Trump vs Rupert Murdoch over an Epstein article
Sam Hawley: Rod, we're going to have a look at the relationship between two of the most powerful men in the world, that is Donald Trump and Rupert Murdoch, which has dramatically re-entered the spotlight in the last few days. This revolves around a Wall Street Journal article, which is owned, of course, that newspaper by Rupert Murdoch. Just tell me what this article alleged when it appeared in the paper last Friday.
Rod Tifffen: Well, it alleges that Donald Trump years ago sent a birthday greeting to Jeffrey Epstein with a sketch of a girl on it.
News report: Donald Trump launching yet another lawsuit against the press, this time targeting media mogul Rupert Murdoch and his News Corp empire over an article in The Wall Street Journal.
News report: He denies writing the letter, which the journal said included a sexually suggestive drawing and ended with the line, Happy birthday and may every day be another wonderful secret.
News report: The president dismissed the letter as fake, saying 'These are not my words, not the way I talk. Also, I don't draw pictures.'
News report: The paper says it happened in 2003, which is before Epstein was convicted. It's all adding to the pressure Donald Trump is under over his handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case.
Sam Hawley: Now, as soon as this was published, Donald Trump threatened to sue. He said in a post on his social media platform Truth Social he was looking forward to getting Rupert Murdoch to testify in his lawsuit against him. And in Donald Trump's words, the pile of garbage newspaper. So Donald Trump was furious.
Rod Tifffen: Murdoch has three main media outlets in the States. He has Fox News, which is unfailingly loyal to Trump. He has the New York Post, which swings around a bit. And he has the Wall Street Journal, where the market incentives are very different. The Wall Street Journal has to keep its credibility with a high flying business audience. Otherwise, they'll go to the New York Times or Washington Post or somewhere. So the Wall Street Journal's coverage of Trump is typically more independent and more probing than, say, Fox News is. So I would imagine that Rupert didn't know this was going to appear before it appeared because he's sort of, you know, at 94 years old, he's more hands off these days and he doesn't actually have the role of chief executive anymore. But I think that the key thing is the Wall Street Journal has to keep up its credibility with its audience.
Sam Hawley: But just to put that in context, once upon a time, of course, Rupert Murdoch had great control over what was in these newspapers. He certainly would have been told beforehand if an article like this was to appear.
Rod Tifffen: Yes, that's true. Certainly, let's say during Trump's first term, if this appeared, Murdoch would have known in advance. But I'm not at all sure that he knew this in advance.
Sam Hawley: All right. Well, he's now involved in an almighty fight with the US president who has indeed sued in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida. So he's going all out Donald Trump here.
Rod Tifffen: Yes. I think the thing is, he's had a record of success since he was reelected, Donald Trump. He's got a settlement from ABC and, you know, CBS paid out a huge settlement for a case that had no substance at all.
News report: Paramount has agreed to pay Donald Trump more than 24 million dollars after settling a lawsuit over a televised interview with Kamala Harris. In the lawsuit, Mr Trump alleged the media group deceptively edited an interview with the former Democratic presidential candidate on its 60 Minutes program on CBS.
Rod Tifffen: And basically that was seen as its parent company, Paramount, wanting to do favours for Donald Trump. The Washington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos, is leaning over backwards to be nice to him. I think the difference, though, is like Bezos is very keen to get government contracts for his space program. And CBS and ABC have other business interests which depend a lot on the favour and patronage of the president. And this president is all about favour and patronage. But Murdoch doesn't have that. So I'd be certainly very surprised if Murdoch settled any time soon. It would be a huge step down in credibility. It would be a huge blow to his ego because he doesn't like giving in, surrendering on these sorts of things. And he doesn't have any ulterior motives and interests like the other major media corporations do.
Sam Hawley: All right, well, Trump is suing News Corp. He's suing Mr. Murdoch. He's suing News Corp's founder, Robert Thompson. News Corp's chief executive. He's suing Dow Jones, the publisher, and he's suing the two journalists involved. So there's a lot of people involved in this lawsuit. That's for sure.
Rod Tifffen: All over a birthday card. Yeah.
Sam Hawley: Oh, yeah. It's a rather damaging birthday card if the allegations are, in fact, true. And we are not insinuating that they are. But Trump is also after huge damages, not less than $10 billion, he says he wants.
Rod Tifffen: Yes, I mean, it's serious, but it's very funny at the same time. The one thing that would make News Corp, make Murdoch settle is if Murdoch was forced to testify in court, because I think he's not really up to doing that anymore. And I think that would be the one threat that would make Murdoch settle.
