Trump’s Teleprompter Operator and the Betting Paradox
A teleprompter operator’s wagers become a White House scandal. A satirical reflection on the gap between the rules for employees and the example set at the top.
Trump could have taken it like a man.
After it emerged that his teleprompter operator, Gabriel Perez, had made $100,000 betting on Kalshi on which words the president would or wouldn't say in an upcoming speech, the White House whipped up a full scandal around Perez. He was sacked and made to hand the money back.
What's disappointing?
First, being Trump's teleprompter operator is a gamble in itself. I was at one of his speeches two years ago at the IAC conference. Beyond being good fun, the teleprompter lasted about 12 minutes and he spoke for roughly 70 without it. So it's quite the risk. Perez took it seriously, working the teleprompter with one hand while adjusting his bets in real time whenever the president strayed from the script.
The White House press secretary trotted out something in Trump's name about it being "unfortunate" and "a disgrace".
In my satirical version, Trump could have said: "Well done, Perez. That's exactly what I'm promoting on the back of the White House, and I'm about to launch a new betting site, alongside the profits from deals I've done with various countries for my hotels and resorts, and the plane I got from Qatar. A word of fatherly advice: next time don't hide it. Brag about it in front of everyone and it'll all be fine."
