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

Final Nielsen numbers show that Joe Biden‘s State of the Union address drew 32.3 million viewers, an 18% increase from last year. (Ted Johnson/DEADLINE.COM)

The numbers were reported based on data from 14 broadcast networks and cable channels.  What’s more, my wish came true.  Fox News drew more viewers than any other single outlet with 5.84 million.  As mentioned in the last blog, their commentators promoted the event as though it was going to be “Biden’s Last Stand.”  This was akin to promoting “Oppenheimer” as a comedy.  Unsuspecting viewers did not get what they came to see.

Want more good news.  While Fox News led for a single entity, MSNBC and CNN had a total viewership of 7.06 million (4.43 and 2.63 million respectively).  From a network perspective, Fox Broadcasting drew 1.78 million viewers while their three competitors–ABC, NBC and CBS–pulled in a combined total of 13.8 million.

Does it make a difference when more viewers get their news from sources other than Fox, Newsmax and OANN?  I’ll let Tommy Christopher of MEDIAITE.COM answer that one.

A CNN flash poll shows President Joe Biden (his emphasis) gained massively on a key question asked before and after his State of the Union address: will the president’s policies move the US in the right direction or the wrong direction?

While 64  percent had a positive view of the speech, there was a dramatic swing from before the speech.  On the “right/wrong direction” question, the difference between the pre-speech number on the question — 45 percent “right direction” — and the post-speech number of 62 percent — was a swing of 17 points.

Keep in mind, until Nikki Haley suspended her campaign on Wednesday, the election coverage was largely on the GOP horse race with all the contenders bashing Biden.  It is now mano-a-mano, and if Thursday night viewer metrics are any indication, the reigning champ opened his defense with a first round knock-down.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP