This fourth program in a series excerpting the book “The Making of Donald Trump” by David Cay Johnston begins by examining Trump University, the fraudulent educational institution that was the focal point of several lawsuits recently settled by Donald Trump. (The Making of Donald Trump,; pp. 117-128.)
Mr. Emory feels that, in a sense, the case of Trump University is a microcosm for what America will be under a Trump presidency. ” . . . . The testimony above all comes from a 2012 suit, but two other lawsuits claimed that the whole Trump University enterprise was a fraud–a scam in which the desperate ad the gullible paid Trump about $40 million for what turned out to be high-pressure salesmanship. . . .” (The Making of Donald Trump,; pp. 120–121.)
In a very real sense, Trump’s pitch in a promotional video embodies Trump as a professional, a person and a politician: ” . . . ‘At Trump University, we teach success . . . . That’s what it’s all about–success. It’s going to happen to you. We’re going to have professors and adjunct professors that are absolutely terrific–terrific people, terrific brains, successful. We are going to have the best of the best. These are all people that are handpicked by me.’ . . . . None of those statements were true. . . .” (The Making of Donald Trump,; pp. 117—118.)
Representative of the operations of this “university” is Trump’s “faculty.” ” . . . . Trump did not even honor his commitment to handpick the faculty. In 2012, when Trump was sued for civil fraud in California, attorney Rachel Jensen read the names of one faculty member after another, displayed photographs of them, and offered video footage of faculty at Trump University ‘live events.’ Trump, who complained that this line of questioning was a waste of time, could not identify a single person. ‘Too many years ago . . . too many years ago . . . it’s ancient history,’ he said. Some of these events had taken place fewer than two years earlier. Again and again and again, Trump testified that he could not remember. . . .” (The Making of Donald Trump,; p. 119.)
An investigation of Trump University in Texas had a revealing political footnote: ” . . . . To the seasoned fraud investigators who compiled the report, the case against Trump seemed ironclad. The investigators concluded with the suggestion that Trump . . . . be named personally in a civil action suit alleging deceptive trade practices. We know all this because John Owens, who retired in 2011 as chief deputy in the Texas attorney general’s consumer protection unit made the internal report public in 2016. The Texas attorney general’s office, Owens’s former employer, responded with a letter citing six laws Owens may have broken in releasing the report and suggesting his law license might be revoked. . . . Greg Abbott, the Texas attorney general, took no public action. . . . Abbott has since been elected governor. He endorsed Trump in 2016. . . . In 2013, three years after [assistant Texas attorney general Rick] Berlin failed to persuade Abbott to adopt his recommendation to recover money for Texas consumers, Trump donated $35,000 to Abbott’s campaign for governor. . . .” (The Making of Donald Trump,; pp. 122-123.)
The Abbott-Trump relationship mirrors the highly suspicious contribution Trump made to the reelection campaign of Florida attorney general Pam Bondi, who dropped the investigation into Trump University in exchange for the “favor.”
As reported during the campaign, Trump’s contribution was made from one of Trump’s charities, which are the focal point of Chapter 16 of Johnston’s book. (The Making of Donald Trump,; pp. 129-134.)
Enjoying the support of many veterans, according to polls, and, also according to polls, active duty military personnel, Trump attempted to use veterans as campaign props by donating to them in violation of regulations governing charitable donations. (The Making of Donald Trump,; pp. 135-136.)
For some weeks, we have been–and will be–reading most of the book into the record, to provide people with a measure against which to evaluate not just “The Donald,” as his first wife Ivana called him, but our society, its institutions and its citizens. We can’t recommend strongly enough that listeners buy this book, read it and use whatever means available to spread the word about it. (We note that neither Mr. Emory nor any of the stations that air this program get money from this book, its publisher or author.)
This third installment of the series commences with a review the substance of an article that embodies the enormous and fundamental flaw in our political and civic process: a poll shortly before the election found that most of the prospective voters polled felt that Trump was more honest and trustworthy than Hillary Clinton. As our reading of Johnston’s excellent book unfolds, the grotesque, spectacularly fallacious character of this perception will become uncomfortably clear. “Donald Trump is currently tracking as the more honest of the two presidential candidates in a poll, although fact-checking of his statements during the campaign have shown he’s lied several times. The latest ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll reports that 46 percent of likely voters believe he is the more honest and trustworthy candidate, while 38 percent believed it was Hillary Clinton. This marks the biggest gap between the two candidates in five ABC News/Washington Post polls that asked the question, beginning in May.”
The program features a continuation of Johnston’s account of Trump’s “curious” relationship with convicted felon and drug dealer Joey Weichselbaum. “Among the assorted criminals with whom Trump did business over more than three decades, his most mysterious dealings involved a drug trafficker named Joseph Weichselbaum. Trump did unusual favors for the three-time felon, repeatedly putting his lucrative casino license at risk to help a major cocaine and marijuana trafficker for reasons that remain unfathomable. . . .”
During the campaign, Trump targeted disaffected, alienated blue-collar workers, chafing under the effects of globalization and lingering damage from the financial collapse of 2008. “The Donald” also, of course, made expelling illegal immigrants a cornerstone of his campaign. There could be no better balance in which to hang the integrity of President-elect Donald Trump than to examine the chapter Johnson titled “The Polish Brigade.” (The Making of Donald Trump; pp. 69-76.)
When demolishing the old Bonwit Teller building in New York City to make way for one of his signature projects, Trump not only broke a promise to salvage the valuable art deco piece at the building’s entrance (providing disingenuous responses to criticism about this), but employed illegal Polish immigrants to dismantle the structure. The abuse to which Trump subjected those immigrants is striking and bodes poorly for those elements of “Middle America” who supported him during the election.
The “Polish Brigade” were not given even elementary working tools, nor basic safety equipment such as hard hats. They worked long hours at very low pay under horrible working conditions and were often not paid at all, until they threatened a top Trump assistant, Thomas Macari.