Sam Hawley: Hmm. All right. Well, let's come to the history of this relationship in just a moment. As you mentioned, you don't think Rupert Murdoch will settle. The newspaper is absolutely sticking by its reporting. It's not removed the article. It's still up there for everybody to see. So it's backing in its own journalism at this point, isn't it?
Rod Tifffen: It is. And one imagines they went through a pretty strenuous process before they published. I mean, this isn't a fly by night newspaper. It's one of the leading newspapers in America. And it wouldn't publish something like this without doing due diligence beforehand.
Sam Hawley: All right, let's get into the history of this relationship, because it has been rather volatile, hasn't it? It's been interesting to watch Rupert Murdoch and his almost reluctance to back Donald Trump, but then sort of falling into line. Just tell me what it was like in the beginning, I guess, back in 2016 during Trump's first pitch for the White House.
Rod Tifffen: Well, the beginnings go back even further than that. Rupert Murdoch took over the New York Post in 1976, and Trump was an absolute publicity whore. He was always wanting to get into the paper. And they have a page six column, which is all gossip about politicians and celebrities and so on. And he often featured in that and was often a source for it. And he more or less divorced his wife in the pages of the New York Post. And they were willing to play the game because Trump, they thought Trump was good copy. But Murdoch saw him as just a lightweight, a crooked property developer. So Murdoch was happy to give him publicity, but never had any high opinion of him, either morally or intellectually.
Sam Hawley: Hmm. All right. But by 2016, he'd sort of come around, had he? He supported Trump.
Rod Tifffen: Well, 2016, Fox News is locked into being on the Republican side of politics. And initially, Murdoch didn't think Trump would be a good candidate. But once Trump won the nomination for the Republicans, Fox News in particular, just and all of the Murdoch empire actually just fell in behind Trump. After the election, Fox News was a faithful outlet for Trump all through the next four years. But then we get to the 2020 election and Trump loses to Biden. And then we've got Trump refusing to accept the result. Got the terrible attack on the Capitol building on January the 6th, 2021. And Murdoch is absolutely appalled. He sees this as an attack on American democracy, American institutions. And he really can't stand the way Trump was behaving. At the same time, though, Fox News had created this audience that believed everything that Trump said. And after the election, Fox's ratings were falling. And in a panic meeting, Murdoch and others said, well, we've got to start going along more with Trump. And then they locked themselves into this false narrative that there was something fishy about the 2020 election. Now, Murdoch was reluctant to go along with this. And in fact, there's evidence of him saying he wants to make Trump history and all this sort of thing. But in the end, the commercial incentives are such that he he toes the line. So you get to 2024 and Fox News is locked in behind Trump. And then, of course, Trump wins. And now the power relationship is all around the other way. Here's Murdoch wanting to be part of the action again. And Trump saying, maybe, maybe not.
Sam Hawley: All right, well, Rod, this relationship between Donald Trump and Rupert Murdoch is clearly volatile, but it really is at a new low right now. How ugly do you think this could get?
Rod Tifffen: Well, Trump's not known for his subtlety. You know, we've already seen, you know, I'm going to sue his ass and all this sort of talk. I think that it could get very ugly.It all depends a bit on how the Murdochs respond. And my guess is they will want to take the heat out of it a bit. But I think the Epstein stuff is, it's hard to know because, I mean, Trump has survived so many scandals it would have sunk any other politician. But it seems to me the Epstein stuff and the different excuses they've given for not releasing information and whatever, this seems to be dividing Trump's MAGA base, you know. And it could be that both sides think it's in their interest to keep, you know, for all this to go away. But Trump's drawn a lot more attention to the article than it would have got, you know, by all this. So if I was a spin doctor, I'd say this wasn't a very rational strategy. But maybe that's why I'm not a spin doctor. But, you know, I would think that it could get very ugly. And certainly I can't see the Wall Street Journal rolling over and saying, yes, we got it wrong.
Sam Hawley: And who do you think will be the victor then, Murdoch or Trump? We know, don't we, that when things proceed to court, all sorts of information might come to light.
Rod Tifffen: Yes. And I think Rupert Murdoch wouldn't want to be having to testify in court. But equally, Trump wouldn't want to have to testify in court where he's cross-examined on his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. That would be just a nightmare for him. They've got various things in America where president can't be sued during their term of office and that sort of thing. So it could all just be put off until after the next election. Who knows? Maybe it will just peter out. But it doesn't show any sign of that yet.
