Financial Times’ Post

Is Trump not a pot calling the kettle black ? In a way, yes—Trump has arguably benefited from a form of non-meritocratic advantage, though not in the way DEI is traditionally framed. While DEI policies aim to address historical inequalities by promoting diversity and inclusion, Trump has benefited from privilege-based advantages, particularly in areas like wealth, social connections, and legacy status. How Trump Has Benefited from Advantageous Policies & Systems: 1. Legacy Admissions & Family Wealth – Trump was admitted to the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, partly due to family connections. His father, Fred Trump, was a wealthy and well-connected real estate developer, which likely influenced his access to elite education and business opportunities. Many argue that legacy admissions function as a type of “affirmative action for the wealthy.” 2. Financial Bailouts & Tax Benefits – Trump’s businesses have received government subsidies, tax loopholes, and bankruptcy protections, which are forms of systemic advantages not available to most Americans. For example: • His companies have declared bankruptcy multiple times, using laws designed to protect failing businesses. • His real estate empire benefited from tax incentives and legal loopholes that allowed him to avoid paying substantial federal income taxes for years. 3. Political and Media Access – Trump leveraged his inherited wealth and celebrity status (from “The Apprentice”) to gain political traction in ways that most first-time candidates could never afford. Media outlets granted him free coverage worth billions during his 2016 campaign, amplifying his platform without the need for traditional political fundraising. 4. Selective Use of Identity Politics – While Trump criticizes DEI, he has personally benefited from identity-based appeals, particularly by positioning himself as a champion for certain demographic groups (e.g., working-class white voters, conservative Christians). His appointment of diverse figures to his administration—such as Ben Carson and Elaine Chao—also shows that he strategically employs diversity when it suits his goals. The Irony: Opposing DEI While Benefiting from Non-Meritocratic Privilege Trump argues against DEI by claiming it lowers standards, yet his own career has been shaped by advantages unrelated to merit, including: • Inheritance • Connections • Preferential financial treatment While DEI policies attempt to level the playing field for historically disadvantaged groups, Trump’s success is an example of how unregulated advantages (such as inherited wealth and legacy status) operate in American society. Thus, while he is not a beneficiary of DEI in the conventional sense, he has certainly benefited from systemic advantages that function in a similar way—just for a different group.

The Daily Takedown: It’s almost awe-inspiring—the sheer gall of the Democratic Coalition to feign moral indignation while willfully misrepresenting the facts. They would have you believe that addressing the very policies that may have contributed to a national tragedy is somehow an act of insensitivity. As if acknowledging reality is an insult to those who suffered. No, what’s actually insulting is their blatant attempt to shield DEI policies from scrutiny by exploiting grief as a political cudgel. Trump’s decision to highlight hiring standards in the wake of disaster isn’t “attacking” DEI—it’s recognizing that when lives are on the line, qualifications should take precedence over ideological purity. If there’s even a possibility that compromised standards played a role, a responsible leader asks those questions. But instead of engaging in an honest discussion, they shriek that Trump is “politicizing” the moment—when in reality, they are the ones using the tragedy to deflect from potential systemic failures. And let’s not forget the breathtaking irony: the same people who spent four years accusing Trump of being “reckless” are now outraged that he’s demanding accountability for aviation safety. The same crowd who insisted “lives are at stake” over COVID protocols now argue that questioning hiring policies affecting air traffic control is beyond the pale. If hypocrisy were jet fuel, these people could power the entire airline industry.

