America’s ‘Sexiest Billionaire’: Will Michael Bloomberg replace Trump in the White House?

By Tom Leonard from New York
The Daily Mail
February 21, 2020

Abridged by Lasha Darkmoon


No, not Donald Trump — but Michael Bloomberg, the multi-billionaire who tends to snort derisively whenever he hears the current president boast about his wealth and brilliant business career.

As the world capital of high-stakes gambling, Las Vegas was an entirely fitting location for the richest person ever to run for the U.S. presidency to lay his claim to the White House.

For the former mayor of New York is both very rich (as the world’s ninth richest man he has an estimated fortune of $62 billion) and full of loathing for Trump — two facts that explain why he felt compelled to join the lengthy list of candidates vying for the Democrat presidential nomination.

On Wednesday night, he made his first appearance in the televised debates, clashing with the five other leading contenders in Sin City just three days before the Nevada caucus on Saturday.

Given he has been riding high in the polls on nothing more than his vast self-funded spending on political advertising — more than $400 million so far — and the implied insult that he’s only running because he thinks the rest of the candidates are incapable of beating Trump, the others lined up to attack him. And, according to the pundits, it was certainly a mauling.


LD:  Bloomberg, whose family came to America as Jewish immigrants from Russia, may well be America’s first Jewish president. As the world’s ninth richest man (worth $62 billion), Bloomberg could easily buy and sell Trump several times over. He reportedly regards Trump with personal loathing, but whether he would  be a better man to have in the White House is highly debatable. So maybe it’s a question of . . . better the devil you know. [LD] 

Debating isn’t Bloomberg’s strong point and he appeared unprepared for the predictable barracking about his views on women, race and crime, and whether America needs another egotistical 70-something billionaire in the White House.

However, America’s political ‘experts’ often misjudge the mood and, judging by the callers jamming the switchboard of New York’s public radio station yesterday, ordinary voters were rather more impressed with the new boy.

But at a time when the Democrats are drifting to the Left — self-described ‘democratic socialist’ Bernie Sanders is currently topping polls — and their presidential contenders compete to be the most politically correct, Bloomberg, 78, is playing a sticky wicket.

It’s not just his money — which he made selling expensive financial data computer terminals to Wall Street. As New York’s mayor, he cleaned up the city in various ways but controversially supported a ‘stop and search’ policy which was widely condemned as racist because it disproportionately targeted young black men.

Bloomberg — who needs to attract black and Hispanic voters to win — has apologised, and did so again on Wednesday, but his opponents were unimpressed by his sincerity.

They were similarly underwhelmed by his stilted response to another skeleton from his past — his history of boorish and offensive comments about women.

Female staff have described a misogynist culture at his company and some sued, with an estimated 17 accepting ‘non-disclosure agreements’ that barred them from discussing it.

One former saleswoman who sued Bloomberg and his company alleged he told her to ‘kill it’ when he learned she was pregnant.

He denied her allegation under oath and reached a confidential settlement with her. When Bloom-berg insisted on Wednesday that none of them accused him of personally doing anything ‘other than maybe they didn’t like a joke I told’, Left-wing firebrand Elizabeth Warren pressed him to release them there and then from their gagging orders.

He declined. ‘Democrats take a huge risk if we just substitute one arrogant billionaire for another,’ warned Warren, who has campaigned fiercely to address America’s growing economic inequality and had a very good night.

‘I’d like to talk about who we’re running against: a billionaire who calls women ‘fat broads’ and ‘horse-faced lesbians,’ she said. ‘And, no, I’m not talking about Donald Trump, I’m talking about Mayor Bloomberg.’

Her ‘horse-faced lesbians’ remark was extracted from a 32-page booklet — ‘The Wit and Wisdom of Michael Bloomberg’ — that his Wall Street colleagues and employees put together in 1990. It’s stuffed full of off-colour jokes.

One quote attributed to him reads: ‘If women wanted to be appreciated for their brains, they’d go to the library instead of to [department store] Bloomingdale’s.’

In another, he reportedly claimed at a meeting that his computer terminal would ‘do everything’ including oral sex, adding: ‘I guess that puts a lot of you girls out of business.’

He says he can’t remember making the comments and, in mitigation, points out that sexism was rife in the financial services industry back then. Meanwhile, in his 1997 autobiography, Bloom-berg bragged that he kept ‘a girlfriend in every city’ during his years on Wall Street.

He told a reporter at the time: ‘I like theatre, dining and chasing women’, describing his romantic life as a ‘wet dream’.

