It appears Michael Bloomberg is suffering from a severe case of globalist buyer’s remorse over his decision to build a billion-dollar European headquarters for Bloomberg News in London following the outcome of the Brexit referendum of 2016.
While speaking at a technology conference in Boston this past week, Bloomberg made some uncharacteristically bold statements that reflect his personal politics as well as the agenda of his staff of 4,000 employees working out of the United Kingdom. Let’s take a look at what Bloomberg had to say about Brexit, his company’s future plans in the UK, President Donald Trump, and those “stupid” voters who threw a monkey wrench in all his plans.
On nationalism:
“All this talk in Washington—words have consequences. Whether we change the immigration laws or not, there is a general feeling around the world that America is no longer an open, welcoming place and a lot of people don’t want to go there, and the same thing is happening in the UK because of Brexit.”
Earth to Bloomberg, immigration laws don’t need to be changed. We already have them on the books here in the States. They simply need to be enforced. President Trump ran on enforcing the immigration laws that already exist, and media outlets like Bloomberg News play willfully ignorant of this fact when reporting on the topic.
America remains an open and welcoming place for legal immigration so long as it’s done properly. The shift in America Bloomberg is referring to is the approach our nation’s top executive (and his constituency) now takes on illegal immigration and the acceptance of refugees from terrorist hotbeds. How can Bloomberg News be expected to reliably report on the issues of illegal immigration to the US or the Islamization of the UK when its owner can’t even speak honestly about it?
Here’s a better question. What is Bloomberg’s stance on the half-million homeless Americans in our streets? Do we do something about that problem or just be “more welcoming” to illegals?
How many readers will rely on Bloomberg News coverage for updates on Brexit without the knowledge that Bloomberg has a one billion-dollar horse riding in the Article 50 revocation race?
On Bloomberg’s new European HQ in London:
“We are opening a brand new European headquarters in London—two big, expensive buildings. Would I have done it if I knew they were going to drop out? I’ve had some thoughts that maybe I wouldn’t have…”
Buyer’s remorse, buyer’s remorse, and more buyer’s remorse. Let’s get one thing straight. Bloomberg is worth $47 billion because he is a smart businessman ill-acquainted with poor decision-making – but he, like virtually every other globalist billionaire of the media-class he rubs elbows with, couldn’t see Brexit or Donald Trump’s election coming. Betting on Brexit or Trump last year would have been like banking on the little ball to land on the color purple at the roulette table for these folks.
While opening a European headquarters in London prior to Brexit seemed like a no-brainer, building the same HQ in London after Brexit is a financial disaster for Bloomberg and his staff – but the deal’s already done. Bloomberg’s “European HQ” will now be on the outside looking in so long as Article 50 overcomes legal challenges and accomplishes the hard break that Nigel Farage, the United Kingdom Independence Party, and a majority of UK voters were looking for when they passed the referendum.
How can Bloomberg News be expected to report accurately on Brexit’s future and the inner workings of Article 50 if they are so deeply invested financially in a British failure to launch? How many readers will rely on Bloomberg News coverage for updates on Brexit without the knowledge that Bloomberg has a one billion dollar horse riding in the Article 50 revocation race?
Of course, Bloomberg News will do anything it can going forward to sway public opinion against Brexit and Article 50. Therefore, I propose that a disclaimer before every Bloomberg piece regarding the issue stating, “We are a cheerleader for the UK remaining a vassal-state for the European Union because our financial interests rely on it”, is in order.
Bloomberg News reporting on these issues with all its financial ties to them is like Colin Kaepernick reporting on white quarterbacks in the NFL.
Bloomberg went on to say:
“My former wife was a Brit, my daughters have British passports, so we love England—it’s the father of our country, I suppose. But what they are doing is not good, and there is no easy way to get out of it because if they don’t pay a penalty, everyone else would drop out. So they can’t get as good of a deal as they had before.”
Again, you’ll never see a Bloomberg article addressing Brexit fairly without advocating for financial penalties. You will, however, see Bloomberg echo Obama’s sentiment for the US to place the UK at “the back of the queue” in trade talks as punishment for taking control of their own fate and becoming a truly sovereign nation once again.
Michael Bloomberg can use his media company to rail against Trump and Brexit voters until he is blue in the face, but he’s getting sloppy and the jig is up.
On Bloomberg’s shocking admittance of the bias of his own employees:
“One of the things that is hurting us both in the United States and in the UK is that we have employees, not a lot but some, who are starting to say: ‘I don’t want to work here—can we transfer to someplace else? This country doesn’t like immigrants.”
This is astonishing to me. Essentially, Bloomberg is admitting that he’s staffing hysterical employees who want to leave their assignments in the UK and the US because their ideology no longer holds a monopoly on the political climate in a post-Brexit and Trump world.
Brits aren’t against immigration. Brits are against a cultural takeover.
How can a news organization be expected to report fairly on the topics of immigration and open borders when its employees are so radically biased in their opinions that they are wanting to flee these nations because there’s finally traction for openly discussing the drawbacks associated with them?
Bloomberg, will you please report on the fact that Muhammed is now the most popular baby name in London? Of course, you won’t. Brits aren’t against immigration. Brits are against a cultural takeover. Bloomberg News reporting on these issues with all its financial ties to them is like Colin Kaepernick reporting on white quarterbacks in the NFL. No thanks.
Bloomberg on Trump:
“I did say that I thought it was the single stupidest thing any country has ever done (Brexit) but then we Trumped it.”
News organizations like Bloomberg, CNN, and the New York Times lie to us by painting themselves as unbiased and factually informative but then they turn around and openly call American and British voters “stupid” or “racist” for voting against their corporate interests.
When the undercover journalists at Project Veritas released their revelations on how one-sided and politically motivated key figures within The New York Times were conducting business, it merely confirmed what we all knew was already taking place. For me, it was tasty and satisfying like a slice of rich chocolate cake, but it didn’t change the way I saw the mainstream media.
I do hope that recorded confessions of deliberate attempts to sway voters away from Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election or admissions that YouTube and The New York Times are colluding to promote their own content while censoring opposing opinions have reached a significant number of New York Times readers who actually were relying on the paper for real journalism—but I doubt it.
Then again, with heads of media companies like Bloomberg showing how fundamentally incapable they are of reporting in an unbiased manner out there in the public domain, who even needs Project Veritas shining the light on the nefarious inner workings of media companies?
The problem isn’t that Bloomberg News has a hard left bias, it’s that they, and others like them, claim impartiality by billing themselves as “just the facts” media outlets. Meanwhile, dig a little deeper and the places are rife with conflicts of interest and hidden agendas. They just hope you’re lazy enough to not get a shovel.
What’s worse is that protectionist “fact checkers” like mediabiasfactcheck.com rate Bloomberg in between “least-bias” and “left-center” and rate The New York Times as simply “left-center.” Was this before or after Project Veritas revealed one of their top social media people claiming to be James Comey’s godson? Was it before or after one of their contractors of 20-plus years decided to blow the whistle on how he no longer knows a single person within the organization who supports the president of the United States? What is “center” about any of that?
Michael Bloomberg can use his media company to rail against Trump and Brexit voters until he is blue in the face, but he’s getting sloppy and the jig is up. Perhaps Project Veritas has good people embedded within Bloomberg News working on revealing how deep the rabbit hole goes as I write these words. Stay tuned.
