Tag: rupert murdoch
Stoking Division Amid Disaster, Trump And His Minions Betray America

Stoking Division Amid Disaster, Trump And His Minions Betray America

The solidarity of American communities in the face of catastrophe, whether natural or manmade, is an aspect of our national character that most of us cherish. We never tire of stories about our fellow citizens upholding each other at the worst of time. We venerate the firefighters, emergency service workers, law enforcement officers and ordinary neighbors whose endurance and sacrifice holds communities together against cruel circumstance – without regard to race, creed, color, gender, or partisan affiliation.

Or at least we did during much of our history. Yet as huge swaths of Los Angeles are consumed by wildfire, it is striking to see those traditional American values torched by a self-serving coterie of right-wing billionaires, whose loyalty to any principle beyond self-aggrandizement is nil: Rupert Murdoch, Elon Musk, and of course their political avatar Donald Trump, the president-elect.

While the LA blaze rages on, all three of these men have used their gigantic public platforms to stoke a different but exceptionally destructive conflagration. Rather than encourage patriotic bonding and mutual aid, they broadcast messages of division, hatred, and suspicion, served up in a poisonous stew of blatant lies, conspiracy theories, and wretched nonsense.

Even as the Los Angeles Fire Department’s undaunted officers and leaders work around the clock, confronting danger and tragedy in every moment, loudmouths like Musk have the temerity to attack them, prattling on about “DEI,” the effort to mitigate decades of discrimination. Neither the Tesla mogul nor Murdoch’s blithering minions on Fox News Channel -- who are shocked that the LA fire chief is a lesbian -- have produced a shred of evidence to show that diversity hinders firefighting. They never will. For the purposes of right-wing Republican propaganda, facts and logic are irrelevant and annoying.

In the same vein are Trump’s attacks on California Gov. Gavin Newsom, whom he disparages with his usual gutter vernacular as “Newscum.” Posting ridiculous falsehoods about the state’s water supply, claiming the governor is withholding water from burning communities, can only be regarded as an obnoxious distraction while state officials try to save lives and stop the fire. With reservoir levels at or above capacity in most of the state, there is no shortage of water, but its use has been hampered by the awful winds and other technical barriers.

Instead of seeking ways to support the scorched and weary Angelenos, the Trump gang aims only to fabricate myths that will overshadow the real cause of this disaster. On CNN, GOP spokesman Scott Jennings has repeated a fake story about budget cuts to the LA Fire Department, when in fact the department received a $50 million increase last year. Donald Trump Jr and various other clowns are whining over a tiny donation of equipment to Ukraine, which has no impact whatsoever.

They will literally say anything to avoid discussing the way climate change – the underlying cause of the hot, dry superstorm that turned a local fire into a regional inferno. They don’t believe in it, so it can’t be causing the fires. Except of course it is.

Trump’s impending return to power is awful to contemplate in these circumstances -- especially for those in California who remember how he behaved the last time he occupied the Oval Office. He denies climate change and oppose any program to stem its deadly impact. And he has repeatedly manipulated federal aid to punish states he considered politically hostile to him, including during the 2018 wildfires in southern California.

As reported earlier this year by Politico, Trump refused to approve critical assistance for those communities until aides showed him that Orange County had given him more votes in 2016 than the entire state of Iowa. Obviously, that is not what presidential duty requires, as if that would matter to him.

The incoming president appears to have no compassion, no instinct to help those who have suffered horrendous losses and terrible. As usual, he is thinking about himself, his partisan objectives, and his obsession with vengeance against perceived enemies.

The Trump years, which will now be extended for another presidential term, have inflicted awful damage on American morale, empathy, and unity. Restoring that spirit will take years and probably decades. It doesn’t seem accidental that Murdoch and Musk, Trump’s gleeful enablers, are of foreign origin. Like him, they display no regard for American ethics and customs. And like him, they are making America not great, but small, stupid, and mean.

Joe Conason is founder and editor-in-chief of The National Memo. He is also editor-at-large of Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative reporting organization formerly known as The Investigative Fund. His latest book is The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers and Frauds Hijacked American Conservatism.--


The Decline And Fall Of The (Trumpist) 'Wall Street Journal'

The Decline And Fall Of The (Trumpist) 'Wall Street Journal'

Many American institutions have beclowned themselves in the past 10 years — too many to list. To count the right-leaning institutions that have not succumbed to Trumpian populism takes only one hand. But the decline of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page has been particularly galling because, compared to the Heritage Foundation, Hillsdale College or the Claremont Institute, it had farther to fall.