He has also repeatedly been accused of making crude and lewd comments, allegedly telling a former female employee, ‘I would do you in a second,’ and saying of another woman, ‘I’d like to do that piece of meat’.

Critics say that ‘Bloomy’ sounds too much like Trump for a political party that has denounced the misogyny of a president who boasted about groping women.

Compounding his problems with voters looking for an antidote to Trump, Bloomberg is distinctly uncuddly. Lacking in warmth and charm, he is notoriously thin-skinned and repeatedly rolled his eyes as his opponents jabbed at him on Wednesday night.

It all sounds fairly damning —until one bears in mind that polls show that what matters to Democrat voters far more than anything is getting rid of Trump.

Despite all the sneering from Left-wing rivals about Bloomberg ‘buying his way’ to the White House, the brutal fact is that money talks in American politics and self-funded presidential candidates can spend as much as they like. And Bloomberg has made clear he’s prepared to spend whatever it takes.

In January, he said he’d even spend $2billion to win the White House.

As well as shelling out on adverts,  he is also conducting huge amounts of polling and hiring armies of staff. It’s estimated that he’s sunk more than $10 billion into philanthropy and politics, particularly favourite causes such as climate change, gun control, abortion rights and tobacco regulation.

‘As president I’ll offer common sense plans and I will get it done,’ was how Bloomberg phrased it in his usual monotone in Las Vegas.

For his part, Trump is certainly taking Bloomberg seriously, dubbing him ‘Little Michael’ (Bloomberg is 5ft 7in), and clearly not relishing the possibility of having to debate with a man who could forensically pick apart his claims to have single-handedly revived the U.S. economy.

Despite the best efforts of Bloomberg’s critics, comparisons between the two tycoons only go so far. While Trump largely inherited his fortune from his property developer father, Bloomberg is the self-made son of a dairy company accountant from Massachusetts.

An Eagle Scout with a passion for snakes, Bloomberg went to Harvard Business School and became an investment banker on Wall Street. Sacked as a partner of Salomon Brothers after the investment bank was bought out, he used his $10 million pay-off to set up Bloomberg in 1981. The business now employs more than 19,000 people in 69 countries.

A few years ago, he was estimated to own 14 homes around the world. They included two in London — one in Knightsbridge and the other in Chelsea. Bloomberg bought the latter, a seven-bedroom mansion in Cheyne Walk that is the former home of author George Eliot, for £16 million in 2014 after paying £1 million more than the asking price.

In New York, he lives in a five-floor mansion on Manhattan’s Upper East Side. Other homes included three estates in the Hamptons, Long Island, and others in Colorado, Bermuda, Hong Kong and Paris.

When he’s not expanding his property portfolio, Bloomberg is also a keen pilot who has spent millions on a fleet of planes and helicopters.

Insiders say Bloomberg, both brash and jocular but also earnest and nerdy, is a man of contradictions. In his campaign for New York mayor he upheld the virtue of school prayers but simultaneously threw a ‘Seven Deadly Sins’ Christmas party in London in 2001, staffed by 600 people.

Guests were invited to frolic on a purple satin bed, while other features included drag queens, massage tables and entertainers waving wads of cash and shouting, ‘Money — ain’t it gorgeous?’


America’s  first  Jewish  president?


36 thoughts to “America’s ‘Sexiest Billionaire’: Will Michael Bloomberg replace Trump in the White House?”

  1. Bloomberg – “America’s first Jewish president?”

    Rosenvelts were:

    Roosevelt Jewish ancestry, this is the Roosevelt family tree
    Christian Nationalist Crusade

    St. Louis: Christian Nationalist Crusade, [1944?]. Leaflet, printed on one side only, 11×8.5 inches, creased into thirds, paper toned else good condition.

    Alleged to have been prepared by “The Carnegie Institution,” more likely from the ravings of Robert Edward Edmondson. From the leaflet – “Millions of dollars are being spent by powerful Jewish financiers to put another Roosevelt in the White House. Every sensible Christian and loyal American will fight the campaign of Leftists, Communists, Jews and Internationalists to return the Roosevelt dynasty to power.”

    1. @ Pat

      Bloomberg – “America’s first Jewish president?”

      Rosenvelts were…

      LD meant OPENLY Jewish, like Bloomberg.

      Not CRYPTO-JEWISH or “disputed Jewish” like Roosevelt or Eisenhower (reputedly a Swedish Jew). Heck, some people even say Trump is a “Jew”!

      Conspiracy theory “Jews” won’t do! They have to be SELF-ADMITTED Jews! Like Bloomberg.