“Instead of hiring an experienced demolition contractor, Trump chose Kaszycki & Sond Contractors, a window washing business owned by a Polish emigre. Upward of two hundred men began demolishing the building in midwinter 1980. The men worked without hard hats. They lacked facemasks, even though asbestos–known to cause incurable cancers–swirled all around them. They didn’t have goggles to protect their eyes from the bits of concrete and steel that sometimes flew through the air like bullets. The men didn’t have power tools either; they brough down the twelve-story building with sledgehammers. . . .
. . . . The demolition workers were not American citizens, but ‘had recently arrived from Poland,’ a federal court later determined. The court also found that ‘they were undocumented and worked ‘off the books.’ No payroll records were kept, no Social Security or other taxes were withheld and they were not paid in accordance with wage laws. They were told they would be paid $4.00 or in some cases $5.00 an hour for working 12-hour shifts seven days a week. In fact, they were paid irregularly and incompletely.’ . . .
. . . . Fed up that their paychecks kept bouncing, some of the workers corralled Thomas Macari, Trump’s personal representative they showed him to the edge of one of the higher floors and asked if he would like them to hang him over the side. The workerrs, likely hungry, demanded their pay. Otherwise, no work.
When Macari told his boss what had happened, Trump placed a panicked telephone call to Daniel Sullivan–a labor fixer, FBI informant, suspect in the disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa, and Trump’s personal negotiator for the Grand Hyatt contract with the hotel workers’ union.
‘Donald told me he was having some difficulties,’ Sullivan later testified, ‘and he admitted to me that–seeking my advice–he had some illegal Polish employees on the job. . . .
. . . .There is no record of any federal, state, or city safety inspector filing a report during the demolition. In a 1990 Trenton restaurant interview. I asked Sullivan how a project of this size could have been erected in the heart of Manhattan without attracting government job safety inspectors. Sullivan just looked at me. When I widened my eyes to make clear that I wanted an explicitly answer, he said, ‘You know why.’ When I persisted, anticipating that Sullivan might specify bribes to inspectors, he said that unions and concrete suppliers were not the only areas where Trump’s lawyer, Roy Cohn, had influence. . . . ” (The Making of Donald Trump; pp. 70-72.)
The text excerpts conclude with a reading of most of chapter 10 of Johnston’s book, covering how Trump’s estimates of his own net worth varied according to his mood at the time of the inquiry. This did not stop him from suing journalist Tim O’Brien for allegedly mis-reporting Trump’s worth. (The Making of Donald Trump; pp. 77-83.)
This second installment of a series commences with a review the substance of an article that embodies the enormous and fundamental flaw in our political and civic process: a poll shortly before the election found that most of the prospective voters polled felt that Trump was more honest and trustworthy than Hillary Clinton.
As our reading of David Cay Johnston’s excellent book unfolds, the grotesque, spectacularly fallacious character of this perception will become uncomfortably clear. “Donald Trump is currently tracking as the more honest of the two presidential candidates in a poll, although fact-checking of his statements during the campaign have shown he’s lied several times. The latest ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll reports that 46 percent of likely voters believe he is the more honest and trustworthy candidate, while 38 percent believed it was Hillary Clinton. This marks the biggest gap between the two candidates in five ABC News/Washington Post polls that asked the question, beginning in May.”
In the first excerpt read into the record in this broadcast, we finish a chapter in which David Cay Johnston relates the genesis of Trump’s relationship with Senator Joe McCarthy’s right-hand man Roy Cohn. Having been sued by the Justice Department because of his discrimination against people of color when renting apartments in his properties, Trump turned to Cohn. It was the beginning of a long relationship between the long-time red-baiter and organized crime apologist and “The Donald.” Trump and Cohn lost the case. Note Trump’s placing of loyalty above all else, a prioritization that Johnston correctly characterizes in the italicize excerpt that follows: ” . . . Elyse Goldweber, the novice Justice Department lawyer, told the court that one employee who spoke to investigators was not being named because ‘he was afraid that the Trumps would have him ‘knocked off,’ or words to that effect’ for revealing the techniques used to deny blacks and other minorities. . . . In “The Art of the Deal,” Trump said he told Cohn, ‘I’d rather fight than fold, because as soon as you fold once you get the reputation’ of someone who settles case. But faced with a case in which neither facts nor the law were on his side, Trump folded and settled. . . .Trump handled the adverse settlement the way he had learned from his father: by spinning the news and offering a simple and quotable narrative . . . Trump’s takeaway from this early loss was not that times had changed and civil rights laws would be enforced. . . . He also learned to place loyalty above all else. . . . That is, of course, the kind of perspective we expect from mobsters, dictators, and others whose primary regard is for unflinching support, not for allegiance to truth or facts. . . .”
As noted in the program, on the day this was recorded, Trump University settled in a massive lawsuit by students who had been defrauded by the “school.” Trump played it in the fashion he learned from his father and that he applied in the housing discrimination suit, highlighted above: “. . . In The Art of the Deal, Trump said he told Cohn, ‘I’d rather fight than fold, because a soon as you fold once you get the reputation’ of someone who settles case. But faced with a case in which neither facts nor the law were on his side, Trump folded and settled. . . .Trump handled the adverse settlement the way he had leaned from his father: by spinning the news and offering a simple and quotable narrative . . . .”
Johnston notes at the end of chapter 5 that Trump learned that having Cohn as his attorney also had other benefits: ” . . . . Hiring him [Cohn] could ensure that his Manhattan construction projects moved smoothly. Among Cohn’s other clients were two of America’s most powerful Mafia figures who controlled key unions attached to demolition and construction in New York City.. . . In “The Art of the Deal,” Trump boasts that when he applied for a casino owner’s license in 1981, he persuaded the New Jersey attorney general to limit the investigation of his background. It was perhaps the most lucrative negotiation of Trump’s life, one that would embarrass state officials a decade later when Trump’s involvement with mobsters, mob associates, and swindlers became clear. . . . ”
Against the background of Cohn’s mob connections, Johnston sets forth Trump’s utilization of those assets to realize his New York City real estate undertakings. Remarkably, such associations did not interdict Trump’s Atlantic City [New Jersey] gaming projects, which normally would have been precluded by such links.
Exemplifying Trump’s organized crime associates and the services they provided–courtesy of Roy Cohn–were Anthony “Fat Tony” Salerno and Paul Castellano. ” . . . Trump bought his Manhattan ready-mix [concrete] from a company called S & A Concrete. Mafia chieftains Anthony “Fat Tony” Salerno and Paul Castellano secretly owned the firm. S & A charged the inflated prices that the LeFrak and Resnik families complained about, LeFrak to both laws enforcement and “The New York Times.” As [reporter Wayne] Barrett noted, by choosing to build with ready-mix concrete rather than other materials, Trump put himself ‘at the mercy of a legion of concrete racketeers.’ But having an ally in Roy Cohn mitigated Trump’s concerns. With Cohn as his fixer, Trump had no worries that the Mafia bosses would have the unions stop work on Trump Tower; Salerno and Castellano were Cohn’s clients. Indeed, when the cement workers struck in summer 1982, the concrete continued to flow at Trump Tower. . . . Just as revealing was Trump’s association with John Cody, the corrupt head of Teamsters Local 282. Cody, under indictment when he ordered the citywide strike in 1982, directed that concrete deliveries continue to Trump Tower. Cody told Barrett, ‘Donald liked to deal with me through Roy Cohn. . . . ”
The excerpts read from Johnston’s remarkable tome conclude with examination of Trump’s relationship with Joey Weichselbaum, a convicted drug trafficker whose relationship with Trump is highly unusual and opaque, even by “The Donald’s” standards. “Among the assorted criminals with whom Trump did business over more than three decades, his most mysterious dealings involved a drug trafficker named Joseph Weichselbaum. Trump did unusual favors for the three-time felon, repeatedly putting his lucrative casino license at risk to help a major cocaine and marijuana trafficker for reasons that remain unfathomable. . . .”
Whereas Trump had many other places to turn to for the various aeronautical, automotive and supplemental services Weichelsbaum and his brother provided, Trump continued to use them and provided them and their associates with remarkable “perks.”
With Trump poised to name a number of Supreme Court justices, we note that the venue of one of Weichelsbaum’s cases was changed in a highly suspicious, revealing and inauspicious manner. ” . . . When Weichelsbaum made a deal with prosecutors to plead guilty to one of the eighteen counts in the Cincinnati case, something very suspicious happened. His case was transferred out of Ohio for the guilty plea and the sentencing. Logically, the case might have gone to South Florida, where Bradford Motors [one of the Weichselbaum drug-trafficking fronts] was located, or to New York, where Weichselbaum lived. Indeed, that is exactly what Weichselbaum’s Ohio lawyer, Arnold Morelli, sought in a January 30, 1986 motion requesting his case be transferred to either Manhattan or Miami for ‘the convenience of human beings such as the defendant and witnesses.’ Instead the Weichelsbaum case was moved to New Jersey. There it was assigned to Judge Maryanne Trump Barry–Donald Trump’s older sister.
Judge Barry recused herself three weeks later, as judicial ethics required, but the mere act of removing herself from the case came with a powerful message: a sitting federal judge, as well as her husband (lawyer John Barry) and family, repeatedly flew in helicopters connected to a major drug trafficker. . . .When Judge Harold A. Ackerman replaced Trump’s sister, Trump wrote him a letter seeking leniency for Weichselbaum on the drug trafficking charge. Trump characterize the defendant as ‘a credit to the community’ and described Weichselbaum as ‘conscientious, forthright and diligent’ in his dealings with the Trump Plaza and Trump’s Castle casinos. When asked about the letter under oath in a private 1990 meeting with New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement lawyers, Trump testified that he could not recall whether ‘he had written any letters of reference to the federal judge who sentenced Weichselbaum.’ Subsequently, the division obtained such a letter, and Trump acknowledged that it bore his signature. . . .”
Earlier in 2016, award-winning journalist David Cay Johnston published a very well-written and researched, yet relatively short and compact biography of Donald Trump–The Making of Donald Trump. For some weeks, we will be reading most of the book into the record, to provide people with a measure against which to evaluate not just “The Donald,” as his first wife Ivana called him, but our society, its institutions and its citizens. We can’t recommend strongly enough that listeners buy this book, read it and use whatever means available to spread the word about it.
This first installment of the series commences with the reading of a poem by Robinson Jeffers, “Be Angry at the Sun,” which encompasses Mr. Emory’s feelings about the recent election, as well as the people and institutions that have precipitated this event–one that figures to be devastating in its manifestations.
Following presentation of the Jeffers poem, we examine an article that embodies the enormous and fundamental flaw in our political and civic process: a poll shortly before the election found that most of the prospective voters polled felt that Trump was more honest and trustworthy than Hillary Clinton. As our reading of Johnston’s excellent book unfolds, the grotesque, spectacularly fallacious character of this perception will become uncomfortably clear. “Donald Trump is currently tracking as the more honest of the two presidential candidates in a poll, although fact-checking of his statements during the campaign have shown he’s lied several times. The latest ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll reports that 46 percent of likely voters believe he is the more honest and trustworthy candidate, while 38 percent believed it was Hillary Clinton. This marks the biggest gap between the two candidates in five ABC News/Washington Post polls that asked the question, beginning in May.”
We begin by noting that Trump’s father networked with an organized crime figure named Willie Tomasello, anticipating Trump’s own use of organized crime figures to further his commercial undertakings. And Hillary Clinton is viewed as less honest than Trump!
Next, we note Trump’s rambling, ignorant and inarticulate response to a question from conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt about which element of the nuclear triad he felt was most important. (The nuclear triad consists of the three vehicles for delivering nuclear weapons: bombing aircraft, seaborne nuclear missiles–primarily submarine-launched weapons–and land-based nuclear missiles.) Trump clearly had no idea what the nuclear triad was, and couldn’t come close to doing justice to the topic. “. . . . Well, first of all, I think we need somebody absolutely that we can trust. . . the power is so massive that we can’t just leave areas that fifty years ago or seventy-five years ago we wouldn’t care [about]. It was hand-to-hand combat. . . I think–I think, for me, nuclear is just the power; the devastation is very important to me. . . . I think one of the most important things that we have to worry about is nuclear generally speaking. . . . The power of nuclear, the power of the weapons that we have today–and that is, by the way, the deal with Iran–the concept of it is so important that you have to make a good deal and what they should have done is that they should have doubled up and tripled up the sanctions. . . . ”
thinkbignkickassWe then note Trump’s fundamental ignorance of business theory, his pretenses to the contrary notwithstanding. ” ‘Are you familiar with the concept of net present value?’ lawyer Andrew Ceresney asked. [This is a basic tenet of business, as familiar to graduate students of business as 2 + 2, as Johnson says] ‘The concept of net present value to me,’ Trump replied, ‘would be the value of the land currently after debt. Well, to me, the word ‘net’ is an interesting word. It’s really–the word ‘value’ is the important word. If you have an asset that you can do other things with but you choose to do them–I haven’t chosen to do that. . . .”
Entering into the meat of Johnston’s formidable text, the broadcast highlights a rambling, vulgar, disorganized motivational talk he gave in Colorado, in the company of a “convicted felon and swindler” named Felix Sater. In addition to the inadequate nature of the presentation itself, the values Trump expressed are not to be overlooked.
Trump underscored how much he disrespected “losers” and his belief in vengeance. Of primary significance in this context is his anecdote about a former employee who was fired because she wouldn’t do something she felt was unethical.
Attacking actress/comedian Rosie O’Donnell, he highlighted his distaste for her physical appearance in crude, vulgar and fundamentally adolescent language.
Author Johnston notes that Trump stressed during his campaign that he was a devout Christian, and yet his belief in “vengeance uber alles” is in fundamental conflict with Biblical teaching.
In the next chapter of the book, David Cay Johnston illustrates how Trump practices what he preaches. When his nephew Fred Trump III filed suit after having been all but excluded from Fred Jr.’s will, Donald Trump saw to it that Fred’s son William, who had been borne with serious health problems, was prevented from obtaining badly needed medical care under the family medical program.
This placed young William’s life in jeopardy.
In the last excerpt read into the record in this broadcast, David Cay Johnston relates the genesis of Trump’s relationship with Senator Joe McCarthy’s right-hand man Roy Cohn. Having been sued by the Justice Department because of his discrimination against people of color when renting apartments in his properties, Trump turned to Cohn. It was the beginning of a long relationship between the long-time red-baiter and organized crime apologist and “The Donald.” Trump and Cohn lost the case.
With the (justifiable) outrage swirling around FBI director (and Mitt Romney backer) James Comey’s public discussion of the discovery of more of Hillary Clinton’s e-mails having been discovered, another election-related investigation has gone largely unexamined. Indeed, the importance of the investigation has been downplayed.
Computer experts discovered a link between a server registered to the Trump organization and two servers registered to the Alfa Bank in Moscow, a bank that is part of the Alfa conglomerate discussed in FTR #’s 530 and 573.
In the Foer piece, and in attempted discrediting articles of same, it is apparent that the investigators do not understand the nature of the entity they are investigating. The journalistic “spin” put on Alfa in the coverage is “Russia/Putin/Kremlin” new Cold War context. Alfa is very, very different.
In FTR #’s 530, 573 we examnined the nature of Alfa’s history, operations and institutional and economic foundations. It is anything BUT “Kremlin/Putin/Russia.”
It appears to be Underground Reich, all the way, with evidentiary tributaries running in the direction of: the Iran-Contra scandal; the Iraqgate scandal; the oil-for-food scam vis a vis Iraq; malfeasanace by a coterie of GOP bigwigs including Dick Cheney and others close to George W. Bush, and Haley Barbour; money-laundering by powerful international drug syndicates; Chechen warlords and drug-trafficking syndicates; the Royal family of Liechtenstein; the Bank al-Taqwa (which helped finance al-Qaeda); the Marc Rich operations; Eastern European and Russian associates of Wolfgang Bohringer, one of Mohamed Atta’s close associates in South Florida; and the Carl Duisberg Fellowship, which brought Mohamed Atta to Germany from Egypt and may have helped him into the U.S.
The program highlights major aspects of the investigation into the Alfa/Trump link:
The Trump/Alfa link was not a malware attack, as some of the computer scientists initially thought: ” . . . . The researchers quickly dismissed their initial fear that the logs represented a malware attack. The communication wasn’t the work of bots. The irregular pattern of server lookups actually resembled the pattern of human conversation—conversations that began during office hours in New York and continued during office hours in Moscow. It dawned on the researchers that this wasn’t an attack, but a sustained relationship between a server registered to the Trump Organization and two servers registered to an entity called Alfa Bank. . . .”
