,” Cartwright revealed he was the source who provided information for the November 4, 2016 Wall Street Journal article, “National Enquirer Shielded Donald Trump from Playboy Model’s Affair Allegation,” which first exposed the “catch and kill” conspiracy.

Where CNN excelled was in the most up-to-date blogging of testimony from the overflow room at the courthouse.  (NOTE TO MSNBC HR:  Hire faster typists.) Moreover, CNN anchors, before analyzing the testimony, read the blogs as they came in, which proved indispensable for SiriusXM listeners who could not see the running dialogue on a sidebar.

For my regular followers, do not worry.  I am not planning to become a full time media critic.  As always, my goal is to find the story that everyone missed or got wrong.  In this case, it was the propensity of reporters and pundits on all of the media outlets to downplay the importance of this trial.  I realized how ludicrous this was when MSNBC legal analyst Danny Cevallos described how he thought trial judge Juan Merchan might calculate appropriate punishment for the crimes committed.  He tried to explain how this was different from most false business records cases because the crime is usually tied to some monetary benefit (e.g. inflating value of an asset or tax evasion).  At which point, he said something that struck a nerve.  I do not have the transcript so I can only paraphrase.  Cevallos suggested there were no victims other than the voters because no individuals lost money as result of the conspiracy.  And the consequences of the January 6 trial and the classified records trial are more apparent and serious.

Sorry Danny.  You can only reach that conclusion, if you do not look hard enough.  I would argue this crime was the most consequential of any of the charges against Trump.   Why? The violent insurrection failed and Joe Biden was sworn in as president two weeks later.  He may have pressured Georgia election officials to change the vote count, but, in the end, he failed to get the state’s electoral votes.  The on-going investigation of the documents case may reveal more serious crimes based on who may or may not have been given access, but Trump is certainly under constant scrutiny to ensure he can do no further damage.

In this case, despite being found guilty, the conspiracy worked.  He became president of the United States.  He appointed three individuals to life-time appointments to the Supreme Court who perjured themselves before the Senate Judiciary Committee when asked about the legal precedent of Roe v. Wade.  Danny, do you think nobody has suffered monetarily from the Dobbs decision?  Or there is no financial element to the Court’s consistent judgments in favor of business over labor.

And how about the non-monetary consequences?  Do you think it makes no difference when individuals are denied a constitutional right when the Court dilutes minority voting power based on Supreme Court decisions nullifying the Voting Rights Act and refuses to acknowledge racial gerrymandering?

What about the hardship for families and friends of the 250,000 individuals who died of COVID during Trump’s last year in office when, in March 2020, Donald Trump told Americans there was nothing to worry about despite telling Bob Woodrow the opposite in two months earlier?  And how about the financial stress of those still suffering from long-COVID because of a man whose criminal behavior may have made the difference in the outcome of the 2016 election?

Are there no consequences when he gave away millions of dollars in federal revenue through tax cuts he lied would pay for themselves?  Instead, he added eight trillion dollars to the national debt.  Again Danny, do you really think there are no monetary consequences to the higher interest rates resulting from that gift to the “one percent” and major corporations?

Danny, I could go on and on about the monetary and non-monetary damages caused by this convicted felon, but hopefully you now see the whole picture.  This was the MOST consequential of all the charges against Trump when it comes to impact. 

Though I doubt it will make a difference, the public can send letters to Judge Merchan which will be part of the sentencing input.  I will be submitting a version of this blog for his consideration and urge others, especially if you have evidence that you have suffered from having a truly illegitimate president in the Oval Office.  Address your correspondence to: 

The Honorable Juan M. Merchan
Supreme Court of the State of New York
100 Centre Street
New York, NY  10013

NOTE: You know who got it right?  That liar, cheat and thief Michael Cohen.  In his first interview following the guilty verdict, Cohen urged listeners “not to handicap this trial against the others as if it was a horse race.”  His point, each of Donald Trump’s crimes have serious consequences. 

All you have to do is look.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

A De Niro Moment

Politics

Joe Biden’s campaign has been taking some heat for sponsoring Tuesday’s appearance outside the scene of Donald Trump’s trial by Robert De Niro and police officers who were assaulted by Trump supporters on January 6, 2021.  Yesterday morning, Anand Giridharadas, publisher of the online news service The.Ink, came to the campaign’s and actor’s defense.  He explained how the Donald Trump’s daily comments about his trial was what he called “making meaning” of the proceeding, creating a pre-verdict narrative of prosecution and victimhood.  Giridharadas then pivoted to Democrats’ frustration about their failure to get their message across to voters which he blamed on the campaign’s lack of a clear narrative.

Who better than an actor to engage an audience with a Marvel Universe-like script where the future is at stake due to the efforts of a political Thanos who will do anything to vanquish his enemies and consolidate power under his control.  On Tuesday, De Niro delivered the prologue to that screenplay, describing Trump as a two-bit wannabe dictator who will bully his way to power, if we let him.

