Would not surprise me to learn that Fox was not the only media outlet that knew about this and decided to sit on it.
After all, Trump is the single best thing that’s ever happened to the newspaper and broadcast industry.
Most newspapers were slowly dying until Trump was elected.
3 Likes
“ETA I’m NAL either, but my breakfast did contain a lot of refined sugar.”
4 Likes
Don’t forget Seth Rich. Fox pushed that conspiracy theory to cover up that they knew it was the Russians?
1 Like
If it’s news, I’m not informed.
If it’s entertainment, I’m not entertained.
3 Likes
Lets not suggest that Faux News is anything but an arm of the republican party. At best its infotainment, but one thing its not, is a news agency.
3 Likes
Although there is the right not to publish, there may not be a right to publish statements you know to be false. And if Fox had the story in late 2016 it puts their later coverage of the scandal in a different light. It also raises the question of why Daniels/Clifford didn’t say anything about this while her suit was in process.
But for me the main thing is: We know that Fox has played an outsize role in the trump regime’s policymaking, a role that’s, um, unusual for a “news” network to be playing. And that leads to the obvious question of what other kompromat they have on the president of the United States and how they may be using it.
7 Likes
This country was more than kind enough to give Murdoch citizenship (Amnesty!) in 1985 along with favorable tax preference, broadcasting licenses including the lifting of restrictions on the number of owners in a market. Little did people know that he’d use the clout to influence a presidential election.
1 Like
I remember at the time thinking and posting (as did others) that we were due for more Trump revelations following the Comey letter. They didn’t come. Now we know why. To paraphrase Bernie Sanders, “rigged!!!”.
8 Likes
Murdoch seems to take a different approach with the WSJ.
As an example, he had invested $100M in Thranos, the scam blood testing company a few years ago. One of the WSJ reporters, a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner, started to report the fraud. Elizabeth Holmes, CEO at Theranos, went to Murdoch to try to get the reporting stopped, but Murdoch did not stop it–and ultimately took the entire $100M loss.
6 Likes
Report: Fox News Had Stormy Daniels Story Before Election, Killed It To Protect Trump
This seems to imply that Fox “News” isn’t a reputable news organization with journalistic standards. That can’t be right.
4 Likes
Now if Rupert would just join him, perhaps the earth would start spinning on its axis again…
1 Like
You are correct; he has held US citizenship for quite some time.
“We decide, you concur.”
If, by “tripping themselves up”, you are referring to lying under oath, then, yes that looks good. All they have to do is tell the truth.
Going to put the key quotes that make it very much clear that there is enough smoke for an investigation:
She had confirmation from Daniels, emails between Michael Cohen and Daniels’ attorney and even the contract Daniels signed.
Falzone did not give up, but kept digging and found out about Trump’s attempt to get the National Enquirer to make a “catch-and-kill” deal with Daniels.
How much of the deal did Falzone, LaCorte, Murdoch know?
Did they know about the illegal payments?
When and what did they communicate to the National Enquirer/AMI/David Pecker?
Was the story killed just by LaCorte or did Murdoch or other higher-ups know about it?
IANAL, so I don’t know what, if any, crimes were committed here, but Congress regularly investigates things that are wrong, even if legal (see these hearings on drug pricing or twitter/facebook). Claiming that this is somehow equivalent to “Benghazi” is the type of “both sides have a point”-ism that has led our current situation. There is clear evidence of Fox doing something wrong, if legal, that is quite deserving of a Congressional investigation.
4 Likes
Except they didn’t pay the reporter more for the story to kill it. They demoted her and had to pay money only under threat of a civil lawsuit. Typical FOX bs.
6 Likes
“there may not be a right to publish statements you know to be false”
If that were true, Murdoch would be in jail and every supermarket tabloid ever published would be out of business.
You can’t lie under oath, but you can publish fiction as fact with impunity.
1 Like
We cover up.
You can go f*** yourselves.
2 Likes
You seem to be wanting to send Congress on a fishing expedition for something (“they might trip themselves up by lying”) of relatively minor importance or worth. May not be the best use of their resources…
I for one am shocked, shocked i tell ya! FOX News acting like Trump TV?! Say it isn’t so! 