Sam Hawley: Rod Tiffen is an emeritus professor in government and international relations at the University of Sydney. This episode was produced by Sydney Pead and Sam Dunn. Audio production by Cinnamon Nippard. Our supervising producer is David Coady. I'm Sam Hawley. Thanks for listening.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
2 minutes ago
- ABC News
Which candidates might miss out thanks to Tasmania's Hare-Clark vote counting system
The long wait for a final result continues after Tasmania's state election 10 days ago. We know the Liberals will be the biggest group in the new Tasmanian Parliament, with at least 14 seats out of 35. Labor has 10 seats and the Greens five, while there are four independents. With vote counting set to continue using Tasmania's Hare-Clark system, here are some of the big questions that will be answered by the end of the week. Depending on how the counts go, we may be waiting until Saturday for an answer. Tasmanian Electoral Commissioner Andrew Hawkey says the distribution of preferences will start on Tuesday afternoon, once the deadline for postal votes has passed and the last batch is received. Before that, there's some final checking and all the votes from each booth are combined. They'll also start preparing for the first round of distributions by sorting the second preferences of those candidates who polled more than a quota. "Where you have something like Mr Rockliff, who has so many first preferences, all his ballot papers are thrown for count two," Mr Hawkey said. "They will sort of do the movement of those ballot papers, looking at every count two on every one of these ballot papers, and that'll be physically moved on Monday." For local government elections, the Tasmanian Eelectoral Commission (TEC) uses a data entry system that computerises the distribution of preferences. It is hoped that system will be in place by the next state election. "What that will mean is we should be able to get a result pretty much on that Tuesday afternoon," Mr Hawkey said. With around 50 per cent of the vote, the Liberals are set to end the count with four seats in Braddon, with Jacqui Lambie Network turned independent MP Miriam Beswick, who ran as a Nationals candidate this time around, losing her seat. Jeremy Rockliff has topped the poll statewide, with two and a half quotas. That will be enough to carry three of his party mates across the line with him, including former federal Liberal MP Gavin Pearce. Incumbent MPs Felix Ellis and Roger Jaensch are the two next best placed Liberals. ABC chief election analyst Casey Briggs said while Mr Rockliff's preferences were expected to flow strongly to the incumbents, Giovanna Simpson wasn't totally out of the count. "The only reason we have a small amount of caution is because his surplus is so big and because Giovanna Simpson performed quite well on preferences in last year's election," he said. According to Mr Briggs, the electorate of Bass is "one of the most complicated" in recent memory. The Liberals will hold their three seats, Labor is set to hold its two, and the Greens one. "That's six of the seats, but then the surpluses for every other party are sitting somewhere between 0.2 and 0.4 of a quota." Whichever candidates can accumulate preferences and outlast their competitors will take a Steven Bradbury-esque win. It means that while Labor pulled only 2.2 quotas — and Jess Greene and Geoff Lyons are still in a contest to become the party's second MP in the electorate — it may still be able to win a third. Compare that to Franklin, where the Liberals won around 2.7 quotas, but are destined for two seats. Mr Briggs also said Bridget Archer's strong vote may complicate things for the Liberals. The former federal MP has more than 1.5 quotas, but due to her high profile there's a chance some of her vote may "leak" to other candidates, rather than stay within the Liberal ticket. "It's possible there are people in Bass that have voted for Bridget Archer, but not other members of the Liberal Party ticket," Mr Briggs explained. "That would actually have the effect of bringing down the Liberals vote in that seat, and it could make it harder for them to stay ahead of other candidates," he said. The Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party (SSF) remains the firm favourite chance of picking up its first ever seat in Lyons, according to Mr Briggs. But with the party's Carlo di Falco sitting on just over half a quota, Mr Briggs said it was not locked in. "His primary vote has fallen a little bit, as we expected, as more postal votes have been counted and out of division, pre-polls and other non-election day votes have been counted," he said. If the SFF fails, the Liberals' Stephanie Cameron may have a chance — she's around 0.2 of a quota behind. Labor's vote tanked in Franklin, with a near 5 per cent swing against the party and leader Dean Winter failing to secure a quota. The ABC has called two seats for them though, with first-term MP Meg Brown best placed to secure the second seat. But she will have to hold off high-profile candidate and Unions Tasmania boss Jess Munday, who she leads by around 1,000 votes. With the Liberals holding their two Clark seats and Marcus Vermey topping the poll for the party, it means he's set to topple either Madeleine Ogilvie or Simon Behrakis. At this stage, Mr Behrakis remains ahead of Ms Ogilvie by around 1,000 votes. "It's not a done deal just yet," Mr Briggs said. "We will need to see some of those lower-placing Liberal candidates excluded to be sure of that." This was Marcus Vermey's third campaign in the last 16 months, having unsuccessfully contested last year's state election and May's Legislative Council election — the long runway helping him get over the hump. Mr Briggs said the Hare-Clark voting system meant incumbents could be vulnerable to a popular outsider, with voters able to avoid certain candidates but still stick with their favoured party. "The Tasmanian electoral system requires candidates to build their own profiles, have good standing with the electorate, and be out there connecting with voters and actively campaigning," he said. "You can't coast along on your party's name because that makes you vulnerable to being defeated by a more popular member of your own party."