The set-up was highly unusual: ” . . . . The researchers had initially stumbled in their diagnosis because of the odd configuration of Trump’s server. ‘I’ve never seen a server set up like that,’ says Christopher Davis, who runs the cybersecurity firm HYAS InfoSec Inc. and won a FBI Director Award for Excellence for his work tracking down the authors of one of the world’s nastiest botnet attacks. ‘It looked weird, and it didn’t pass the sniff test.’ The server was first registered to Trump’s business in 2009 and was set up to run consumer marketing campaigns. It had a history of sending mass emails on behalf of Trump-branded properties and products. Researchers were ultimately convinced that the server indeed belonged to Trump. (Click here to see the server’s registration record.) But now this capacious server handled a strangely small load of traffic, such a small load that it would be hard for a company to justify the expense and trouble it would take to maintain it. ‘I get more mail in a day than the server handled,’ Davis says. . . .”
The article details more unusual aspects of the link: ” . . . . That wasn’t the only oddity. When the researchers pinged the server, they received error messages. They concluded that the server was set to accept only incoming communication from a very small handful of IP addresses. . . . Eighty-seven percent of the DNS lookups involved the two Alfa Bank servers. ‘It’s pretty clear that it’s not an open mail server,’ Camp told me. ‘These organizations are communicating in a way designed to block other people out.’ . . . .”
Paul Vixie–one of the premier experts in the field–felt the connection was highly unusual: ” . . . . Earlier this month, the group of computer scientists passed the logs to Paul Vixie. In the world of DNS experts, there’s no higher authority. Vixie wrote central strands of the DNS code that makes the internet work. After studying the logs, he concluded, ‘The parties were communicating in a secretive fashion. The operative word is secretive. This is more akin to what criminal syndicates do if they are putting together a project.’ Put differently, the logs suggested that Trump and Alfa had configured something like a digital hotline connecting the two entities, shutting out the rest of the world, and designed to obscure its own existence. . . .”
The available evidence indicates that the hookup indicated “human-level communication”: ” . . . I put the question of what kind of activity the logs recorded to the University of California’s Nicholas Weaver, another computer scientist not involved in compiling the logs. ‘I can’t attest to the logs themselves,’ he told me, ‘but assuming they are legitimate they do indicate effectively human-level communication.’ . . . ”
More about the nature of the communication, from the scientist using the code-name “Tea Leaves”: ” . . . . Tea Leaves and his colleagues plotted the data from the logs on a timeline. What it illustrated was suggestive: The conversation between the Trump and Alfa servers appeared to follow the contours of political happenings in the United States. ‘At election-related moments, the traffic peaked,’ according to Camp. There were considerably more DNS lookups, for instance, during the two conventions. . . .”
The scientists attempted to get the public to pay attention to their investigation and New York Times writers turned their attention to the case: ” . . . In September, the scientists tried to get the public to pay attention to their data. One of them posted a link to the logs in a Reddit thread. Around the same time, the New York Times’ Eric Lichtblau and Steven Lee Myers began chasing the story.* (They are still pursuing it.) Lichtblau met with a Washington representative of Alfa Bank on Sept. 21, and the bank denied having any connection to Trump. . . .”
Things got “interesting” after that. According to the computer scientists, the Trump Organization shut down the server! As the brilliant Berkeley researcher Peter Dale Scott noted, in a different context, “The cover-up obviates the conspiracy. ” . . . . In September, the scientists tried to get the public to pay attention to their data. One of them posted a link to the logs in a Reddit thread. Around the same time, the New York Times’ Eric Lichtblau and Steven Lee Myers began chasing the story.* (They are still pursuing it.) Lichtblau met with a Washington representative of Alfa Bank on Sept. 21, and the bank denied having any connection to Trump. . . . The computer scientists believe there was one logical conclusion to be drawn: The Trump Organization shut down the server after Alfa was told that the Times might expose the connection. Weaver told me the Trump domain was ‘very sloppily removed.’ Or as another of the researchers put it, it looked like ‘the knee was hit in Moscow, the leg kicked in New York.’. . . . Four days later, on Sept. 27, the Trump Organization created a new host name, trump1.contact-client.com, which enabled communication to the very same server via a different route. When a new host name is created, the first communication with it is never random. To reach the server after the resetting of the host name, the sender of the first inbound mail has to first learn of the name somehow. It’s simply impossible to randomly reach a renamed server. ‘That party had to have some kind of outbound message through SMS, phone, or some noninternet channel they used to communicate [the new configuration],’ Paul Vixie told me. The first attempt to look up the revised host name came from Alfa Bank. ‘If this was a public server, we would have seen other traces,’ Vixie says. ‘The only look-ups came from this particular source.’According to Vixie and others, the new host name may have represented an attempt to establish a new channel of communication. But media inquiries into the nature of Trump’s relationship with Alfa Bank, which suggested that their communications were being monitored, may have deterred the parties from using it. Soon after the New York Times began to ask questions, the traffic between the servers stopped cold. . . .”
Not surprisingly, the FBI has dismissed the relevance of the computer link.
This dismissal comes against the background of several late-breaking developments:
The unsuccessful attempt by Alfa subsidiary Crown Resources to buy Marc Rich’s commodities firm: ” . . . A deal to sell the Swiss-based commodities operation of former U.S. fugitive financier Marc Rich to Russia-owned energy trading group Crown Resources is off. . . . Crown is owned by the Alfa Group conglomerate. . . . .”
The subsequent successful attempt by Alfa player Mikhail Fridman to purchase the Marc Rich firm: ” . . . Mikhail Fridman: ‘Defendant Mikhail Fridman currently serves as Chairman of the Board of Directors of co-conspirator Alfa Bank and as Chairman of the Board of Directors of Defendant Consortium Alfa Group. Fridman further served on the Board of VimpelCom, a NYSE company, and has control over Golden Telecom, a NASDAQ company … purchased the United States trading firm owned by American, Mark Rich, the one time commodities baron pardoned by President Clinton with much controversy. . . .”