      1. Are Stalin and Putin “Jews” just because a bunch of ill-informed conspiracy theorists call them Jews? Of course not! To qualify as a genuine Jew, a person’s Jewishness has to be either self-admitted or beyond dispute — Like the Jewishness of Karl Marx or Trotsky.

      2. The jews play it smart. Too smart for the “whites”or even the jew wise people. By acknowledging by himself, Bloomberg that he is a tribesman, the jews, make it appear, seem, that Trump ain’t no jew! So the sheeple will once again vote for Trump. And as we know Trump is a crypto- jew or at least is very, very, close of being a jew. When will the jew wise people understand that the jew thinks in layers and smoke screens?
        Probably never.

      3. Splitting hairs, Ruth. These Jews by any other “cryptoname” would smell as foul. 🤭
        Know them by their deeds…plodding along on roads to perdition

        1. Garbage. Everyone who does evil isn’t a Jew. A crypto-Jew is a crypto-Jew. And remains crypto. Period. Are you a JEW because you are capable of behaving like the cartoon Jew of your fevered imagination?

      4. Are you a JEW because you are capable of behaving like the cartoon Jew of your fevered imagination?

        I am sorry, browny, but Ruth is asking you an insightful question here that exposes you as a moral pygmy which, to be perfectly truthful, you are.

        You showed your true colors when you called Lobro your brother in arms but dropped him like a hot potato as soon as he got in trouble. That’s what I call a moral and spiritual pygmy.

        No offence, I am just illuminating the spot you have chosen for yourself in the moral universe.

        1. @ Brownhawk

          No, Ruth didn’t misunderstand you, you pathetic attention seeker. Why don’t you just address your moronic comments in future to your fellow morons on this site and stop trying to pick quarrels with your intellectual superiors? For sheer boneheaded stupidity and pompous obscurantist prose you are hard to beat.

      5. @ Brownhawk


        If your wife is left unsatisfied, “as usual”, you might have something to do with that kind of “misunderstanding”, brother.

        Your wife may try as hard as it gets, but it can hardly help to rectify the awkward situation.

        Btw, do you have a wife? Perhaps, I should have asked first: Are you a man, bozo?

      6. Ruth

        Here’s an idea. How about we take the words “jew” and “cryptojew” out of most of our discourse. Instead, simply KNOW THEM BY THEIR DEEDS. For example, when referring to men like Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin, most people could write (((them))), or (((him))) in the singular. Whereas nobody in their right mind would refer to Jesus in this way. Isn’t identifying the bad actors the bottom line?

        Writers are often lazy when they use buzzwords like “jew” and “cryptojew” when used in a context where they can’t help but buzz with the preconceived notions of those reading them. And I’m just as guilty of this as anyone….. And so were you with your reply to me.



        The fact that I rejected lobro’s views on Stalin has nothing to do with morality, and I won’t waste my breath trying to explain that to a moron.

        Instead I’ll quote what is attributed to Voltaire:

        “I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to my death your right to say it”

      8. @Brownhawk

        The fact that I rejected lobro’s views on Stalin has nothing to do with morality, and I won’t waste my breath trying to explain that to a moron.

        Yes, chief, it has not. But dropping your brother in arms in a heartbeat, as soon as he got in trouble, has everything to do with morality. You stuck your tongue in your ass, and you didn’t say a single word in his defense while others – who didn’t even hold him as brother in arms as you did – put in a good word for him. So, don’t twist my words, bastard.

        What you are doing here is called straw man fallacy, moron. The basic structure of the argument consists of Person A making a claim, Person B creating a distorted version of the claim (the “straw man”), and then Person B attacking this distorted version in order to refute Person A’s original assertion. The straw man argument is an example of a red herring – it’s meant to distract from the real issue.

        Even here you couldn’t help but confirm your moral nonentity.

        That’s a shame!


        I should elaborate by saying that I don’t reject lobro the man, and that the moral component in all this is reflected in Voltaire’s quote

        1. Best to leave this topic to one side, Brownhawk.
          Your further comments are welcome.
          Admin has no judgment to make on your moral character.
          The Voltaire quote is a good one.

      10. Admin
        I will honor your request, but hope that you’ll allow me the final word by pointing out that Circassian’s straw man argument is illegitimate, in that it is simply crafted to suit his purpose by means of deducing this or that which amount to nothing more than assumptions. I could just as easily have expounded on areas where lobro has my support. The fact that I didn’t doesn’t support Circassian’s claim. And I think lobro knows this. 🙂

        1. Ok, let this subject drop now.
          And I hope Circassian takes the hint too.
          No more reference to past posters please.
          Whether they are heroes or villains, let God judge.

