Or so the fake news industry wants you to think.
Latest exhibit in a vast museum: This Reuters “investigation” of the share of Russian ownership in Trump properties in southern Florida.
A Reuters review has found that at least 63 individuals with Russian passports or addresses have bought at least $98.4 million worth of property in seven Trump-branded luxury towers in southern Florida, according to public documents, interviews and corporate records…
The tally of investors from Russia may be conservative. The analysis found that at least 703 – or about one-third – of the owners of the 2044 units in the seven Trump buildings are limited liability companies, or LLCs, which have the ability to hide the identity of a property’s true owner. …
In an interview, Gil Dezer said the project generated $2 billion in initial sales, from which Trump took a commission.
Assuming the average Russian bought between one and two Trump properties, that means they 63*2/2044 = 3.1%-6.2% of them.
$98.4 million / $2 billion = 4.9% of Trump properties by value.
Note that Miami is by far the most favored destination in the US for Russian offshore kleptocrats, which is presumably why Reuters chose to focus on it for its investigation.
Russia’s share of world billionaires = 77/1,826 = 4.2%.
There are two possible explanations for this:
- All these dozens of people answer to ROG (Russian Occupation Government) and have been tasked to finance Trump by… buying his towers instead of having some Arab sheikh do it for them.
- The Russian share in Trump property ownership is in fact commensurate with the number of Russians financially capable of this as a percentage of the global total.
The media, of course, would very much rather you take away the impression that it’s the former, but like all good propaganda, it doesn’t quite spell it outright.
Especially since Occam’s Razor and basic sanity would indicate the latter.
Otherwise, if property ownership determined political allegiance, London would basically be a Saudi fiefdom. (Okay, come to think of it, perhaps that’s not the best example).