The FBI’s long-dormant Twitter account began tweeting files about Bill Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich, shortly after the official dismissal of investigations into the Alfa/Trump link: ” . . . . Now, a new interagency mystery is raising questions about whether the F.B.I. has become politicized, just days before the presidential election. On Sunday, a long-dormant F.B.I. Twitter account suddenly sprung to life, blasting out a series of links to case files that cast the Clintons in a decidedly negative light. . . . Then, on Tuesday, the “FBI Records Vault” account—which had not tweeted at all between October 2015 and Sunday—published a link to records related to the 15-year-old, long-closed investigation into former President Bill Clinton’s pardoning of onetime commodities trader turned fugitive Marc Rich. The post, which was quickly retweeted thousands of times, links to a heavily redacted document that repeatedly references the agency’s “Public Corruption” unit—less-than-ideal optics for Hillary Clinton, who has spent her entire campaign fighting her image as a corrupt politician. . . .”
FBI Director James Comey was in charge of the original Marc Rich investigation and the pardon of Rich by Bill Clinton. Is there a connection between the official dismissal of the investigation into the Alfa/Trump link by the FBI, the tweeting by the FBI of the files on the Clinton pardon of Marc Rich and the fact that it was Comey who presided over the Marc Rich investigations? ” . . . . In 2002, Comey, then a federal prosecutor, took over an investigation into President Bill Clinton’s 2001 pardon of financier Marc Rich, who had been indicted on a laundry list of charges before fleeing the country. The decision set off a political firestorm focused on accusations that Rich’s ex-wife Denise made donations to the Democratic Party, the Clinton Library and Hillary Clinton’s 2000 Senate campaign as part of a plan to get Rich off the hook. Comey ultimately decided not to pursue the case. The kicker: Comey himself had overseen Rich’s prosecution between 1987 and 1993. . . .”
Program Highlights Include: details of the Carl Duisberg Society’s links to Atta and to major German corporations; discussion of the Alfa Fellowhip against the background of German Ostpolitik discussed in FTR #’s 918 and 919; detailed analysis of Viktor Kozeny associates Fridman and (Pyotr) Aven (Kozeny employed Bohringer as a pilot); a summary analysis of the major points in FTR #’s 530 and 573.
The title of the program derives from “the Himmler Kreis”–Himmler’s circle of friends, the industrialists who financed the day-to-day workings of the Nazi SS and, in turn, received slave labor from Himmler’s inventory of incarcerated workers. We borrow on the Third Reich term to characterize the Friends of Trump–the Trumpen Kreis.
Beginning with review of UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage, we note the “Brexit” architect’s support for Donald Trump. In addition, we note that Farage has a German wife. Under other circumstances this would be unremarkable. In the context of covert operations/clandestine politics, a romantic/sexual partner/spouse might also be a case officer and/or paymaster.
We bring this up because the “Brexit” engineered by Farage and company removed a major obstacle to the creation of a German-dominated EU military force. ” . . . . With Britain, which had always adamantly opposed an integrated EU military policy, leaving the EU, Berlin sees an opportunity for reviving its efforts at restructuring the EU’s military and mobilizing as many member countries as possible for the EU’s future wars. . . .”
Interestingly, and perhaps significantly, Donald Trump has drawn support from Hindu nationalists of the Modi stripe. There is an important element of networking here: Trump campaign manager and “Alt-right” media figure Stephen K. Bannon is a supporter of Modi’s movement, as well as that of Nigel Farage. ” . . . . Mr. Trump may be largely indifferent to the reasons behind his Hindu loyalists’ fervor, but his most senior advisers are not. The campaign’s chief executive, Stephen K. Bannon, is a student of nationalist movements. Mr. Bannon is close to Nigel Farage, a central figure in Britain’s movement to leave the European Union, and he is an admirer of India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, a Hindu nationalist Mr. Bannon has called ‘the Reagan of India.’ It may be pure coincidence that some of Mr. Trump’s words channel the nationalistic and, some argue, anti-Muslim sentiments that Mr. Modi stoked as he rose to power. But it is certainly not coincidental that many of Mr. Trump’s biggest Hindu supporters are also some of Mr. Modi’s most ardent backers. . . .”
Trump has also received the support of the mercurial, bombastic Russian fascist Vladimir Zhirinovsky, whose political career was launched with the assistance of Gerhard Frey, a prominent German Nazi. Trump and Zhirinovsky have overlapping political styles: ” . . . . His combative style, reminiscent of Trump’s, ensures him plenty of television air time and millions of votes in Russian elections, often from the kind of blue-collar workers who are the bedrock of the U.S. Republican candidate’s support. Zhirinovsky once proposed blocking off mostly Muslim southern Russia with a barbed wire fence, echoing Trump’s call for a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico. Zhirinovsky, who said he met Trump in New York in 2002, revels in his similarities with the American businessman – they are the same age, favor coarse, sometimes misogynistic language and boast about putting their own country first. . . .”
In FTR #921, we noted that Trump kept a book of Hitler’s speeches by his bed and read it to gain tips on the use of rhetoric. He appears to have borrowed a play from Der Fuhrer’s rhetorical playbook when addressing the Values Voters Summit: ” . . . He regaled the crowd of Christian voters in his usual bombastic way, but near the end of the speech, Trump seemed to play into the hands of his accusers who claim that not only does Trump remind people of infamous dictators like Italian fascist Benito Mussolini and German Nazi leader Adolf Hitler with his jingoism, blatant nativist nationalism, and over-the-top fact-twisting scapegoating, but he sounds like them as well. He paraphrased the infamous Nazi Party slogan, ‘Ein volk, ein reich, ein Fuhrer!’ . . . If one saw the speech, or watches it in replay, Trump begins raising his voice on the first use of the word ‘one,’emphasizing each part of the verbal triptych. Not only does he invoke the traditional lines from the Pledge of Allegiance, he progresses from, just as the Nazi Party slogan does, ‘one people’ (‘ein volk’) to ‘under one god’ (an implied unified Christian nation or ‘ein reich’) to ‘one flag’ (‘ein Fuhrer,’ the symbol of a unified nation). . . .”
