The American The New York Times published a sensational investigation into the method of doing business by Donald Trump.
However, in practice, this sensation looks like a banal order, most of which, moreover, has been sucked out of the democratic finger.
If you look at the essential content of the article and the arguments presented, then this is not in the document.
Trump is actually accused of doing business according to American rules - he minimizes tax payments and uses the specifics of legislation in order to pay less money to the state (even special instructions have already appeared on how others can follow the path of Trump's clever man).
The tales of "influence trading" - foreign and American businessmen buying the president's attention and loyalty - are based on the rise in popularity of his clubs, as well as on the desire of foreign governments to place former business partners in negotiations with Trump.
For some reason, journalists who shoveled through a mountain of materials could not even find documents on banal lobbying (when a company pays an intermediary to, say, get to dinner or even at the same table with the head of state) - these documents would be much more proof of “trading in influence ”Than the influx of new members to the Mar-a-Lago club or the increase in card payments at the Doral golf resort.
The only thing that can really be presented to Trump from the text of the article is, possibly, illegally refunded taxes in 2010 in the amount of more than $ 70 million.
And here the president does not escape responsibility - he is conducting an official lawsuit with the tax authorities, the final decision has not yet been made.
However, the lack of arguments is fully compensated by the “correct” structure.
From the point of view of classical journalism, this structure is trite.
The article is a stream of consciousness for almost 60 thousand characters of the text.
Apparently, this should create in the reader the feeling of some kind of grandiose investigation - it is no coincidence that NYT indicates that it “studied and analyzed the data of thousands of tax returns of individuals and legal entities for the period from 2000 to 2017, as well as additional tax information for other years "And included in the text materials from" dozens of interviews and previously unpublished materials from other sources - both open and confidential. "
Another psychological technique is regularly repeating - almost through a paragraph - phrases and thoughts.
This is done so that the American reader constantly stumbles upon them and thereby fixes them in his brain affected by clip thinking.
Finally, the text is full of blatant distortions and fabrications.
For example, it is indicated that Trump paid $ 750 federal income tax during his first year in office (although his lawyers insist that this is only a small part of all tax payments), and it is also noted that Trump has huge debts.
“Trump is personally responsible for loans and other debts totaling $ 421 million, most of which are due in four years.
All the stocks that could help him plug the holes, he sold a few years ago.
If he wins re-election, his creditors may find themselves in an unprecedented position - they will have to decide whether to bring a claim against the incumbent president, ”the New York Times asked.
All these twitches and psychological tricks are not accidental.
The article was released for a specific event - the beginning of a period of debate between President Trump and his opponent Joseph Biden.
The first meeting should take place on September 29, and both sides pin tremendous hopes on it.
Democrats need to show that Joe Biden is more likely to be alive than dead, and the Republicans expected Donald Trump to roll over his opponent, and overturn the Democrat on the most important issues for America, for example, the same racial pogroms behind which the Democratic Party stands.
The article saves Biden - it gives him the opportunity to attack Trump on an equally important topic (tax evasion in the United States is a serious crime), and in addition, to challenge the image of the president as a successful businessman and patriot, for whom "America comes first."
“In 2017, Trump's notorious $ 750 in federal income tax was less than the $ 15 598 he or his company paid in Panama, the $ 145 400 in India and the $ 156 824 paid in the Philippines,” the New York reporters threw in. Times patrons to Sleepy Joe.
However, in order for these themes to take off, they need to be promoted as much as possible - just like a picture.
What did the tandem of democratic politicians and liberal media do immediately after the publication of the "investigation"?
First of all, the "investigation" is used to drive a wedge between Trump and the American working class, on whose decision the name of the winner in the most important states (Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin) depends.
People are trying to convince people that while they are struggling to earn a living and pay taxes, the millionaire Trump is paying some meager amount to the budget.
For example, Biden's team released a video comparing the income taxes of representatives of various professions in the United States.
"Teachers pay an average of $ 7,239 a year, firefighters $ 5,283, nurses $ 10,216. And Trump $ 750," they write.
And House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that $ 750 is further proof of Trump's contempt for ordinary workers.
On a tangential note, the president's anti-immigrant policy was also touched - Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez said that Trump's contribution to "funding our community is less than that of an illegal immigrant."
At the same time forgetting the small fact that Trump's contribution (in addition to all taxes, not just income) consists of another $ 400 thousand per year - the president's salary, which he refused.
Will Trump be able to protect his reputation and his electorate?
Much, if not all, will depend on the outcome of the September 29 debate and on the arguments the president uses to counter the attacks from Joe Biden.
And these arguments need to be found - not highbrow quotes about business and not cynical phrases from the series "an intelligent person always strives not to pay taxes", but the same pictures that are available and understandable to ordinary workers from Michigan and Pennsylvania.
The author's point of view may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.