Late at night, a video unexpectedly captured the attention of every media outlet, with the exception of short video tforms.


    The video’s title is “A Sincere Apology from Howard, the Current Patriarch of the Rothschild Family.”


    In the footage, Howard intentionally portrayed himself as frail and elderly, with a look that suggested he was gravely ill, evoking a sense that his time was running out.


    This choice in appearance stemmed from advice given to him by a think tank.


    The think tank posited that downying one’s age and misfortune could elicit sympathy, ultimately diminishing public feelings of hatred and me directed towards an individual.<h3 style="background-color:DodgerBlue">


    To illustrate, consider the act of theft: when a twenty-year-old in good health steals a wallet, it is perceived differently than when an eighty-year-old, terminally ill personmits the same act. While both actions are fundamentally the same, society tends to show greater leniency towards thetter.


    While presenting Howard as an elderly man in distress may tarnish his personal image, it was a strategic move to soften public animosity towards the Rothschild family.


    Indeed, the think tank’s strategy proved effective. When Howard appeared on camera, struggling as if he were on the brink of death, the audience responded with a degree of sympathy.


    As he began to speak, Howard wasted no time addressing the issue at hand, expressing deep remorse: “I believe everyone is aware that Matt Rothschild, a member of our family, has made grave mistakes andmitted serious crimes. Although Matt’s actions were entirely his own, as the patriarch of the Rothschild family, I bear a significant responsibility for oversight!”


    He continued, “Instead of standing up and publicly apologizing, I foolishly attempted to resolve his issues through financial means, interfering with the judicial process. This was a grave error on my part, and I wish to extend my sincere apologies to all involved and to the American people.”


    The think tank understood the importance of framing the narrative carefully.


    Had they ced all the me solely on Matt from the outset, it would have only incited public outrage. Instead, they advised Howard to ept a portion of the responsibility for negligence while subtly shifting the me onto Matt.<fn9775> This text is hosted at find?novel</fn9775>


    This approach not only eased the audience’s hostility but also led them to subconsciously view Matt as the sole perpetrator, leaving Howard in the role of a parent unable to control his child, yet still willing to take responsibility.


    Furthermore, Howard’s admission of attempting to bribe Bruce Weinstein was seen as a risky yet bold move.


    What’s particrly noteworthy is that the only evidence against Howard was a phone call with Bruce. Given the context of that conversation alone, it would be difficult to prosecute him for a crime. Thus, even with his confession, he faced no legal repercussions, yet garnered public favor, making this tactic quite clever.


    With a sorrowful expression, Howard added, “Although Matt is my beloved grandson, he has made serious mistakes and even broken thews of the United States. As the patriarch of the Rothschild family, I assure all fellow Americans that we will not shield Matt, nor will we seek leniency for him.”<h3 ss="wp-block-heading has-text-align-center" id="chapter-list"><strong></strong>