Want to know why Americans rate media credibility below that of used-car salesmen? The Wall Street Journal gave us a great demonstration last night. And now Donald Trump will make yet another example of a media company — this time, the Murdochs.
All yesterday afternoon, media analysts buzzed that the WSJ had a major scoop on Trump and his connection to Jeffrey Epstein. Breath was bated, fingers hovered over social-media apps on smartphones, and anticipation rose that This Time They Had Trump. And the big WSJ scoop turned out to be … a ribald birthday letter from 2003, allegedly from Trump to Epstein.
It turned out to be a joke, both literally and journalistically:
It was Jeffrey Epstein’s 50th birthday, and Ghislaine Maxwell was preparing a special gift to mark the occasion. She turned to Epstein’s family and friends. One of them was Donald Trump. …
The letter bearing Trump’s name, which was reviewed by the Journal, is bawdy—like others in the album. It contains several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman, which appears to be hand-drawn with a heavy marker. A pair of small arcs denotes the woman’s breasts, and the future president’s signature is a squiggly “Donald” below her waist, mimicking pubic hair.
The letter concludes: “Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.”
Apparently attached to this letter was a typewritten imaginary conversation, which the WSJ reproduces, and which sounds nothing at all like Trump. “We do have certain things in common, Jeffrey,” Trump supposedly muses, along with the observation that “Enigmas never age, have you noticed that?” It reads like a Trump conversation translated into New Yorker-ese.
Even if this were true — and we’re getting to that — it’s a big, fat nothingburger. Trump has acknowledged many times that he and Epstein used to socialize together, but that he stopped contacting Epstein well before his first arrest in 2007. What would it matter if Trump had sent a birthday letter to Epstein in 2003? That has nothing to do with Epstein’s crimes at the time. This tells us nothing new at all, except that the WSJ and the Murdochs apparently don’t have much sense for what constitutes news.
According to Trump, however, it’s not true, and he warned Rupert Murdoch and the WSJ not to run the story. They did include that in the story:
In an interview with the Journal on Tuesday evening, Trump denied writing the letter or drawing the picture. “This is not me. This is a fake thing. It’s a fake Wall Street Journal story,” he said.
“I never wrote a picture in my life. I don’t draw pictures of women,” he said. “It’s not my language. It’s not my words.”
He told the Journal he was preparing to file a lawsuit if it published an article. “I’m gonna sue The Wall Street Journal just like I sued everyone else,” he said.
Put the lawsuit aside for a moment. Who at the WSJ thought it was a good idea to run this after Trump denied authoring the letter? If this story had some actual and substantive news value, it might be worth the risk, but this is a nothingburger. It has no value except in the potential to falsely suggest some sort of closer tie to Epstein, for which this is not evidence at all. Trump just won two lawsuits against ABC News and CBS News, the former for defamation and the latter for election interference by fraud. Trump has clearly decided on full-scale lawfare against his enemies after being targeted by lawfare for the last several years.
The WSJ and the Murdochs might just have well as waved a red flag in front of a bull, while dispensing a big ‘scoop’ of what comes out of the south end of a northbound steer.
And now News Corp is about to experience the horns:
The Wall Street Journal, and Rupert Murdoch, personally, were warned directly by President Donald J. Trump that the supposed letter they printed by President Trump to Epstein was a FAKE and, if they print it, they will be sued. Mr. Murdoch stated that he would take care of it but, obviously, did not have the power to do so. The Editor of The Wall Street Journal, Emma Tucker, was told directly by Karoline Leavitt, and by President Trump, that the letter was a FAKE, but Emma Tucker didn’t want to hear that. Instead, they are going with a false, malicious, and defamatory story anyway. President Trump will be suing The Wall Street Journal, NewsCorp, and Mr. Murdoch, shortly. The Press has to learn to be truthful, and not rely on sources that probably don’t even exist. President Trump has already beaten George Stephanopoulos/ABC, 60 Minutes/CBS, and others, and looks forward to suing and holding accountable the once great Wall Street Journal. It has truly turned out to be a “Disgusting and Filthy Rag” and, writing defamatory lies like this, shows their desperation to remain relevant. If there were any truth at all on the Epstein Hoax, as it pertains to President Trump, this information would have been revealed by Comey, Brennan, Crooked Hillary, and other Radical Left Lunatics years ago. It certainly would not have sat in a file waiting for “TRUMP” to have won three Elections. This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS!
Honestly, the WSJ’s subscribers should sue them for false advertising, too. At one time, the WSJ was a reliable media outlet that focused on real news and dealt fairly with both sides. Over the last couple of years, though, the Journal has allowed its news operations to get increasingly tendentious and hyperbolic. Today’s big ‘scoop’ of effluvium is embarrassing but not surprising, unfortunately. Maybe the Murdochs need to get out of this business and find buyers who are interested in filling the credibility vacuum in their industry rather than just try to add to it by sucking harder.