      1. So? What is your point, Peter? Do you have any, brother?

        The stupidity of people makes me desperate sometimes… and leaves me wondering: Can these people be cured of their stupidity at all? Or even – should they be cured to begin with?

        Maybe they should be just left where they are? Ah?

        Any thoughts on that?

  2. Hard to find a politician in a democracy who to such an extend exposes the utter weakness of the whole concept as it is practiced in the west today: He’ll just buy the votes.

    Democracy is som silly notion that if enough indifferent people vote, the sum of their voting is going to be something intelligent or even sound.

    A country can only take so much of a mob’s rule before it collapses. Just too damn pity that America is so big and has so much momentum yet…

    1. Can we finally stop with calling the jews jews, The real jews, children of god are the believers in Christ, the christians. Of course the elite crypto- jews in the catholic church don’t preach this knowledge.

      Paul said that believers are:
      “The children of God” (Romans 8:16).
      “The Household of God” (Ephesians 2:19).
      “The children of Abraham” (Colossians 3:7).
      “Abraham’s seed” (Galatians 3:29).
      “The Children of promise” (Rom. 9:8, Galatians 4:28).
      “A peculiar people” (Titus 2:14).
      “The elect of God” (Colossians 3:12).
      “Heirs of God”(Rom. 8:17).
      “Heirs according to the promise” (Galatians 3:29).
      “The temple of God” (1 Cor 3:16).
      “The circumcision” (Philippians 3:3).
      “The Israel of God” (Galatians 6:16).
      Peter said that believers are:
      “A chosen generation” (1 Peter 2:9).
      “A royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9).
      “A holy nation” (1 Peter 2:9).
      “A peculiar people” (1 Peter 2:9).
      James said that believers are:
      “Heirs of the kingdom” (James 2:5).
      John said that believers are:
      “The sons of God” (John 1:12).
      “Kings and priests unto God” (Revelation 1:6).
      “The new Jerusalem” (Revelation 3:12).
      “The Holy city (Revelation 21:2).
      The letter to the Hebrews said that believers are:
      “The people of God” (Hebrews 4:9).
      “Mount Zion” (Hebrews 12:22).
      “The city of the living God” (Hebrews 12:22).
      “The heavenly Jerusalem” (Hebrews 12:22).

      1. The Jews are the real Jews. Nowhere in the Torah, which basically tells the entire story of the tribe of Judah, does it ever mention a “Jew.” Jews came later.

        When the Jews finally do make their appearance in the Bible, they are described as being something other people can become (Esther 8:17).

        Jews are the real Jews. What they aren’t, are Israelites. There were entire books taken out of the Bible that describe the Edomite takeover of Judea, which tells you exactly who the Jews were, and in many cases still are.

  3. when the founders added the 12th amendment and created the electoral college, they were thinking they didn’t want the country ruled by a lot of know-nothings, effete highbrows, the real provincials, and i guess they thought, knew from experience, there was a pretty good chance that was more likely the case in big population centers, where ignorance is somehow rather the rule… it makes sense because the human population, mostly in the population centers, had always been ruled by rulers of one stripe or another, no account for anybody thinking for himself…
    this is the internet… anybody who still thinks we’ve never had any jewish presidents at this late date must not get out in cyberspace much… i suppose the author thinks these guys are all using their real names too…
    good inside info on bloomberg though… i’m liking him more all the time…
    i don’t get why everybody says he was a big bust at the debate…
    it’s probably the pc thing, trying to paint the antagonist elizabeth what’s-her-real-name as really effective…
    i liked his line about bernie the socialist being millionaire who owns 3 houses….
    if bernie was a real socialist, representing all those billions of poor people in the world, he’d still be swinging at the millionaires, not just the billionaires… because compared the poor people bernie is supposed to be trying to help, bernie might as well be a billionaire…
    You do gotta like bernie’s initials – BS…
    However, he has come out now against the apartheid in Palestine, and if you can believe that, he looks a lot better… We need more than a little bit of rhetoric though…
    Does Bernie have a real plan t rescue us from the ZOG?
    I doubt it, but if he want’s to elaborate, we’re all ears…
    Anyway, Donald Drumpf, Bloomberg, Sanders, the 3 leaders now, are all Jews…
    So what’s that make you think?

    1. A new Revolution won’t come through any ballot boxes, Bark. They’re all corrupted beyond repair. The tree of Freedom has NEVER been nourished with Jefferson’s “fresh manure”. Instead, all we’ve had are safeguards in the form of a few crucial Amendments, the 12th not being among them. And those have CONSTANTLY been under assault, especially the 2nd, where an inexorable drive seeks a final outcome where owning a gun will be a felony. God help us if that day ever comes.