Trump is also borrowing a rhetorical page from the Nazi playbook in his attacks on the press: ” . . . . On Saturday night, a new and foreign accusation came to the fore: ‘Lügenpresse!’ The term, which means ‘lying press’ in German, has a history dating back to the mid-1800s and was used by the Nazis to discredit the media. In recent years, it has been revived by German far-right anti-immigrant groups. And on Saturday, it made an appearance at a Trump rally in Cleveland, Ohio. . . Breitbart News [edited by Trump campaign manager Stephen K. Bannon] reported favorably on the term in an interview earlier this year with the leader of the German far-right group PEGIDA, writing, ‘It will come as no surprise to many that the mainstream media would lash out against a word that highlights their own, intentional failings. But [Lutz] Bachmann’s PEGIDA has popularized the term to the point where it has become a pillar — even a rallying cry — for the nationalist, populist movements across the continent.’ . . . Meanwhile, the hatred toward the press among the larger population of Trump supporters grows increasingly pronounced nearly every day. In these final weeks of the campaign, at nearly every rally, Trump riles up his audience against the press as reporters sit in the media pen, easy targets for vitriol. Reporters disembarking the press bus at Trump’s rally in Naples, Florida, on Sunday, the day after the ‘lügenpresse’ incident, were immediately greeted by boos and shouts of ‘Tell the truth!’ . . . ”
Concluding the broadcast, we note that David French, a conservative veteran of the Iraq war, has been viciously trolled by Trump’s Alt-Right followers because of his adoption of an Ethiopian orphan: ” . . . . In particular, the alt-right made a point to attack French’s youngest daughter, whom his family had adopted from Ethiopia. You see, alt-righters view bringing in children of color to America as the ultimate betrayal of the white race, which is why they had particular scorn for French. ‘I saw images of my daughter’s face in gas chambers, with a smiling Trump in a Nazi uniform preparing to press a button and kill her,’ he writes. ‘I saw her face photo-shopped into images of slaves. She was called a ‘niglet’ and a ‘dindu.’ The alt-right unleashed on my wife, Nancy, claiming that she had slept with black men while I was deployed to Iraq, and that I loved to watch while she had sex with ‘black bucks.’ People sent her pornographic images of black men having sex with white women, with someone photoshopped to look like me, watching. . . There is nothing at all rewarding, enjoyable, or satisfying about seeing man after man after man brag in graphic terms that he has slept with your wife. It’s unsettling to have a phone call interrupted, watch images of murder flicker across your screen, and read threatening e-mails. It’s sobering to take your teenage kids out to the farm to make sure they’re both proficient with handguns in case an intruder comes when they’re home alone.”
Program Highlights Include: Review of Trump’s links with the Steuben Society; review of the Steuben Society’s position in the Nazi underground in this country, before, during and after World War II; review of the political resume of Gerhard Frey; discussion of Blacks for Trump supporter “Michael the Black man” and his background in a murderous, anti-Semitic cult.
Supplementing analysis in the first four programs about the Trumpenkampfverbande, this program examines the media bias in his favor in the context of the Nazi tract “Serpent’s Walk,” about a Nazi takeover of the U.S. in the mid-twenty-first century. That takeover occurs after the SS goes underground (which happened), builds up their “economic muscle,” (which has happened with the Bormann network), buys into the opinion-forming media (which has happened) and sways the American people. “A century after the war they are ready to challenge the democrats and Jews for the hearts and minds of White Americans, who have begun to have their fill of government-enforced multi-culturalism and ‘equality.'” This appears to be happening with the Trump campaign. Noting the incessant grilling of Hillary Clinton over the e-mail non-scandal (110 of 30,000 e-mails contained classified material, a 0.36 percent margin of error) and the Clinton Foundation (a charity that helps the disadvantage and enjoys a higher official rating than the American Red Cross), Paul Krugman compared this–accurately–to the kid glove treatment afforded the dishonest and incompetent George W. Bush during the 2000 campaign. Reviewing Trump’s creditors, we note the primary role of Deutsche Bank in underwriting his real estate projects and the mysterious, opaque projects involving German industrial and aristocratic elements. After reviewing the absolute control that the Bormann capital network wields over corporate Germany, the program highlights the fundamental relationship between Deutsche Bank, Bormann and the remarkable and deadly network the Reichsleiter founded. Heavily invested in American corporations, the Bormann group and the Underground Reich are in an excellent position to manipulate media coverage of events, through direct corporate editorial policy and through the awarding of advertising contracts. We note, also, that the Bormann group controls corporate Germany: ” . . . What will not pass is the economic influences of the Bormann organization, whose commercial directives are obeyed almost without question by the highest echelons of West German finance and industry. ‘All orders come from the shareholders in South America,’ I have been told by a spokesman for Martin Bormann. . . .” The control of corporate Germany further enhances the ability of the Underground Reich to control media coverage. We are of the considered opinion that this dynamic is a major factor in the grotesquely slanted coverage of Trump’s campaign. While the “pundits” natter endlessly about Hillary Clinton’s health (never even considering that she may have been vectored), they are completely ignoring the fact that Trump is hundreds of millions of dollars in debt to Deutsche Bank, a predatory “too big to fail” institution that has flouted this country’s regulatory statutes and engaged in open law breaking. And, it’s a Bormann bank. The broadcast concludes with a transitional element that notes Trump’s political evolution from the anarcho/fascist libertarian milieu of Ron Paul, the same political forces that are the foundation of “Team Snowden” and WikiLeaks/Assange. ” . . . . Trump’s style and positions — endorsing and consorting with 9/11 truthers, promoting online racists, using fake statistics— draw on a now-obscure political strategy called “paleolibertarianism,” which was once quite popular among some Republicans, especially former presidential candidate Ron Paul. . . . But it was [Murray] Rothbard’s founding of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in 1982 that enabled the fledgling political movement to establish affinity with the neo-Confederate Lost Cause movement. . . . In the past few years, however, it’s been reborn as the alt-right, as a new generation of libertarians discovered their hidden heritage and began embracing racism and conspiracy theories. Many alt-right writers trace their roots to Rothbard. As one of them, Gregory Hood, put it, paleolibertarian theories about race and democracy “helped lead to the emergence [of the] Alternative Right.” Rothbard’s call for “sovereign nations based on race and ethnicity” is very similar to beliefs Trump’s alt-right supporters express today. . . .” Program Highlights Include: review of the ownership of the Quandt corporation, parent company of BMW and Audi automobiles by the heirs of Joseph Goebbels; BMW’s use of advertising contracts to influence editorial policy at “The Atlantic” magazine; review of George Soros’s role in financing Trump’s Chicago tower; review of the genesis of Soros’s business career “Aryanizing” Jewish property during the Holocaust.