News.com.au
2 minutes ago
- News.com.au
Youth crime crackdown: CLP to ‘overhaul' NT Youth Justice Act
Chief Minister Lia Finocchiaro has vowed to toughen the Youth Justice Act following the alleged stabbing of a teenage boy at the Royal Darwin Show, with the Chief Minister saying legislation will be 'introduced on urgency' this week in Parliament. At the Royal Darwin Show on Saturday evening, a knife was allegedly plunged into a 15 year-old boy during an altercation, triggering panic. The alleged victim was rushed to hospital in a serious condition. On Sunday morning, Ms Finocchiaro, who enjoyed the show's festivities the day before the stabbing, took aim at the 'apologists' who 'have come out against' her government's crime package. 'Let's be clear, our current reality is the result of years of Labor's soft, offender-first policies,' she said. ' Yesterday at the Royal Darwin Show, a 15-year-old allegedly stabbed another child in front of Territorians who were simply trying to enjoy the event. 'This is not normal. It is not acceptable. And under my Government, it will not be tolerated.' Ms Finocchiaro then doubled down on 'replacing Labor's broken system', 'This week in Parliament, we will be changing the Youth Justice Act to end Labor's failed catch-and-release scheme,' she said. 'We expect the usual offender apologists to criticise our efforts, but they should look Territorians in the eye and say that kids witnessing senseless violence at a family show is okay. 'Legislation will be introduced on urgency to overhaul the Youth Justice Act 2005 and Youth Justice Regulations 2006.' The changes follow months of youth related crime that has seen carjackings, home invasions, ram raids, edged weapons incidents, bashings and riotous behaviour. The key changes which will be tabled include: For courts to now consider a youth's full criminal history when sentencing for adult offences; Removing 'detention as a last resort'; Stronger powers for Youth Justice Officers to use spit-guards and 'reasonable force' to maintain safety and prevent escapes; Expanded powers for the Commissioner to manage emergencies, aligning with the Correctional Services Act. Further, the CLP say additional effects will materialise through the changes, including the definition of 'escape', the strengthening of victim engagement and aligning chief executive powers with the Corrections Services Act. In early July, Ms Finocchiaro announced she would expand the list of serious offences that are ineligible for youth diversion. The 13 'prescribed offences' included riot related charges, violent act causing death, recklessly endangering serious harm, negligently causing serious harm, hit-and-run, dangerous driving during pursuit, assaults on workers, police or with the intent to steal, robbery, burglary, using a stolen motor vehicle and making off without payment. The NT Parliament will meet between July 29 - July 31. The reforms respond to repeated community concerns and real cases where young offenders reoffended while on bail, putting the community at further risk. Minister for Corrections Gerard Maley said the reforms respond to repeated community concerns and real cases where young offenders reoffended while on bail, putting the community at further risk. 'Territorians have a right to safe streets and communities, victims have a right to a responsible justice system, and serious offenders have the right to remain silent,' said Mr Maley.
Sydney Morning Herald
32 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
‘Frosty on Trump': Australians eager for more independence from the US
Australians are voicing a strong desire for the country to assert more independence from the United States amid Donald Trump's turbulent presidency, with most voters saying they do not blame Prime Minister Anthony Albanese for failing to secure a meeting with the US President. The latest Resolve Political Monitor survey of more than 2300 people, conducted for this masthead, found that most Australians continue to have strongly negative views of Trump six months after he re-entered the White House. Fewer than one in five Australian voters believe Trump's election was a good outcome for Australia. When asked whether it would be a good or a bad thing for Australia to become more independent from the US on foreign policy and national security, 46 per cent of respondents said they believed it would be a good thing, compared to 22 per cent who said it would be a bad thing. When compared along political lines, 56 per cent of Labor voters said they supported Australia adopting a more independent foreign policy and just 12 per cent opposed the idea. Coalition voters were evenly split, with 34 per cent favouring more distance from its closest security partner while 35 per cent said it would be bad to become more independent of the US. Since returning to the White House, Trump has imposed a 10 per cent tariff on all Australian goods, as well as a 50 per cent tariff on steel and aluminium imports. The Trump administration has also called for Australia to dramatically increase defence spending to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product, while launching a review into the AUKUS nuclear-powered submarine pact. Since his re-election, Albanese has stressed the importance of Australian sovereignty and said his government would not commit to joining the United States in a hypothetical war with China over Taiwan.