We New Yorkers used to tolerate him when he was just another crappy real estate hustler masquerading as a big shot. I love this city. I don’t want to destroy it. Donald Trump wants to destroy not only the city but the country, and, eventually, he could destroy the world.

There is evidence the De Niro’s presence had the desired effect.  The event was covered by entertain news outlets such as “TMZ” and “Hollywood Tonight” which normally do not feature Biden campaign events.  Moreover, it put Trump on the defensive.  In the middle of closing arguments in his election interference trial, Trump found time to post the following on Truth Social.

I never knew how small, both mentally and physically, Wacko Former Actor Robert De Niro was. Today, De Niro, who suffers from an incurable case of TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME, commonly known in the medical community as TDS, was met, outside the Courthouse, with a force far greater than the Radical Left – MAGA. 

His response, as hoped, reminded non-MAGA conservatives that all he cares about is himself and a movement that is no longer the party of Abraham Lincoln or Ronald Reagan.  However, one scene does not translate into a compelling narrative.  It has to be reinforced.  And yet, the campaign does not take advantage of the wealth of material Trump gifts them.  Consider the following example.

On the same day De Niro, et. al., appeared outside the Manhattan courthouse Trump took to Truth Social to endorse MAGA candidate John McGuire, who is challenging House Freedom Caucus chair Bob Good in the GOP primary for Representative Good’s seat.

Bob Good is BAD FOR VIRGINIA, AND BAD FOR THE USA. He turned his back on our incredible movement, and was constantly attacking and fighting me until recently, when he gave a warm and ‘loving’ Endorsement – But really, it was too late.

What was Good’s crime?  He endorsed Ron DeSantis for the Republican nomination for president. However, a la Nikki Haley, Ted Cruz, Mitch McConnell and every other spineless member of the Trump cult, Good genuflected before the MAGA god including an appearance with the blue suit, red tie brigade two weeks earlier at Trump’s trial.

Although I ultimately decided not to throw my hat in the ring for election to the House of Representatives from Florida’s 4th District, I still wake up most mornings thinking about the message I would post.  Here is the my imagined response to Trump’s conviction.

Last night, our incumbent congressman Aaron Bean posted the following on Twitter/X.

STATEMENT ON TRUMP VERDICT: The unprecedented and retaliatory verdict out of New York today was a travesty of justice, plain and simple. This was not a declaration of guilt or indicative of the evidence or the case presented. This was an attempt to derail the election of President Trump in November, and it will not work! We will fight this, and President Trump will have the ultimate verdict in November!

Since the day of Trump’s first indictment, he and sycophants like Aaron have been telling you that Donald Trump is the only thing between you and the deep state which has you next on their list.  Let me ask you a couple of questions.  How many of you have been indicted for having a marital affair?  How many of you have had your homes raided by the FBI?  How many of you have had armed IRS agents raid your home?  I’m pretty sure the answer is ZERO.  And allow me to suggest why.  Because none of you falsified business records to cover up payments to the person with whom you violated your marriage vows.  Because none of you are illegally holding on to classified documents.  Because there are no armed IRS agents out in the field.  If I am your congressman, if there ever was an instance in which the “deep state,” regardless of who was in the White House, violated your rights to privacy and protections under the Constitution, I would make sure there was an investigation and if there was wrongdoing, I would make sure the responsible individuals were held accountable.  However, for 240 years, from 1776 to 2016, no congressman needed to make that pledge because the topic never came up before. But Trump wants you to be scared of something that has never happened before.

Do you honestly believe Donald Trump thinks he needs commission of an actual crime to come after someone?  Based on Trump’s choice to endorse Bob Good’s challenger, even after Good skipped a session of Congress to help Trump circumvent Judge Merchan’s gag order, you now know it is Donald Trump and Aaron Bean who are more likely to turn on you, than it is for the FBI, IRS or any other imaginary enemy in the “deep state.”  Good turned his back on the MAGA movement only if believe Ron DeSantis never ran for governor or president as the post-Trump leader of the MAGA movement.  Which you know is not true.  Therefore, the only thing Good turned his back on was Trump.  For him, that is an unforgiveable crime.

For things I have written about Trump, I assume I am on his retribution list.  If you support the MAGA platform or currently plan to vote for Trump in November, you probably assume you are NOT.  But guess what.  So did Bob Good.

Every Democratic candidate for office this election cycle needs to realize, as marketing guru Donny Deutsch reminded us this morning, the Trump brand took a big hit yesterday.  He is now branded as a convicted felon.  Twelve ordinary citizens proved he is no longer invincible.  And he now holds a place of honor in the “Loser Hall of Fame.”  He has been exposed as a business fraud.  He was held liable in civil court for sexual assault and defamation.  After he became the titular head of the MAGA dominated GOP in November 2016, they have lost majorities in the House, Senate several state legislatures as well as governorships.  And now he has proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be guilty of 34 felonies.

Reinforce that message every day, a la Robert De Niro, to “make meaning” of Trump’s behavior and words.

For What It’s Worth.
Dr. ESP