    2. It’s pretty much normal for the radical left to defend Palestinians. They are exercising (pretending, actually) their universal motto of helping the poor and oppressed. However they barely scratch the surface of the Jewish Question, and they will never threaten Zionism.

      One coin with two faces: ZIONISM/COMMUNISM. From time to time TPTB rotate the coin 180 degrees, and the Goyim buy it every time! Jews are experts in make-believe politics.

      The two real political choices for the Goyim nowadays should be NATIONALISM in one side, including a sovereign Central Bank, and GLOBALISM in the opposing side, where national states are governed by a central authority – Brussels in the case of the EU.

      “The communist pave the way for the Jew” – and vice-versa.

      1. @ NBTT

        Why is it “left wing” — or the “radical left” in your parlance — to care for the plight of the Palestinians? Why do you smear people like me who care deeply about the plunder of Palestine and the cruelty meted out to helpless civilians in Gaza? I am NOT “the radical left”. I regard myself as a moderate with conservative tendencies. And yes, I am white.

        There has to be something fundamentally wrong with you, something cruel and racist, if you don’t give a damn for the Palestinians just because their skins are a shade browner than yours. Is your heart moved to pity only when the victims are white — like yourself presumably?

        That’s what you sound like, NBTT. A heartless racist behind a mask of intellectuality. You are hiding your racism behind all this talk of Zionism and Communism. You should have compassion for the Palestinians no matter what color they are!

      2. Madame Butterfly,

        I have total solidarity with the Palestinian people in their Hercules struggle against Zionism, as I showed unequivocally in previous threads. I have total solidarity with the Hezbollah militia; they showed to the world how it’s done in the 2006 Israeli invasion of Lebanon. The Vietnam War impressed me very much, total solidarity with the terrible suffering of the Vietnamese people, and also with the 60,000 American dead know nothing youngs (white, black or spanish), except the psychotic ones. I have total solidarity with…

        Do I have solidarity with the psychopathic IDF dead soldiers? Not at all! Do I have solidarity with Israeli civilians? Yes, especially under 12 years old.

        I’m not watching the debates but I bet Bernie has a beautiful speech for the Palestinians, we should support it. I’m just denouncing his hypocrisy that’s all.

        I like your writings even when you beat me. 🙂

        1. NBTT —

          Oh dear, it seems I have misjudged you badly! Please forgive me. If what you say about yourself is true, and I have no reason to doubt your sincerity, then you are a kindred spirit and I have complete solidarity with you. I am so pleased to hear that you back the Palestinians and Hezbollah and regard them as noble freedom fighters rather than as “terrorists”.

      3. Not a problem at all, Madame!

        I just realized that the American government considers Hezbollah a terrorist group, now I am a terrorist sympathizer. OMG, I’m toast!!

        When I wrote “Hercules struggle” I meant “Herculean struggle” sorry about that, elegant teacher. 🙂

  4. NBTT
    Here’s another coin you should be interested in, commemorating the Haavara Agreement, 1933, between the German Zionists and Adolf Schnickelgruber…
    The Zionists would have gotten nowhere in Palestine without the help of the Nazis…
    And the Nazis would never have survived the Jewish BDS movement, mostly directed from NYC against Germany in the thirties, without the help of the Zionists…
    Now you’ll watch this whole presidential campaign unfold without Bloomberg or Trump (maybe Bernie), none of the other candidates, no media people saying the word Zionism…

  5. How on earth does one amass $62 billion just by being an investment banker? Insider knowledge? Closed circle? I do not comprehend. If they can do it, why not us? We need that kind of war chest, then we could start getting to places.

    1. Ex –

      “How on earth…..??” Invent something expensive that rich people need to get richer, then target them! 🙂

      He was not an investment banker per se. He used his EE degree from Johns Hopkins and systems development experiences at Salomon Bros to create a system he sold to traders. Being a jew did not hurt.

      It was being fired, he said, which was the real beginning of his empire.

      “If I hadn’t gotten fired from Salomon, which became part of Citigroup, I wouldn’t have gotten a $10 million severance, used my electrical engineering degree to begin my own information technology company and program a computer terminal for bond traders. I’d be working for my girlfriend now, who’s on the board of Citibank.”

      The same year he was fired, Bloomberg founded Bloomberg LP — where he, along with his three co-founders, created a computerized system to provide real-time market data and other financial calculations to investment banks and Wall Street firms, which they sold as a subscription service.

Comments are closed.