"A distinction is often made between tactical and strategic air interdiction, depending on the objectives of the operation. Typical objectives in tactical interdiction are meant to affect events rapidly and locally, for example through direct destruction of forces or supplies en route to the active battle area. By contrast, strategic objectives are often broader and more long-term, with fewer direct attacks on enemy fighting capabilities, instead focusing on infrastructure, logistics and other supportive assets." https://lnkd.in/eyY8eTAh

An aircraft being hit by a bullet poses several dangers, depending on the location and severity of the impact. Potential risks of an aircraft being struck by a bullet can cause structural damage to the fuselage and wings. Other factors to consider are the fuel tank or fuel line penetration. Also, loss of cabin pressurization, damage to critical systems such as hydraulic systems, engines, avionics. Lastly, injury to passengers or crew, and the psychological impact are all crucial if an aircraft is struck by a bullet. Overall, modern commercial and military aircraft are designed with some level of redundancy and robustness, allowing them to continue flying despite certain types of damage. However, the consequences depend heavily on the type of aircraft, the bullet's trajectory, and the systems or components affected. #airportsafetyandsecurity #vulnerabilityassessment

The FAA is clarifying which fall protection standards should apply to human external cargo (HEC) helicopter operations in a draft revised policy statement.

Asked how the President knows the aircraft crash in DC was the fault of Democrats (and DEI), He said: “Because I have COMMON SENSE and unfortunately a lot of people don’t”. (Emphasis added) BTW – In my experience, most airport controllers and pilots are old white men. The President’s comment again demonstrates a lack of empathy for the victims and His total lack of knowledge on any topic. Embarrassing President. I am a licensed private pilot. Not an expert, but I often flew in and out of a local airport used by commercial and private planes … and news channel helicopters. My traffic pattern altitude was typically 800 feet above ground level (agl). The helicopters were limited to about 300 feet agl. There were traffic avoidance systems that warned of near-by traffic (often shut off near the ground due to false positives from aircraft on the ground).  Most military aircraft do not have compatible systems. Not having many Facts, my common sense tells me maybe the aircraft were out of their assigned altitudes. Something happened. Probably, one of the controllers was either Obama … or gay. That is “common sense”. Maybe we should wait for the experts to gather FACTS and provide a report. Me – a registered Republican when the President was still a registered Democrat.

🚨 Know Your Rights: 18 USC 32🚨 Under U.S. law, 18 U.S. Code § 32 makes it a federal crime to destroy or damage an aircraft, or to attempt or conspire to do so. This law is crucial for protecting air travel safety. Violations can result in serious penalties! ⚖️ Key Points: - Targets destruction, damage, or disabling of aircraft - Includes attempts or conspiracies to harm aircraft - Federal offense with severe consequences Stay informed and protect public safety! ✈️ #PublicSafety #KnowTheLaw #18USC32 #Aviation

https://lnkd.in/g9cPzk5g No word yet if snow, differing weather, or birds affected either vehicle. This was a new route, as well. The question of who was on the plane affected seems to be of some concern, so further questions regarding the presence of the helicopter, and its placement, in the current political climate, are of heightened concern. Due diligence of top notch people will examine all aspects, including personnel, scheduling, fatigue, and Tower control. My confidence is in the best.

Firstly, I would like to offer my condolences to the family and friends of the victims of Flight 5342 and the soldiers on board the Black Hawk helicopter. Acknowledging all of the potentials that come when humans and human error is involved, and acknowledging that there may (will) be more specifics of this disaster that come out, I think there are important things to consider for all industries, people and individuals that unfortunately really get scrutinized during events like these: Regardless of any individual error or process that may or may not have led to the accident, during the investigation there have been many inefficiencies in the systems and processes in place that are meant to avoid exactly these situations. The problem starts that even when these inefficiencies are noted, any one of them are tolerable since there are many other parts to the system to account for any errors. However, once these start to stack up, even though one alone may not risk the entire system, the combination of many processes working at only 90 or 85% of intended effectiveness results in the overall risk to the system passing the critical threshold. In critical industries like Aerospace, this is most important as the risk tolerance needs to be extremely low (or non existent) since the worst case scenario is catastrophic. I still think in all industries, ignoring any single process limited efficiency only because it doesn't break the system, is a mistake as it is the addition of these single inefficiencies that lead to full system or process failure and in the worst of cases, peoples lives. Lets all take lessons here and make sure we do our best to protect innocent humans who at the end of the day are the ones who end up suffering from these inefficiencies. #hardlessons