Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.
The tag 'Organized Crime' is associated with 36 posts.

FTR #1005 What the Hell Does Dave Emory Mean by “The So-Called Progressive Sector”?

“In the ’60’s, we had Mar­tin Luther King with ‘I Have a Dream.’ Now, we have Jesse Jack­son with ‘I Have a
Scheme.’ “–Mort Sahl

The third of his land­mark books about the assas­si­na­tion of Mar­tin Luther King, Dr. William Pep­per’s “The Plot to Kill King” is a well-writ­ten, inves­tiga­tive tour de force. In this pro­gram, we read excerpts of his book high­light­ing the duplic­i­ty and, in some cas­es, very pos­si­bly lethal treach­ery of some icon­ic, so-called “pro­gres­sive” polit­i­cal fig­ures.

In his inves­ti­ga­tion of King’s mur­der­ers, he detailed the appar­ent role of the late Rus­sell Lee Adkins, a mem­ber of the Dix­ie Mafia in Mem­phis, Ten­nessee. (The Dix­ie Mafia is dis­tinct from the Mafia, per se, that oper­at­ed in the South, although–as Pep­per makes clear–they worked with Mafiosi like New Orleans capo Car­los Mar­cel­lo and Mar­cel­lo asso­ciate Frank Lib­er­to, like Adkins, an oper­a­tor in Mem­phis.)

In “The Plot to Kill King,” Pep­per presents a depo­si­tion of Ron­nie Lee Adkins, Rus­sel­l’s son.  

In the depo­si­tion, Adkins alleged that the room switch to a room over­look­ing the swim­ming pool at the Lor­raine Motel was effect­ed by Jesse Jack­son. In AFA #8, we high­light­ed how this switch placed King in a per­fect posi­tion for the assas­sin to shoot him. This room switch was essen­tial for the suc­cess­ful killing of Dr. King.

1.-” . . . . . . . . Clyde Tol­son, Hoover’s Deputy (whom Ron­nie was told to call ‘Uncle Clyde’ from the first time he came to vis­it them in the 1950s) flew into the old air­port where the old Nation­al Guard planes were based. . . .”
2.-” . . . . Ron said that O.Z. dis­pensed mon­ey to, among oth­ers, Solomon Jones, Jesse Jack­son and Bil­ly Kyles. The mon­ey was paid for their obtain­ing and pass­ing on infor­ma­tion. Tol­son told his father that Jones, Jack­son, and Kyles were also paid infor­mants of the F.B.I. paid out of the Mem­phis office, but the mon­ey that came from Tol­son was sep­a­rate from the mon­ey they received from [Mem­phis Police and Fire Depart­ment head and for­mer FBI agent Frank] Hol­lo­man and the Mem­phis FBI Office. The Adkins mon­ey envelopes were wrapped up with rub­ber bands and paper with ini­tials on it, ‘BK,’ ‘JJ,’ and so forth. . . .”
3.-” . . . . . . . . Ron stat­ed (under oath) that when Dr. King returned to Mem­phis on April 3, Jesse Jack­son was instruct­ed to arrange for the room change from the low­er pro­tect­ed room 202, to the bal­cony room 306. . . .”
4.-” . . . . . . . . Years lat­er, when he asked his moth­er what the prob­lem was with Jones, she said that Jack­son (which was sub­se­quent­ly con­firmed by Junior) was pay­ing for every­thing. He was in charge of the mon­ey. . . .”

In FTR #46, we accessed William Pep­per’s first book on the King assas­si­na­tion, Orders to Kill. In that vol­ume, Pep­per set forth a Spe­cial Forces “A” Team deployed to Mem­phis to kill Dr. King and his aide Andrew Young. Pep­per repris­es that infor­ma­tion in this book, includ­ing infor­ma­tion giv­en to the Green Beret snipers by a Mem­phis Police oper­a­tive that “Friend­lies were not wear­ing ties.” In that con­text check out Jesse Jack­son, pho­tographed along­side Dr. King before the mur­der: ” . . . . . . . . War­ren [one of the snipers] report­ed that he had spo­ken over the radio with an MPD offi­cer whose first name he believed was Sam, who was the head of the “city TAC.” (This had to be Inspec­tor Sam Evans, head of the MPD tac­ti­cal units.) War­ren said that Sam pro­vid­ed details about the phys­i­cal struc­ture and lay­out of the Lor­raine. He also told War­ren that “friend­lies were not wear­ing ties.” War­ren took this to mean there was an infor­mant or infor­mants inside the King group. . . .”