In the pre-Trump era, the paper had some integrity. While the board was broadly aligned with the Republican Party, its editorials didn't hesitate to differ with Republicans on major questions.

In the Trump era, the Journal has become, if not Pravda, then something like The Nation magazine.The Nation reliably whitewashed the sins of the Soviet Union and other communist regimes because it regarded anti-communism as a greater threat to the world than communism itself. Similarly, The Wall Street Journal has gradually become a parody of itself on the grounds that Democrats are always and forever the greatest threat to the country.

With that guiding principle, there is simply no Republican, no matter how deranged or unfit, whom the Journal will not prefer to a Democratic opponent. In 2022, the Journal advised its Arizona readers to choose Kari Lake for governor despite the fact that Lake had called for the 2020 election to be decertified, denounced mask wearing and encouraged the use of hydroxychloroquine during the pandemic, promised to criminally pursue journalists who "dupe the public," and pronounced the nation "rotten to the core" when the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago. The Journal didn't mention most of that in its endorsement, claiming, hilariously, that Arizona's election was primarily about school choice.

This week, commenting on the drone kerfuffle, the Journal intoned that it couldn't be sure what people were seeing — but it was certain that the whole thing could be attributed to the erosion of trust in government.

Noting that "non-cranks" have reported seeing things that move strangely in the dark, the Journal quoted Jon Bramnick, a GOP state senator from New Jersey, who said, "It must be something going on that they can't tell us because they are so fearful of what the public's gonna do when they hear what the drones are doing."

You might think the paper would rebuke this state senator for getting out over his skis and encouraging conspiratorial thinking, but no, the editorial notes that "This is how deep the suspicion runs. And when that happens, conspiracy theories fill the air as much as drones do."

And guess who's responsible for this erosion of trust?

"The Biden administration has squandered its credibility to the point that it's rational not to believe what it says. Remember the Chinese spy balloon that traveled across the continental U.S.? The administration downplayed its importance while it was courting better relations with Beijing, only to shoot it down over the Atlantic Ocean."

Whoa. If you want to cite relations with Beijing as a source of mistrust, the Trump administration offers far more dire examples. While he was chasing a "great trade agreement" with Xi Jinping (the terms of which were never honored, by the way), Trump repeatedly lied about and minimized the risk of COVID-19, which had far more serious consequences for Americans' lives than waiting until the big spy balloon was over the ocean before shooting it down.

Nor did the Journal see fit to mention that Trump is, right on schedule and very on brand, stoking conspiracies of government malfeasance about the drones. He popped off: "Can this really be happening without our government's knowledge. I don't think so! Let the public know, and now. Otherwise, shoot them down!!!"

This is not to excuse President Joe Biden's betrayal of trust in repeatedly promising that he would not pardon his son and then doing so, or misleading the public about the degree of his physical and mental decline. But for the Journal to look at the world of 2024 and conclude that the erosion of trust in government is due to Biden without ever once mentioning that Trump and his minions are the most prolific bilge spillers imaginable is to be completely without scruple.

Just in the last few weeks of the campaign, Trump falsely alleged that FEMA was purposely withholding hurricane assistance in order to funnel funds to illegal immigrants, that the Congo was emptying its prisons to send convicts to the United States and that the 2020 election was stolen.Trust is crucial to the successful functioning of society. Many social science studies have found that nations with high trust have less corruption and greater prosperity than those with low trust. It makes sense.

If you believe that most people are untrustworthy, you will rely only on those within your own family or tribe and be less likely to engage with outsiders. Trust is a social and economic lubricant. It's also, as we've learned, quite easy to undermine when people get their information from online rumors and irresponsible politicians and other actors who stoke distrust for their own political ends.

The drone affair is fluff and will doubtless be forgotten in a month if not sooner. But the spectacle of the Journal chastising the Biden administration without a solitary word about Trump and his enablers (in whose ranks they stand) is breathtaking.

Mona Charen is policy editor of The Bulwark and host of the "Beg to Differ" podcast. Her new book, Hard Right: The GOP's Drift Toward Extremism, is available now.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Paul Ryan

Ex-Speaker Ryan: Trump 'Betrayed His Oath' And Is 'Unfit For Office'

Former House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) told Fox News on Tuesday that former President Donald Trump is unsuitable for another term in office — and that he believes the former president isn't loyal to upholding the Constitution.

"I voted for him in 2016, hoping that there was going to be a different kind of person in office," Ryan told host Neil Cavuto. "And I do think character is a really important issue. If you put yourself above the Constitution, as he has done, I think that makes you unfit for office."

"But what happened?" asked Cavuto. "What turned you off? Was it the whole January 6 thing?"

"That's a part of it, I think it's a contribution of factors," said Ryan. "But I think it really is his character at the end of the day, and the fact that if you're willing to put yourself above the Constitution, an oath you swear when you take office, federal office, whether there's president or a member of Congress, you swear an oath to the Constitution. And if you're willing to suborn it to yourself, I think that makes you unfit for office."

This comes as Ryan, who helped Trump pass his signature tax cut legislation in 2017, has gradually become more outspoken against him, calling him an "authoritarian" and a "narcissist." Ryan has also said he cannot vote for Trump this year, which has caused the former president to rage against the former speaker on social media.

In one such rant last month, Trump proclaimed: "Rupert Murdoch should fire pathetic RINO Paul Ryan from the Board of Fox. Ryan is a loser, always has been, and always will be. He was the WEAKEST & MOST INCOMPETENT Speaker of the House in its History. Fox will sink to the absolute bottom of the pack if Paul Ryan has anything to do with it!"

Watch the video below or at the link here.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Rupert Murdoch

Why Prince Harry May Force Rupert Murdoch To Testify

With a net worth of nearly $20 billion, far-right media mogul Rupert Murdoch has deep enough pockets to settle with virtually any litigant — except one. And a failure to settle in this particular case could result in the 93-year-old being forced to testify under oath.

The Daily Beast recently reported that Prince Harry — also known as the Duke of Sussex — is still proceeding with his lawsuit against Murdoch over his alleged knowledge of a hacking and cover-up scandal involving News Group Newspapers (NGN), which is Murdoch's family of UK-based tabloids. Harry has so far refused to settle with Murdoch, meaning the suit could lead to a potentially humiliating public trial for Murdoch should plaintiffs prove he knew about illegal hacking practices.

"If true, these allegations would establish very serious, deliberate wrongdoing at NGN, conducted on an institutional basis on a large scale," presiding judge Mr. Justice Fancourt (the stylized title of English High Court judge Sir Timothy Fancourt) said. He added that proceedings could "establish a concerted effort to conceal wrongdoing."

Beast correspondent Clive Irving reported last year on the depth of the cover-up at former NGN publication News of the World, which Harry's lawyers uncovered during the discovery process. The Duke of Sussex's attorneys found that "[NGN] executives had wiped a trail of emails, destroyed hard drives and removed many boxes full of documents" relating to the hacking scandal.

The same lawyers representing Prince Harry in the suit also represented actor Hugh Grant, who, unlike Harry, settled out of court for what he referred to as an "enormous sum" with NGN. He emphasized that he "would love to see all the allegations they deny tested in court." However, he added that "the rules around civil litigation mean that if I proceed to trial and the court awards me damages that are even a penny less than the settlement offer I would have to pay the legal costs of both sides."

"Rupert Murdoch’s lawyers are very expensive," Grant said. "So even if every allegation is proven in court, I would still be liable for something approaching £10 million in costs. I’m afraid I am shying at that fence."

Harry's refusal to settle with Murdoch's tabloid empire could be a deliberate attempt to force the media mogul to testify, as the British royal has previously agreed to settle other lawsuits with publications involved in the hacking scandal. The Associated Press (AP) reported in February that Prince Harry settled with Mirror Group Newspapers over its own hacking practices.

"Phone hacking by British newspapers dates back more than two decades to a time when scoop-hungry journalists regularly phoned the numbers of royals, celebrities, politicians and sports stars and, when prompted to leave a message, punched in default passcodes to eavesdrop on voicemails," the AP explained. "The practice erupted into a full-blown scandal in 2011 when Rupert Murdoch’s News of the World was revealed to have intercepted messages of a murdered girl, relatives of dead soldiers and victims of a bombing. Murdoch closed the paper, and a former News of the World editor was jailed."

Prince Harry's lawsuit may not be the only one that results in a public trial with Murdoch on the witness stand. Earlier this year, a judge allowed voting software company Smartmatic's $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News to proceed, which is now in the discovery process. While Fox News was able to settle with Dominion Voting Systems last year for $787 million, Smartmatic attorney Erik Connolly said in 2023 he is "looking to take this case through trial" and that his clients want "the vindication of a jury verdict in their favor."

"We will be ready to defend this case surrounding extremely newsworthy events when it goes to trial, likely in 2025," a Fox News spokesperson said last year.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World