QUICK: How many Presidential candidates can you name who kept a book of Adolf Hitler’s speeches by their bedside? Donald Trump does. For many years, what Mr. Emory terms “The Underground Reich” has been a fundamental point of discussion and analysis in these broadcasts and posts. In the third program analyzing the Donald Trump campaign, we examine the “Trumpenkampfverbande,” its political antecedents and adherents. Exemplifying, and networking with, generations of fascists and fascist organizations, the Trumpenkampfverbande embodies the emergence of the Underground Reich into plain view. A signature element of Trump’s campaign is his resuscitation of the “America First” slogan and concept, a manifestation both of his thinly-veiled appeal to Nazi and white supremacist elements and his willingness to cede dominance over world affairs to a German-dominated “third power bloc.” The America First concept mobilizes powerful feelings among those feeling overwhelmed and left behind by political and economic developments globally and in the United States. We note that the “original” America First was financed by Nazi Germany. Trump’s invocation of America First exemplifies the nature of his political heritage and allegiances. One of his top advisers Joseph E. Schmitz, “obsessed with all things German” and, according to associates, someone who “fired the Jews” (from the Pentagon) and manifested Holocaust denial. This is not atypical of “Team Trump.” One of the most important figures in mainstreaming “alt right” (i.e. Nazi, white nationalist and anti-Semitic) attitudes has been Breitbart’s Steve Bannon, now essentially running the Trump campaign. Trump and his campaign have a habit of re-tweeting information from “alt right” websites and message boards. Of primary significance in analyzing Trump concerns the main financial backer of his real estate projects–Deutsche Bank. In addition to the fact that this places a potential President in the position of owing upwards of $100 million to an institution that has openly defied U.S. regulatory positions, Deutsche Bank is a primary element of the remarkable and deadly Bormann capital network, about which we speak so often. Program Highlights Include: Analysis of the possibility that Trump’s father was in the Ku Klux Klan; review of Trump’s association with former Axis spy Norman Vincent Peale; review of Trump’s counsel–Senator Joe McCarthy aide Roy Cohn; Trump’s additional financial backing from George Soros, who got his start in business “Aryanizing” Jewish property during the Holocaust; Trump’s tweeting of a campaign ad featuring Waffen SS-clad World War II re-enactors; The enthusiastic suppoprt Trump has received from David Duke.
Karl Rove’s American Crossroads organization has been channeling money to Bernie Sanders’ campaign. This, alone, should make thinking people ask serious questions about Saint Bernard. Other questions the Sanderistas are not asking include: why has Sanders been cited by the Federal Elections Commission three times?; why haven’t the media asked questions about his Communist/radical past, including serving as a Presidential elector for the Trotskyite Socialist Workers’ Party in 1980; just what was his wife’s role in the collapse of Burlington College?; why has Sanders been so reluctant to release his tax information?; why is he repeating the GOP theme of Hillary as “a liar?;” why is Graham E. Fuller, a prominent advocate of the Muslim Brotherhood and radical Islam promoting Bernie Sanders? All of the contents of this website as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of videotaped lectures are available on a 32GB flash drive. Dave offers his programs and articles for free–your support is very much appreciated.
Analyzing the media’s psychological warfare against Hillary Clinton, we note how much of the “negative narrative”–including assertions parroted by Bernie Sanders and his associates–about her comes from the right-wing media attack machine. How many people note, for example, that the Inspector General’s referral to the Justice Department was not criminal? We note that George H.W. Bush–the man for whom CIA headquarters was named–was defeated for re-election by Bill Clinton. Fox News is headed by Roger Ailes, who was George H.W. Bush’s campaign director. Much of the media/internet coverage of Hillary comes from Fox, echoed dutifully by other, so-called “responsible” media outlets. It should be noted that both “The New York Times” and “The Washington Post” have longstanding ties to the CIA. Both papers have contracted–along with Fox News–for excerpts from a book titled “Clinton Cash,” authored by Peter Schweizer, a Koch brothers political spear carrier and former adviser to Sarah Palin. We note that the Citizens United decision had as its centerpiece an anti-Hillary movie called Hillary Clinton: The Movie. Not surprisingly, the New York Times has featured slanted coverage of the Clinton e-mail non-scandal. Program Highlights Include: Review of FBI director James Comey’s work as a Mitt Romney supporter in 2012; Hillary Clinton’s voting record as the 11th most liberal Senator; CNBC’s “Morning Joe” program’s deliberate distortion of Washington Post columnist David Ignatius’s statements on the Hillary Clinton e-mail non-scandal; Joe “Morning Joe” Scarborough’s role as a GOP member of the House of Representatives; CNBC owner Chris Burke’s major contributions to George W. Bush’s campaigns.