Pep­per devotes much text to analy­sis of the active sup­pres­sion of the truth by media out­lets. A CNN  “doc­u­men­tary” about the King assas­si­na­tion host­ed by Soledad O’Brien con­sist­ed large­ly of bla­tant dis­in­for­ma­tion.

After dis­cussing the dis­heart­en­ing CNN doc­u­men­tary Pep­per high­lights media com­plic­i­ty in the cov­er-up of this coun­try’s polit­i­cal assas­si­na­tions, not­ing that many so-called pro­gres­sive com­men­ta­tors and out­lets adhere to this cen­sor­ship. ” . . . . The remain­ing, miss­ing point of this pic­ture of dis­in­for­ma­tion and infor­ma­tion con­trol is the coop­er­a­tive activ­i­ty of a num­ber of seem­ing­ly pro­gres­sive, inves­tiga­tive jour­nal­ists and researchers. These are a coterie of estab­lish­ment lib­er­al pro­fes­sion­als who come on to assist the gov­ern­men­t’s posi­tion in cas­es and extreme­ly sen­si­tive issues like polit­i­cal assas­si­na­tion. These indi­vid­u­als have usu­al­ly devel­oped respect and cred­i­bil­i­ty with­in the pro­gres­sive com­mu­ni­ty over a peri­od of time as activist oppo­nents of offi­cial gov­ern­ment posi­tions and actions. They have this devel­oped cred­i­bil­i­ty; thus, when they elect to support–or just ignore–the offi­cial gov­ern­ment posi­tion on a par­tic­u­lar issue or action, they have the abil­i­ty to under­cut dis­sent. . . .”

One of the indi­vid­u­als cit­ed by Pep­per is Daniel Ells­berg, although he does not men­tion him by name in the excerpt we read. Pep­per refers to Ells­berg, specif­i­cal­ly, in ear­li­er dis­cus­sion in his book.

Ells­berg leaked the Pen­ta­gon Papers, which were then pub­li­cized by “The New York Times,” as well as The “Wash­ing­ton  Post,” both very close­ly linked to the CIA.

As dis­cussed in FTR #978, among oth­er pro­grams, we not­ed that the Pen­ta­gon Papers were them­selves “sec­ond-lev­el” cov­er-up, false­ly main­tain­ing that there was con­ti­nu­ity from the Kennedy admin­is­tra­tion to the John­son admin­is­tra­tion with regard to Viet­nam war pol­i­cy.

Dou­glas Valen­tine has writ­ten exten­sive­ly about the U.S. nation­al secu­ri­ty estab­lish­ment. Best known for his sem­i­nal work on the Phoenix pro­gram in Viet­nam, he has recent­ly pub­lished “The CIA as Orga­nized Crime.”

In his recent vol­ume, Valen­tine notes Daniel Ells­berg’s long-stand­ing links to the CIA and the inability/unwillingness of what he calls “The Com­pat­i­ble Left” to talk about St. Ells­berg’s con­nec­tions to Lan­g­ley.

This under­scores why Mr. Emory has, for so long, referred to the “so-called pro­gres­sive sec­tor.”

1.-” . . . .  Peter Dale Scott had also been mar­gin­al­ized as a result of his 1972 book, The War Con­spir­a­cy, and his 1993 book Deep Pol­i­tics and the Death of JFK. Peter sup­port­ed me, and a few years after the Phoenix book was pub­lished, I men­tioned to him that I was writ­ing an arti­cle, based on my inter­views with Scot­ton and Conein, about Ells­berg’s deep polit­i­cal asso­ci­a­tion with the CIA. . . .”
2.-” . . . . [Alfred] McCoy [author of The Pol­i­tics of Hero­in in South­east Asia] accused CIA offi­cers Ed Lans­dale and Lou Conein of col­lab­o­rat­ing with Cor­si­can drug smug­glers in 1965, at the same time Ells­berg was work­ing close­ly with them. But when I inter­viewed him, Ells­berg insist­ed that these CIA offi­cers were not involved in the drug traf­fic, despite over­whelm­ing evi­dence to the con­trary. . . .”
3.-” . . . . But more impor­tant­ly, by  cov­er­ing up his own CIA con­nec­tions, he’s reas­sur­ing the bour­geoisie that sub­scribes to these media out­lets that every­thing they assume about their lead­ers is right. And that’s how sym­bol­ic heroes mis­lead the way. . . .”
4.-” . . . . If Ells­berg were to reveal the CIA’s secrets, he would no longer have the same reas­sur­ing effect on the lib­er­al bour­geoisie. So his spon­sors nev­er men­tion that he had an affair with the mis­tress of a Cor­si­can drug smug­gler in Saigon. That’s not in the book or the movie. He denies his CIA bud­dies were involved in the drug trade, even though they were. . . .”

Pep­per con­cludes the main body of his text with obser­va­tions about the role of the pow­er elite and the news media in per­pet­u­at­ing the social and eco­nom­ic sta­tus quo: ” . . . . “Look” decid­ed to pub­lish my work, but in the inter­im, Bill met with New Orleans DA Jim Gar­ri­son, and was shak­en by Gar­rison’s evi­dence of the involve­ment of the CIA in the assas­si­na­tion of John Kennedy. Right after the Gar­ri­son meet­ing, he called Bob Kennedy around 1:00 a.m., and Bob con­firmed the con­clu­sion, but said he would have to get to the White House in order to open the case. Bill Atwood had a heart attack about three hours lat­er, around 4:00 a.m., and left “Look.” Need­less to say, nei­ther my piece nor Gar­rison’s were pub­lished, and the asso­ciate edi­tor, Chan­dler Brossard, who brought us to Atwood, was let go. . . .”


Jack Ruby to FBI Informant: Watch “the Fireworks” in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/1963

An inter­est­ing doc­u­ment came to light in the recent release of files relat­ing to the assas­si­na­tion of JFK. Jack Ruby told an FBI infor­mant to “watch the fire­works” in Dealey Plaza that day. This might be eval­u­at­ed against the back­ground of FTR #963, relating–among oth­er things–a read­ing of Jack Ruby’s War­ren Com­mis­sion tes­ti­mo­ny. All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 37+ 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.


FTR #966 Dramatis Personae of the Russia-Gate Psy-Op

Devel­op­ing infor­ma­tion about the cast of char­ac­ters in the “Rus­sia-Gate” psy-op, we high­light the polit­i­cal alle­giance of “Team Trump”–the oper­a­tives involved with Trump’s cam­paign and busi­ness deal­ings with Rus­sia, as well as Robert Mueller, for­mer FBI chief and a very spe­cial pros­e­cu­tor indeed.

Although Trump cer­tain­ly had links to Russ­ian mob fig­ures, they are by no means the prime movers in this dra­ma.

Most impor­tant­ly, we detail the polit­i­cal resumes and deep pol­i­tics under­ly­ing the cast of char­ac­ters in this dra­ma, track­ing the oper­a­tional links back to Joe McCarthy and the red-bait­ing spe­cial­ists from the first Cold War.

Joe McCarthy legal point man Roy Cohn is, to a con­sid­er­able extent, the spi­der at the cen­ter of this web. Cohn:

1.-Was Trump’s attor­ney for much of “The Don­ald’s” pro­fes­sion­al life.
2.-Introduced Trump cam­paign man­ag­er and dirty tricks spe­cial­ist Roger Stone to the seat­ed Pres­i­dent.
3.-Was instru­men­tal in arrang­ing for a bribe which made “inde­pen­dent” Repub­li­can John Ander­son the Pres­i­den­tial can­di­date for the Lib­er­al Par­ty in New York. This gam­bit gave Rea­gan a key vic­to­ry in New York. Cohn and Stone’s asso­ciate in this oper­a­tion was Antho­ny “Fat Tony” Salerno–one of Cohn’s mob clients and among Don­ald Trump’s orga­nized crime asso­ciates as well.
4.-Was the point man for intro­duc­ing Rupert Mur­doch to Ronald Rea­gan and forg­ing the right-wing media attack machine that dom­i­nates today, the most promi­nent ele­ment of which is Fox News.

Roger Stone is anoth­er fig­ure who weaves through­out this con­cate­na­tion. Stone:

1.-Was Don­ald Trump’s cam­paign man­ag­er and lat­er dirty tricks oper­a­tive, who net­worked with Wik­iLeaks go-between for the Trump/Alt-right crew.
2.-Was tout­ing Lib­er­tar­i­an Par­ty can­di­date Gary John­son. John­son and Jill Stein were advo­cat­ed for by Stone as par­tic­i­pants in the debates between Hillary Clin­ton and Trump. (John­son and Stein’s com­bined vote total helped Trump win in sev­er­al key states.)
3.-Worked with Roy Cohn to put “inde­pen­dent” Repub­li­can John Ander­son the Pres­i­den­tial can­di­date for the Lib­er­al Par­ty in New York. This gam­bit gave Rea­gan a key vic­to­ry in New York, as not­ed above.

The point man for the Trump busi­ness inter­ests in their deal­ings with Rus­sia is Felix Sater. A Russ­ian-born immi­grant, Sater is a pro­fes­sion­al crim­i­nal and a con­vict­ed felon with his­tor­i­cal links to the Mafia. Beyond that, and more impor­tant­ly, Sater is an FBI infor­mant and a CIA con­tract agent. As the media firestorm around “Rus­sia-gate” builds, it is impor­tant not to lose sight of Sater. ” . . . . He [Sater] also pro­vid­ed oth­er pur­port­ed nation­al secu­ri­ty ser­vices for a report­ed fee of $300,000. Sto­ries abound as to what else Sater may or may not have done in the are­na of nation­al secu­ri­ty. . . .” We won­der if help­ing the “Rus­sia-Gate” op may have been one of those.

Beyond Sater, oth­er key play­ers in this con­cate­na­tion do not track back to “Kremlin/Putin/FSB/KGB.” Rob Goldstone–the pub­li­cist whose over­ture to Don­ald Trump, Jr. ini­ti­at­ed the lat­est “Rus­sia-gate jour­nal­is­tic feed­ing fren­zy in the media, began his career a jour­nal­is­tic foot sol­dier for Rupert Mur­doch, the very same Rupert Mur­doch whose chris­ten­ing as a GOP/right-wing pro­pa­gan­dist was ini­ti­at­ed by Roy Cohn.

Gold­stone con­tact­ed Don­ald Trump Jr., dan­gling the bait that there might be dirt on Hillary avail­able if he met with some asso­ciates. Fore­most among those is a Russ­ian attor­ney, Natal­ie Vesel­nit­skaya. Her appar­ent pur­pose in this meet­ing was not to offer up dirt on Hillary Clin­ton but to work toward eas­ing a media lock­down on a doc­u­men­tary about the Mag­nit­sky affair.

Spun in the West, the U.S. in par­tic­u­lar, as a clas­sic exam­ple of ham-fist­ed Russ­ian cor­rup­tion and vio­lence, the Mag­nit­sky affair was revealed in the film doc­u­men­tary to be an exam­ple of U.S. cor­rup­tion, not Russ­ian.

Craft­ed by Putin polit­i­cal oppo­nent Andrei Nekrasov, the film revealed an unex­pect­ed dynam­ic: ” . . . . Nekrasov dis­cov­ered that a woman work­ing in Browder’s com­pa­ny was the actu­al whistle­blow­er and that Mag­nit­sky – rather than a cru­sad­ing lawyer – was an accoun­tant who was impli­cat­ed in the scheme. . . .”

Attempt­ing to lift the media black­out on Nekrasov’s film was Vesel­nit­skaya’s goal, not dis­sem­i­nat­ing dirt on Hillary Clin­ton.

Pro­gram High­lights Include: the financ­ing of Joe McCarthy’s career by Nazi sym­pa­thiz­er Wal­ter Har­nischfeger, part of the Ger­man-Amer­i­can Fifth Col­umn in this coun­try which was at the fore­front of the dis­cus­sion in FTR #‘s 918, 919; McCarthy’s use of a post­war Nazi net­work head­ed by Gen­er­al Karl Wolff, SS chief Hein­rich Himm­ler’s per­son­al adju­tant; Spe­cial Pros­e­cu­tor Robert Mueller’s role in cov­er­ing up the BCCI scan­dal and the over­lap­ping Oper­a­tion Green Quest inves­ti­ga­tion pur­suant to 9/11.


FTR #936 The Making of Donald Trump (Top Banana Republic), Part 5

This fifth and final install­ment of the series ref­er­ences 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.”

In the pre­vi­ous pro­gram, we opined that we all, in a sense, are enrolled in Trump Uni­ver­si­ty. By the same token, we could all be said to be play­ing the board game Trump: The Game. ” . . . . Then there’s his Monop­oly-like board game. When Trump and exec­u­tives from Mil­ton-Bradley intro­duced Trump: The Game in 1989, the devel­op­er sur­prised every­one by declar­ing those roy­al­ties would go to char­i­ty, too. Mil­ton-Bradley took Trump at his word. It also fig­ured it might improve sales, which were weak, if peo­ple real­ized their pur­chas­es would not enrich a pre­sumed bil­lion­aire but go to char­i­ty. Its tele­vi­sion ads told poten­tial buy­ers: ‘Mr. Trump’s pro­ceeds from Trump: The Game will be donat­ed to char­i­ty.’ . . . Trump has said he made $808,000 and that the mon­ey was donat­ed to his Don­ald J. Trump Foun­da­tion. . . . At the time, I spent a day call­ing New York and New Jer­sey char­i­ties try­ing to find any dis­clo­sures of gifts made by Trump. . . . But call after call pro­duced noth­ing. . . .” (The Mak­ing of Don­ald Trump; p. 17.)

Trump appeared to have won over a major­i­ty of vot­ing mil­i­tary vet­er­ans and a poll of active-duty ser­vice mem­bers indi­cat­ed that most pre­ferred Trump. Trump him­self avoid­ed mil­i­tary ser­vice dur­ing the Viet­nam War. “. . . . Don­ald turned eigh­teen in 1964, when the death toll in Viet­nam was ris­ing fast. He got four stu­dent defer­ments and one med­ical defer­ment, after his doc­tor wrote that he had a bone spur in his foot. Which foot? a jour­nal­ist asked years lat­er. Trump said he could not recall. . . .” (The Mak­ing of Don­ald Trump; pp. 131–132.)

In the fall of 2015, Trump boy­cotted a GOP pri­ma­ry cam­paign debate because Meg­yn Kel­ly was to be the on-air host. Trump instead went to an event on the Bat­tle­ship Iowa muse­um to what he mis­rep­re­sent­ed as a major vet­er­ans orga­ni­za­tion. ” . . . . Trump instead went to the Bat­tle­ship Iowa, now a muse­um at anchor in Long Beach, Cal­i­for­nia, to deliv­er what his cam­paign said would be a major address on nation­al defense. Trump praised the spon­sor of the event, Vet­er­ans for a Strong Amer­i­ca, and told the audi­ence that ‘hun­dreds of thou­sands’ of peo­ple belonged to the orga­ni­za­tion. There were evi­dent­ly two relat­ed orga­ni­za­tions, both non­prof­its, though Trump and his host nev­er made that clear to the audi­ence on the ship or watch­ing on tele­vi­sion. One was a char­i­ty, the oth­er one of those dark mon­ey polit­i­cal groups that have expand­ed since the Supreme Court’s 2010 Cit­i­zens Unit­ed deci­sion, enabling mon­ey from undis­closed sources to influ­ence elec­tions. A quick inter­net check would revealed to the Trump cam­paign that the IRS had revoked the non­prof­it sta­tus of Vet­er­ans for a Strong Amer­i­ca due to their fail­ure to file required dis­clo­sure reports. A char­i­ty dis­clo­sure orga­ni­za­tion, Guidestar, report­ed that it had no record of any board of direc­tors, Every indi­ca­tion point­ed to Vet­er­ans for a Strong Amer­i­ca being a one-man enter­prise run by a South Dako­ta lawyer named Joel Arends, whose oper­a­tion was under inves­ti­ga­tion for sus­pect­ed elec­tion impro­pri­eties in Ari­zona and Texas. Reporters lat­er learned the orga­ni­za­tion had thir­ty dol­lars in the bank and debts ten times that size. None of this was in line with Trump’s pro­mo­tion of the group’s immense size, influ­ence, and good works. . . .” (The Mak­ing of Don­ald Trump; pp. 135–136.)

Next, the pro­gram high­lights how Trump pro­motes him­self and his projects using The Amer­i­can Acad­e­my of Hos­pi­tal­i­ty Sci­ences. Trump, his daugh­ter Ivan­ka, his son Don­ald, Jr., the chief oper­at­ing offi­cer of the Trump Orga­ni­za­tion (Don­ald Cala­mari) and Trump’s but­ler Antho­ny Senecal are major fig­ures in this orga­ni­za­tion. The main fig­ure in the orga­ni­za­tion is Joseph Cinque, aka “Joey No Socks” or “The Prep­py Don.” ” . . . If those sound like names that might be asso­ci­at­ed with a fig­ure involved in orga­nized crime, it’s because they are. New York police with a search war­rant knocked on the door of Cinque’s Park Avenue South apart­ment in 1989. Cinque declined to let them in. The police applied a bat­ter­ing ram. Inside the apart­ment they found a trove of stolen art, includ­ing two Marc Cha­gall prints val­ued at $40,000. they had been tak­en in an art gallery heist. Cinque made a deal to plead to a mis­de­meanor, but pros­e­cu­tors scrapped the plea bar­gain after Cinque was seen talk­ing to John Got­ti, the ‘dap­per don’ who became head of the Gam­bi­no crime fam­i­ly by arrang­ing the mur­der of his pre­de­ces­sor Paul Castellano–one of the secret own­ers of the com­pa­ny that sup­plied con­crete for many Trump build­ings.

“Got­ti told Cinque that he would ‘take care of the DA,’ an appar­ent ref­er­ence to Anne Hey­man, the pros­e­cu­tor who had offered the plea bar­gain. . . . Hey­man ordered a more thor­ough inves­ti­ga­tion of Cinque. She alleged that the inves­ti­ga­tion showed that Cinque ‘was deal­ing drugs out of his apart­ment and fenc­ing stolen art-work.’ Hey­man also said that Cinque’s apart­ment on Cen­tral Park South appeared to be a retail out­let for stolen cloth­ing, includ­ing Armani suits and silk shirts. In 1990, Cinque plead­ed guilty to a felony: receiv­ing stolen prop­er­ty. . . .” (The Mak­ing of Don­ald Trump; p. 158.)

Anoth­er inter­est­ing, close asso­ciate of Don­ald Trump was Felix Sat­ter, who changed the spelling of his name, adding an extra “T” to avoid being rec­og­nized on inter­net search­es. ” . . . ‘Sat­ter’s’ name appears with just one ‘T’ in a host of places. There’s the deed to his home for exam­ple. It is also spelled with only one ‘T’ on New York State court papers from his 1991 felony con­vic­tion for stab­bing a man in the face with the stem of a mar­gari­ta glass. The name Sater with one ‘T’ also appears on fed­er­al court papers in a $40 mil­lion orga­nized crime stock swin­dle he con­fessed to in 1998, a scheme that ben­e­fit­ed him as well as the Gen­ovese and Gam­bi­no crime fam­i­lies. The stock swin­dle involved fake stock bro­ker­age firms using high-pres­sure tac­tics to get naive peo­ple to buy worth­less shares from Sater and his mob friends. . . .” (The Mak­ing of Don­ald Trump; p. 162.)

Trump’s close asso­ciate Felix was able to escape seri­ous legal ret­ri­bu­tion by going to work for the CIA. ” . . . . There is every indi­ca­tion that the extra­or­di­nar­i­ly lenient treat­ment result­ed from Sater play­ing a get-out-of-jail free card. Short­ly before his secret guilty plea, Sater became a free­lance oper­a­tive of the Cen­tral Intel­li­gence Agency. One of his fel­low stock swindlers, Sal­va­tore Lau­ria, wrote a book about it. The Scor­pi­on and the Frog is described on its cov­er as ‘the true sto­ry of one man’s fraud­u­lent rise and fall n the Wall Street of the nineties.’ Accord­ing to Lauria–and the court files that have been unsealed–Sater helped the CIA buy small mis­siles before they got to ter­ror­ists. He also pro­vid­ed oth­er pur­port­ed nation­al secu­ri­ty ser­vices for a report­ed fee of $300,000. Sto­ries abound as to what else Sater may or may not have done in the are­na of nation­al secu­ri­ty. . . .” (The Mak­ing of Don­ald Trump; p. 165.)

The last text read­ing con­cludes with dis­cus­sion of Trump’s unsa­vory real estate deals. Lur­ing unwary buy­ers in with the pres­ti­gious Trump brand name, ‘The Don­ald” left a great many of them high and dry when the truth emerged about what was real­ly going on. In this sense, too, we are ALL investors in the Trump brand name, and like­ly to receive the same treat­ment as his unwary real estate cus­tomers.

A Baja Cal­i­for­nia (Mex­i­co) project is typ­i­cal of Trump’s method­ol­o­gy and oper­a­tions in this regard. ” . . . . A June 2007 newslet­ter noti­fied buy­ers that con­struc­tion was under­way. The next month, the Trump Baja News report­ed, ‘our new and excit­ed home­own­ers now are part of an elite group of vaca­tion home­own­ers who own prop­er­ty devel­oped by one of the most respect­ed names in real estate, Don­ald J. Trump.’ Three months lat­er, in Octo­ber, when Wall Street crashed under the weight of the tox­ic mort­gages and oth­er Baja real estate projects fal­tered, the same newslet­ter car­ried a mes­sage ‘From the desk of Ivan­ka Trump.’ Ivan­ka assured the buy­ers that their invest­ment was sound. ‘Though it may be rue that some of Baja’s devel­op­ments could slow down, these mar­ket con­di­tions sim­ply do not apply to Trump Ocean Resort–or any oth­er Trump devel­op­ment,’ she wrote.

“Two months lat­er, in Decem­ber 2007, the newslet­ter advised buy­ers of new­ly dis­cov­ered geo­log­i­cal prob­lems afflict­ing the build­ing site. A few months lat­er, in March 2008, anx­ious buy­ers received calls or let­ters. Con­struc­tion loans had been approved, would be fund­ed short­ly, and work would be under­way. This was nine months after buy­ers had been told in writ­ing that con­struc­tion had already begun. Still, con­struc­tion did not pro­ceed.

“All of these pro­mo­tions, sales pitch­es, and newslet­ter updates cre­at­ed the impres­sion that Trump was the builder and the devel­op­er, words he used. The buy­ers lat­er said they bought in because Trump was the devel­op­er or builder. That under­stand­ing then changed abrupt­ly.

“The worst news arrived two before Christ­mas 2008. What had been described as a part­ner­ship between ‘the Trump Orga­ni­za­tion, Don­ald J. Trump,’ and the oth­er peo­ple and com­pa­nies involved was described in a new way. Nei­ther Trump nor the Trump Orga­ni­za­tion were invest­ment part­ners in the Trump Ocean Resort. They were not the devel­op­ers, either. They had mere­ly licensed the use of the Trump name. . . .” (The Mak­ing of Don­ald Trump; pp. 169–170.)

It is grue­some­ly iron­ic that the bulk of Trump’s scam­ming revolves around his real estate empire. It was, of course, the col­lapse of the real estate mar­ket that led to the finan­cial col­lapse of 2008.


FTR #935 The Making of Donald Trump (Top Banana Republic), Part 4

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 and 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.)


FTR #934 The Making of Donald Trump (Top Banana Republic), Part 3

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 & Sons 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 brought 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 work­ers, 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.)


FTR #933 The Making of Donald Trump (Top Banana Republic), Part 2

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. . . .”


FTR #932 The Making of Donald Trump (Top Banana Republic), Part 1

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.


FTR #903 Daniel Hopsicker on Donald Trump and How He Is Going to Make America Great Again

Don­ald Trump’s entire busi­ness career–his “art of the deal”–derives from high­ly ques­tion­able deal­ings with a pan­theon of orga­nized crime fig­ures, cor­rupt financiers and intel­li­gence-con­nect­ed oper­a­tives. From his ear­ly entre­pre­neur­ial career in Atlantic City to his under­tak­ings in Flori­da to his oper­a­tions in West­ern cities like Las Vegas, one finds Trump asso­ci­at­ed with Jim­my-Hof­fa linked Mafia fig­ures, peo­ple from the milieu of Howard Hugh­es and Iran-Con­tra play­ers such as Adnan Khashog­gi. Trump has pro­ject­ed financier Carl Icahn as his Sec­re­tary of the Trea­sury, ignor­ing Icah­n’s link to what Daniel has called “Cocaine One” and the mys­te­ri­ous, nefar­i­ous Sky­way air­lines. Trump’s Atlantic City deals involved mob-linked fig­ures like Dan Sul­li­van, Ken­neth Shapiro, “Fat Tony Saler­no” and Nicky Scar­fo. More sig­nif­i­cant­ly, the State of New Jer­sey, Atlantic City offi­cials, and the Hol­i­day Inn inter­ests have aid­ed Trump in high­ly ques­tion­able ways. In Las Vegas, Trump has been the heir to fig­ures from the Mey­er Lan­sky and Howard Hugh­es inter­ests, such as Louis Less­er. Trump’s larg­er cir­cle of friends links to indi­vid­u­als and insti­tu­tions involved with the Mar­cos fam­i­ly in the Philip­pines, whose largesse derived from the Gold­en Lily loot secret­ed by the Japan­ese in World War II. Pro­gram High­lights Include: Craig Less­er (Louis Lesser’s son) and his role in access­ing some of the Gold­en Lily loot in the Philip­pines; Iran-Con­tra fig­ure Adnan Khashog­gi’s sale of his per­son­al yacht to Don­ald Trump; Khashog­gi’s links to Imel­da Mar­cos; Trump’s flip­ping of a lux­u­ry Palm Beach (Flori­da) prop­er­ty to Russ­ian mob­ster Dim­it­ry Rybolovlev; Trump’s use of “off­shoring” tac­tics to ren­der his deal­ings opaque.


“Bormann Jews” in Ukraine? And Israel? Gold Warriors, Bubie?

The new prime min­is­ter of Ukraine received an appar­ent­ly bogus law degree from MAUP, the largest pri­vate uni­ver­si­ty in Ukraine and an epi­cen­ter of anti-Semi­tism in that benight­ed coun­try. David Duke has been a fac­ul­ty mem­ber of MAUP. Might Volodymir Groys­man be a “Bor­mann Jew?” We won­der, also, about Shel­don Adel­son, the largest indi­vid­ual con­trib­u­tor to the 2012 GOP Pres­i­den­tial cam­paign and the most impor­tant of Ben­jamin Netanyahu’s finan­cial back­ers. Much of Adel­son’s wealth comes from Macao-based gam­bling casi­nos. Macao was a major epi­cen­ter of Axis gold smug­gling dur­ing World War II. 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.