Donald Trump's fight with Fox News and Megyn Kelly, explained

If anyone is interested in Donald Trump and tuned into this past Thursday night's GOP debate on Fox News, you witnessed the attempted take-down of the GOP presidential front runner by the very organization that made him the front runner in the first place. As a result, sensing a hoodwinking in progress, Trump lashed out and has continued to lash out against Fox and one of it's debate moderators, Megyn Kelly. 

Vox.com's Ezra Klein explains how Fox's build-up and tear-down of Donald Trump goes beyond Megyn Kelly. It's about Fox New's lust for power,ratings and money. Klein also states how ultimately it's a fight that Trump can't win:

On Friday, Donald Trump said that Fox News's Megyn Kelly had it out for him during the first Republican presidential debate. And he had a theory as to why.

"She gets out and she starts asking me all sorts of ridiculous questions," Trump told CNN. "You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her... wherever."

So how did we get to the point where the leading Republican candidate for president is accusing one of Fox News's signature hosts of going on a PMS-fueled rant against him? The answer is surprisingly complex.

It's not just about what happened at Thursday's debate. It's also about the way Fox News had, until Thursday, been inflating the Trump bubble, and the broader tension between Fox News's role as a ratings-obsessed cable network, an actual journalistic outlet, and one of the most important institutional actors in the Republican Party.

But let's start with what happened at the debate, and why it left Trump feeling so betrayed.

There's been an internal war at Fox News over Donald Trump

Until Thursday, Fox News had been one of Trump's most important allies. The liberal media watchdog group Media Matters notes that between May 1st, 2015, and July 31st, 2015, Donald Trump was given, by far, the most airtime of any GOP presidential contender, with 31 appearances on the network; Jeb Bush, by contrast, only had 7.

And more than simple airtime, Fox News's hosts defended Trump when the rest of the media was piling onto his more noxious comments.

When Trump said Mexico was sending rapists and criminals into America, Fox News contributor Monica Crowley said Trump "is saying things that need to be said."

When Trump blasted Senator John McCain's war record, Fox News's Steve Doocy said, "if you listen to his comments in total...he's not critical of John McCain the war hero, he's critical of his Senate record." Harris Faulkner said "McCain is not admitting that he kind of started this whole thing."

Erik Bolling, a member of Fox News's 'The Five," said, "I like what Donald Trump is saying, I like what he's doing." On Fox and Friends, Trump was compared to St. Augustine and Mr. Smith from Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. And on his radio show, Sean Hannity, one of Fox's key primetime personalities, gave Trump the ultimate compliment. He compared him to Ronald Reagan:

• One of the greatest moments of Ronald Reagan's presidency, he was at Reykjavik. And Gorbachev was pushing him to give up Strategic Defense, what liberals called, derisively, 'Star Wars.' And he said, 'nyet' [no], and he walked away from the table. And eventually it led to peace. That's like Trump's art of the deal.

But there's been at least one powerful critic of Trump at Fox News: Rupert Murdoch. On July 22nd, New York Magazine's Gabriel Sherman, author of a biography of Roger Ailes, reported that there was a schism at Fox News over Donald Trump.

• According to sources, Murdoch has tried — and failed — to rein in Fox News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes, who, insiders say, is pushing Fox to defend Trump’s most outlandish comments. This week, Ailes told his senior executives during a meeting that Murdoch recently called him and asked if Fox could "back off the Trump coverage," a source told me. Ailes is said to have boasted to his executives that he told Murdoch he was covering Trump "the way he wanted to."

Murdoch loathed Trump so much that he took to Twitter to make his feelings known. "When is Donald Trump going to stop embarrassing his friends, let alone the whole country?" he asked.

Fox News went after Trump at the GOP debate

Donald Trump's post-debate tantrum has been an embarrassment. But it's not, on some level, a surprise.
After months when Fox News was his main ally, Trump stepped onto the Fox News debate stage and suddenly found the network seemingly committed to his destruction.

The first question was designed to embarrass Trump in front of a national audience of Republicans. Bret Baier began the debate by asking, "Is there anyone on stage, and can I see hands, who is unwilling tonight to pledge your support to the eventual nominee of the Republican party and pledge to not run an independent campaign against that person?"

