Mentioned thousands of times In Epstein Report.
97 Times Pleaded The Fifth.
34 Felony Convictions.
91 Criminal Charges.
26 Sexual Assault Allegations.
6 Bankruptcies.
5 Draft Deferments.
4 Indictments.
2 Impeachments.
2 Convicted Companies.
A long history of adjudicated fraud:
1 Fake University Shut Down. Paid 25mn in restitution to defrauded students.
1 Fake Charity Shut Down.
$5 Million Sexual Abuse Verdict.
$2 Million Fake Charity Abuse Judgment. Forbidden to engage in charity work here in NY
$93 Million Sexual Abuse Judgements.
$400+ Million Fraud Judgment.
First President in history to maintain a debt to GDP ratio over 100% for his entire term.
Highest annual budget deficit.
Most added to the national debt in a single term.
Most new unemployment claims. To be fair, COVID played a major role here.
Largest single day point drop in the history of the Dow..
Longest government shutdown in history (and he did that while his own party controlled both chambers of Congress).
First President in the history of approval ratings to maintain a net negative approval rating for his entire term. Repeat performance as of 3-26.
First President to be impeached twice.
First President to have bipartisan support for his conviction after impeachment (which happened both times).
Most indictments, guilty pleas, and criminal convictions of members of an administration --
Trump (Republican): 215
Nixon (Republican): 76,
Reagan (Republican): 26.
Vs. Democrats:
Obama (Democrat): 0,
Carter (Democrat): 1,
Clinton (Democrat): 2.
First president to have a mug shot.
With all of the above verifiable facts, how can you expect any respect when you put something like that back in our nation's highest office.
LCG
While I can't figure out how this directly relates to broadcasting, let's keep in mind that the lawsuits / court cases / accusations have all been based on efforts to thwart Trump's political campaign. For example, a whole bunch of charges were put forth about falsifying the value of the Mar a Lago property. Yet no real estate investor, financing agent or analyst found any error in the valuations Trump put forth... but they universally laughed at the supposed valuation deemed by the prosecutor to be the "real value".
The media, upon the filing of that case, was filled overwhelmingly by reports of the suit stating that the property had been overvalued maliciously and with the intent to defraud. There were few reports, mostly in the WSJ and Bloomberg and the like, stating that the valuation estimated by a prosecutor in New York was absurd and did not reflect a cross section of valuations and transactions in the same area.
This is just one case of "lawfare" where one party found that the complicated and intricate deals of the first person who was a modern-day businessman and not a politician to be running for the presidency. A major issue is that many reporters are not familiar with business and they have made many mistakes in writing about such matters.
For example, in one "major" daily paper just a few days ago I read an article where one of the Silicon Valley billionaires was stated to have "made over one billion dollars last year on his... " where the actual fact was that the investor had a gross income of over $1 billion and had a pre-tax profit of nearly $100 million (EBITDA). After provision for taxes and depriciation / amortization, the guy actually "made" under $50 million.
The journalist was only off by a billion or so because he/she/it did not understand that "profit" is what is left over after expenses. A friend who is in finance said to me that he believes that this is because journalists who have no training in finance look at business the way an individual looks at their tax return. There, everything that that you get from a salary is "income" and you pay taxes on all of it except for a few relatively small deductions. Yet in business, everything you spend is a deduction and you only pay taxes on what is left over, if anything.
So what we have here is a preponderance of journalists... and even the late-night "comedy" show hosts... who don't understand business. Add in the tendency of one party to use the legal system to attempt to thwart the campaigns and programs of "the other party", something now being called by the new term of "lawfare".
Again, what I see is that few journalists understand a businessman who has become a politician. We had Ross Perot who tried, about 50 years ago, to run for office. And, if you read "On Wings of Eagles", you can see that the application of good business practices to government did what Carter could not do: rescuing Americans held prisoner in Iran. But, even then, the press did not well understand the benefits of having business and financial skills when it comes to running the government.
www.news-gazette.com
