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

I 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

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

Just when you thought there was no room for another classic television series reboot, Americans were “treated” to a revival of the Celebrity Apprentice.  Hosted by New York supreme court judge Juan Merchan, the format called for a series of Donald Trump associates to compete to see who best emulated the show’s namesake and original apprentice, who perfected his business and political skills at the altar of former Al Capone and Joe McCarthy attorney Roy Cohn.  Instead of Trump family members and Trump Organization executives, the judges consisted of a panel of 12 anonymous New Yorkers.

The following is a recap of the presentations made by each of the losing contestants.

• American Media, Inc. president David Pecker.  Mr. Pecker wanted the judges to know how much he owed his own behavior to Trump’s tutelage, referring to him as “my mentor.”  Where else would he learn to create fake magazine covers than the man you adorned his office with manufactured Time “Man of the Year” awards?
• Campaign and White House staffer Hope Hicks.  Ms. Hicks demonstrated how she had effectively mastered the “Trump Backtrack.”  Once Hicks realized she had bolstered the prosecution’s case by tying the Stormy Daniels payment to the 2016 election, she made a point to describe how Trump asked that newspapers that featured release of the Access Hollywood tape be banned from his Trump Tower residence, as if that would shield Melania from the on-coming firestorm.
• Adult film star Stormy Daniels.  Trump’s lawyers, referencing Ms. Daniels’ “Make America Horny Again” strip club tour, books and anti-Trump merchandise, accused her of using the alleged affair to make money.  To which, she pulled the Trump “both sides do it” argument out of her hat.  When defense lawyer Susan Necheles asked Daniels about “an online store where you sell merchandise,” she replied, “Not unlike Mr. Trump.”
• Defense witness and attorney Robert Costello. Mr. Costello chose one of Trump’s favorite distractions to make his case.  Throw everything against the wall and hope something sticks.  First, he demonstrated distain for the process.  Then he cherry-picked evidence, especially emails.  Under direct questioning, he felt no need to elaborate, claiming, “The emails speak for themselves.”  Finally, he likely committed perjury, testifying that his sole interest was to help Cohen navigate his legal problems. However, when other emails totally undermined his previous testimony, he adopted the Trump/Emily Litella defense, “Never mind.”

As we always knew, none of these also-rans had a chance against Trump Organization attorney and fixer Michael Cohen.  He had an insurmountable advantage, ten years with the Donald to hone his Trump-like bag of tricks which included.

• Lying.
• Tax evasion.
• Bullying and threatening Trump adversaries.

However, the creme de la creme was revealed during cross-examination when Mr. Cohen admitted he had underpaid a contractor (Red Finch IT Consulting) and pocketed the difference because he felt entitled to it.  What could possibly be more Trumpian than that?  And but for the fact Cohen flipped on Trump, you can imagine the latter telling his protégé, “I’m proud of you boy.  Thanks for being the son I never had.”

POSTSCRIPT:  Minor League Justice

Watching cable news coverage of the trial took me back to my childhood.  I received my first transistor radio for my 10th birthday.  At bedtime, I would listen to baseball games featuring our hometown AAA Richmond Virginians, a Yankees farm team.  Due to budget constraints, the announcers did not attend away games.  Instead, they called the game based on teletype updates.  Crowd noise and the crack of a ball against a bat were added to the illusion the broadcast team was actually in attendance.

Coverage of the Trump trial was a throwback to those days.  Although the technology was more sophisticated, the underlying process remained the same.  Someone in the overflow room would transcribe the testimony, post it to the news anchors who then did their best to take the viewer “inside the courtroom.”

To complete this illusion, all MSNBC and CNN needed was background noise consisting of the defendant’s rustling papers, snoring and an occasional fart.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

As a lifelong cinephile, every chapter in Donald Trump’s political saga evokes an immediate, consistent response.  “I feel like I’ve seen this movie before.”  Former American Media, Inc. CEO David Pecker’s testimony in the Trump election interference trial is no different with one exception.  Pecker’s description of his agreement to support Trump’s 2016 campaign represents a déjà vu double feature.

Secrets and Lies

During coverage of the New York trial, multiple pundits harkened back to the days when they accompanied their mothers to the grocery store.  Each recalled seeing The National Enquirer while waiting to check out.  Their memories included examples of the outrageous front page headlines about women giving birth to alien babies and freaks of nature.  No one took it seriously. How then could a tabloid with so little journalistic integrity possible flip the outcome of the 2016 election?

As we know, even a broken clock is right twice a day.  And all it took was one or two verified stories to cloak the Enquirer in the credibility it had seldom enjoyed.  Case in point, the October 10, 2007 front page report that announced 2008 Democratic candidate for president John Edwards fathered a love-child with a campaign worker.   The narrative was initially viewed as just more Enquirer sensationalism.  However, once Edwards remained in the news as a potential Barack Obama vice-presidential running mate, mainstream media outlets picked up the story.

On August 8, 2008, Edwards admitted having an affair with Rielle Hunter, who had been hired to produce behind-the-scenes videos following Edwards on his quest for the presidential nomination.  On August 18, New York Times reporter David Carr gave the Enquirer, somewhat begrudgingly, its due credit.

There are some stories, especially ones that occur in the bedroom, where mainstream media outlets sometimes can’t venture—or at least they can’t find it in themselves to lead the charge. But it would be hard to argue that the body politic is not enriched by the recent revelations that Mr. Edwards is not who we thought he was, even balanced against the many stories the Enquirer gets wrong.

Then National Enquirer publisher (drum roll) David Pecker must have realized this was a turning point in his tabloid’s history.  With its new-found credibility in the political arena, the Enquirer could no longer be ignored by more reputable media outlets.  As we learned yesterday in a New York courtroom, this enabled actual fake news produced under the agreement between Pecker, Trump and Michael Cohen in June 2015 to rapidly move from the tabloid rack at the checkout line to the nightly news and cable outlets.

All the President’s Men

In 1972, they were called “dirty tricks.”  Among the first was the infamous “Canuck Letter.”  At the time, Maine Senator Edmund Muskie was the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination for president.  The saga begins with a handwritten letter to William Loeb, editor of the Manchester Union, postmarked from Deerfield Beach, Florida and signed by a Paul Morrison.  It accused Muskie of denigrating Franco-Americans by laughing when a campaign aide referred to them by the slur “Canucks.”  Without fact checking the source, Loeb published the letter on the front page with an editorial in which he wrote, “We have always known that Sen. Muskie was a hypocrite, but we never expected to have it so clearly revealed.”

In an emotional response at a February 26, 1972 rally, Muskie states, “The letter is a lie,” and called Loeb “a mudslinging, vicious and gutless coward.”   In what was considered unacceptable in those days, Muskie was reported to have tears in his eyes, a perceived sign of weakness.  Despite efforts to dismiss his emotional outburst, Loeb continued the attack until primary election day, and even though Muskie was the victor, the damage was already done.  During the Florida primary, bumper stickers warned Democratic voters, “Vote for Muskie or he’ll cry.”

Although the author of the letter was never definitively identified, Donald Segretti a young staff member on the Committee to Re-elect the President, took responsibility and sent Muskie the following:

October 11, 1973

Dear Senator Muskie:

I wish to personally apologize to you, your family, and your staff for activities in the 1972 Presidential campaign. Such activities are wrong and have no place in the American political process.

I trust that my public statements to that effect and my guilty plea will prevent others from getting involved in such activities in the future.

Sincerely,
DONALD H. SEGRETTI

FAT CHANCE!

Postscript:  The Common Denominator

The reason this movie keeps getting played over and over again is the fact each has the same executive producer–Roger Stone.  He was the Nixon whisperer in 1968 and 1972, the Trump whisperer in 2016 and thanks to a Trump pardon will still be spreading mischief in this election cycle.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP