Tag: politics

Posted on

Billionaire Sex Scandal: “Enquiring” Minds Want to Know

Jeff Bezos owns Amazon and the Washington Post newspaper (aka the WaPo). The amazing success of the first company allowed Bezos to buy the second one. But all is not rainbows and unicorns for the richest man in the world. Bezos is divorcing his wife of 25 years after engaging in an illicit affair with Lauren Sanchez, a TV news reporter. But wait, there’s more…

NEW YORK, NY – FEBRUARY 08: The New York Post with a headline referring to Jeff Bezos is photographed at a convenience store on February 8, 2019 in New York City. Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon is accusing David J. Pecker, publisher of National Enquirer, the nations leading supermarket tabloid, of extortion and blackmail. (Photo by Stephanie Keith/Getty Images)

Pictures and text messages from the affair were leaked to the National Enquirer, whose CEO, David Pecker, is a long-time friend of President Trump. In case you didn’t know, there is no love lost between the President and Bezos, largely because of the critical coverage of the Trump Presidency by the WaPo.

Now AMI, parent company of the National Enquirer, is being accused by Bezos of blackmail and extortion for threatening to release more lurid photos unless Bezos backed off from going after AMI. If this isn’t all strange enough, there’s even speculation that Sanchez’s brother may have been the one who leaked the photos.

Tabloid newspapers found in supermarket checkout aisles have always trafficked in sensational and unseemly “news” especially those stories involving celebrities, money, and sex…and this story has it all. Add a little political intrigue with the Trump connection and you have a perfect fire-storm of scandalous gossip masquerading as journalism.

This may not be the kind of journalism that the Founding Fathers wanted to protect when they wrote the First Amendment, but it still benefits from its protections. Media history buffs may recall James Thomson Callender, a scandalmonger whose attacks on our earliest Presidents led to the Sedition Act. According to the Digital History website, “Attacked by his critics as a ‘traitorous and truculent scoundrel,’ Callender defended himself on strikingly modern grounds: that the public had a right to know the moral character of people it elected to public office. Although he has often been dismissed as a ‘pen for hire,’ willing to defame anyone, Callender was much more important than that. His life underscored one of the most radical consequences of the American Revolution. The Revolution ensured that ordinary Americans would be the ultimate arbiters of American politics.”

Posted on

When is a Wall NOT a Wall?

Last evening President Trump took to the airwaves to make his case for greater border security in the form of a wall. The argument for a wall, one that Mexico would pay for, has been a constant theme of the Trump campaign and presidency. Last evening’s remarks were the President’s first Oval Office address and there was considerable hand-wringing from TV network executives about giving him this platform. Sacrificing lucrative prime-time real estate to a political figure who has a history of playing fast-and-loose with the truth made for a difficult decision. However, in the end (and in light of the government shutdown and the potential for news to be made) all major TV networks agreed to air his remarks, and the Democratic rebuttal, in real-time.

Fence separating United States and Mexico

While there is little disagreement about the need for greater security on our southern border, there is considerable debate on how to best achieve that security. Trumps wants a wall while others argue for heat-sensors, drones, and other forms of electronic surveillance. All of these would slow down illegal entry, drug smuggling, and other abuses of our national sovereignty. An effective barrier would also serve to funnel immigrants and those seeking asylum to legal ports of entry. These ideas are not terribly partisan. Democrats, including Senators Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Chuck Schumer, voted for 700 miles of border fencing in 2006.

But what is most surprising to me is the arguments that seem to hang on the disagreement over the idea of a barrier and what we will call it. President Trump calls it a wall while others use the term fence. Whether it is made of concrete or steel appears to be important to some. There was even a debate last week about whether former President Obama had a wall constructed around his residence in the District of Columbia. Some argued that the brick and steel fencing did not amount to a “wall.”

Any rational person can see that this argument, and the ensuing government shut down, is not actually about border security and immigration policy. Instead it is about scoring political points and playing to constituents who are divided on this and so many other issues. Effective communication depends on a level of trust between parties who are willing to listen to each other…and sadly that appears to be nearly impossible in this current political climate.

css.php