Trump had already made clear that he wouldn't take that pledge. But Fox News began the debate by making sure every Republican in the country knew Trump wouldn't take that pledge. It was a question designed to embarrass him, and Baier kept turning the screws.

"Experts say an independent run would almost certainly hand the race over to Democrats and likely another Clinton," Baier told Trump. "You can't say tonight that you can make that pledge?"

And, for Trump, it went downhill from there.

Megyn Kelly's first question for Trump exposed his rampant misogyny in front of a national audience. "You've called women you don't like 'fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals,'" she began.

Trump, of course, interrupted. "Only Rosie O'Donnell," he said with a smile.

Kelly wasn't having it. "For the record, it was well beyond Rosie O'Donnell," she replied. "You once told a contestant on Celebrity Apprentice it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees. Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president, and how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who was likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?"


Trump's answer was a master class in how to excuse sexism and wield the politics of white male resentment. "I don't frankly have time for total political correctness. And to be honest with you, this country doesn't have time either," Trump replied.

"Honestly Megyn," he continued, "if you don't like it, I'm sorry. I've been very nice to you, although I could probably maybe not be, based on the way you have treated me. But I wouldn't do that."

It turned out he would do that. But we'll get to that in a second.

The next question to Trump came from Chris Wallace. And here, again, the question was designed to embarrass the candidate.

"Mr. Trump, it has not escaped anybody's notice that you say that the Mexican government, the Mexican government is sending criminals -- rapists, drug dealers, across the border ... you have repeatedly said that you have evidence that the Mexican government is doing this, but you have refused or declined to share [that evidence]. Why not use this first Republican presidential debate to share your proof with the American people?"

But the demolition effort didn't end with the questions. As soon as the debate ended, Fox News cut to a focus group being conducted by pollster Frank Luntz. The entire segment was about how the focus group came in liking Trump and left loathing him. It was a festival of Trump hatred.

Look at the debate from Trump's perspective. His onetime friends at Fox News crafted the questions to embarrass him and then, once he was off the air, cut to a focus group — and who knows if that was a real focus group or actors who were coached on what to say — who told the whole country that Trump had lost the debate. 

And there's nothing Donald Trump hates like being called a loser....

Continue 

The Clown Car Has It's Driver

If you haven't seen this mornings cover of the NY Daily News take a look at it below. It it makes an extremely bold statement and leave no doubt about how they feel about media whore Donald Trump and his announcement that he will be running for President in 2016.

I'll take the ‪‎NY Daily News‬ over that Murdock piece of trash ‎NY Post‬ any day!

Jonnie Marbles: Why I Foam-Pied Rupert Murdoch

Published on Wednesday, July 20, 2011 by The Guardian/UK

Some people might think my action played into Murdoch's hands, but I did it for all the people who couldn't

By Jonnie Marbles

First things first: I don't hate octogenarians. I don't have a vendetta against anyone over 80 who likes to begrudgingly give evidence to parliamentary committees. Nor am I in the habit of attacking media moguls on international television. Yesterday was, hopefully, a one off.
The moment Jonnie Marbles attempted to hit Rupert Murdoch in the face with a foam pie.

If you're of sound mind, you might quite reasonably ask what possessed me to smuggle a shaving-foam pie into Portcullis House and throw it at (though, alas, not into) the face of one of the world's richest and most powerful men. I didn't do it because I wanted more Twitter followers. Simply put, I did it for all the people who couldn't.

It's not difficult to find reasons to dislike Rupert Murdoch. His reach is one of the most insidious and toxic forces in global politics today. The phone-hacking scandal, despicable though it is, barely scratches the surface of the damage done by News International. It is a media empire built on deceit and bile, that trades vitriol for debate and thinks nothing of greasing the wheels of power until they turn in its favour. What's more, no matter what the grievances he wreaks on those he has never met, his power and money keep him forever safely out of their reach.

Yes it's true that Murdoch's power is waning. But it's also true that he will never face real justice. Yesterday's select committee hearing was a farce before the foam ever left my fingers: a toothless panel confronting men too slippery to be caught between their gums.

I was filled with hope as Tom Watson questioned Murdoch Sr relentlessly with the passion and vigour we might expect to be the norm when our elected representatives face down the perpetrators of a modern Watergate. For a few bright moments I thought I might see justice done, keep the pie in my bag and spare myself a night in jail. Those moments were short lived: as committee member after committee member feebly prodded around the issues and Murdoch Jr began to dominate, I knew I was going to have to make a massive tit of myself.

To be honest, I had not expected to get so far, but parliamentary security, with its machine-gun toting cops and scatter X-rays, is apparently no match for a man with some shaving-foam covered plates in his bag. Then, once inside the committee room, I was helped along by some unwelcome luck. I had always intended to wait until the end of the hearings anyway before I launched my circus crusade, and as the penultimate speaker finished several people made their way out, leaving me a clear path to Murdoch. It was a horrible feeling: I had a plan, a pie and no excuses left.

I had intended to unleash a wave of polemic as I made my move. As it turned out, the whole thing was far too weird for me to string two thoughts together, particularly as Murdoch's wife rose from the chair to prevent and avenge her husband's humiliation. As it went, I'm glad I was even able to make the accurate understatement that he was a "naughty billionaire".

As I languished predictably in a prison cell later that evening, I contemplated whether people would understand why I'd done it. I knew it was a tall order: a surreal act aimed at exposing a surreal process was never going to be an easy sell. I worried, too, that my clowning would detract from the scandal, or provide sympathy for Murdoch.

Believe it or not, I even worried about Rupert Murdoch's feelings. You see, I really don't hate 80-year-olds and, at the end of the day, Rupert Murdoch is just an old man. Maybe what I was trying to do was remind everyone of that – that he is not all powerful, he's not Sauron or Beelzebub, just a human being, like the rest of us, but one who has got far too big for his boots.

Lautenberg Highlights Additional News Corp. Hacking Allegation in the U.S. as DOJ Review Begins

Lautenberg Flagged News Corp. Hacking Allegations with Federal Authorities in 2005

WASHINGTON—As the Justice Department reviews claims that News Corp. hacked into the phone records or voicemails of American 9/11 victims, U.S. Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) today wrote to Attorney General Eric Holder and FBI Director Robert Mueller to highlight a 2005 hacking allegation in the United States that was made against a News Corp. marketing company called News America Marketing.

Lautenberg originally wrote a letter in 2005 bringing this case to the attention of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales after a small New Jersey marketing company called FLOORgraphics alleged that News America Marketing engaged in illegal computer espionage by breaking into password protected computer systems and obtaining confidential information.

“As the Department of Justice and FBI examine the recent hacking allegations involving News Corp. and its subsidiaries more closely, I wanted to make sure that you were fully aware of the case of FLOORgraphics and News America, as it may be relevant to your current investigation,” Lautenberg wrote.

A copy of today’s letter can be found here

Distort, Attack, Repeat: The Fox Propaganda Machine in Action

If your of the belief that Fox News is nothing more than a propaganda machine for the Republican Party, you'll be interested in watching a hour by hour slide show that takes you through a typical day on the "Fixed" news network of relentless "Obama bashing".

The feature can be found over at Rolling Stone's website and accompanies a story about how Fox News Chairman Roger Ailes created the most profitable propaganda machine in history.

Ailes runs the most profitable – and therefore least accountable – head of the News Corp. hydra. Fox News reaped an estimated profit of $816 million last year – nearly a fifth of Murdoch’s global haul. The cable channel’s earnings rivaled those of News Corp.’s entire film division, which includes 20th Century Fox, and helped offset a slump at Murdoch’s beloved newspapers unit, which took a $3 billion write-down after acquiring The Wall Street Journal. With its bare-bones news gathering operation – Fox News has one-third the staff and 30 fewer bureaus than CNN – Ailes generates profit margins above 50 percent. Nearly half comes from advertising, and the rest is dues from cable companies. Fox News now reaches 100 million households, attracting more viewers than all other cable-news outlets combined, and Ailes aims for his network to “throw off a billion in profits.”