Fox News RSS Feed

MAINE — A new round of explosive allegations has put Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner back in the spotlight ahead of Tuesday’s primary, but voters who spoke to Fox News Digital were split on whether the scandals would affect their vote.

"It's not a good situation," said Jeff from Waterloo, Maine, one of the residents interviewed outside a shopping plaza in Biddeford, adding that choosing the "lowest common denominator" should not be the answer.

"I am a conservative, but he's just got so much baggage that I think if the Democrats want to have a winner, they're going to have to find somebody else because he's not the guy, just too much," he said.

‘HE HATED WOMEN’: EXPLOSIVE ABUSE, NEW NAZI TATTOO ALLEGATIONS FROM EXES ROCK PLATNER'S CAMPAIGN

Sheila from Harrison, Maine, said the scandals would "absolutely" weigh on her vote.

She said Platner lacks the judgment and values she expects from someone serving in Congress.

"Anyone who's representing our country or representing us in Congress needs to be held to a higher standard, and I don't think he's got any standards," she said.

Just days before Maine's Democratic Senate primary, former girlfriends told The New York Times that Platner engaged in heavy drinking, experienced violent episodes and discussed rape fantasies, accusations Platner has denied.

DEMOCRATIC MAINE SENATE CANDIDATE GRAHAM PLATNER CONFRONTED BY MS NOW HOST ABOUT TATTOO CONTROVERSY

The Marine Corps veteran also faced criticism over a string of controversies, including reports that he sent sexually explicit messages to younger women, a Nazi-linked tattoo and online comments mocking a Purple Heart veteran.

While some voters said Platner raised red flags, others remained unfazed.

Asked whether Platner's comments about women bothered her, Ellen from Acton, Maine, said, "When it comes to my vote, no."

SENATE CANDIDATE GRAHAM PLATNER SENT EXPLICIT TEXTS TO MULTIPLE WOMEN WHILE MARRIED, WIFE SAYS: REPORT

"I trust his wife," she said. "She knows him better than anybody. He is far from perfect. Most of this, my understanding, happened during a tough time in his life. The recent accusations, yes, they're more recent, but again, I trust her to know who he is morally.

"I do think that, as a representative of Maine, aside from what he may do in his marriage, he's going to do a good job for me," she added.

Jane from Wells, Maine, said her plans to vote for Platner haven’t changed.

"I still like him," she said. "Oh yes. I love him."

Jessica from Biddeford, Maine, said she was not following the controversy surrounding Platner because she ignores the news, arguing that the media distracts people from "the issues that are important."

"We're better together as one instead of fighting each other over things that don't matter," she said.

Platner will appear on the ballot alongside David Costello and Janet Mills in Maine's Democratic Senate primary on June 9, with the winner advancing to face incumbent five-term Republican Sen. Susan Collins in November.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/9U4PbGj
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., criticized four fellow Republicans who joined Democrats to block an effort to add the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act to the Senate's reconciliation package, saying "you can't explain it to me why you wouldn't vote for voter ID."

During Thursday's vote-a-rama, Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Thom Tillis, R-N.C., voted with Democrats to defeat an amendment that would have attached the election-integrity measure to the GOP's budget package.

"I guess it's frustration," Hawley told Fox News Digital. "Listen, we've been doing this in Missouri for years. I mean voters in my state put it in our constitution."

FOUR SENATE REPUBLICANS AGAIN UNITE WITH DEMS TO BLOCK TRUMP'S SAVE AMERICA ACT

"Voter ID is the most popular thing out there," he continued. "There's a reason for that. People want their elections to be safe, they want them to be fair. And to me, you can't explain it to me, why you wouldn't vote for voter ID. I just don't understand it."

Republicans, yet again, failed to pass the legislation Thursday night through the Senate, despite months debating the importance of attaching it to the roughly $70 billion budget reconciliation package to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol.

REPUBLICANS FAIL TO ATTACH SAVE AMERICA ACT TO PARTY-LINE FUNDING PACKAGE

Many senators who voted to block the SAVE act argued that a bill dedicated to voter ID laws and protecting election integrity should be determined at state-level, and should not have federal jurisdiction.

Hawley rejected arguments that election rules should be left solely to the states, arguing Congress has long played a role in regulating federal elections.

"We make federal rules all the time for elections, you know," Hawley said. "I mean all the time we do. And there's nothing more basic than protecting the integrity of the ballot and that's what this is about."

PENCE URGES SENATE TO ‘RESTORE PUBLIC CONFIDENCE’ WITH NATIONWIDE VOTER ID LAW

Congress has enacted numerous election-related laws over the years, including the bipartisan Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022, which revised procedures for certifying presidential election results.

The SAVE Act would require applicants to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections and would require voters to present photo identification when casting a ballot in federal elections.

"37 states have voter ID already including several blue states," Hawley said in response to the idea that election rules should be left to the state. "So I think this idea that this is like ‘this is weird, this is exotic, this is out there,’ no it's not. Like most of our states do it." 

"Sooner or later this is going to happen because I think the American people are going to demand it."

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/DIOU9Lp
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

Customs and Border Protection stopped two separate vehicles and confiscated over $300,000 worth of narcotics over the span of a day.

The apprehensions continue to demonstrate the high volume of narcotics that smugglers are attempting to bring across the southern U.S. border, even as immigration numbers have plummeted in recent months.

On Sunday, May 17, agents at the San Ysidro Port of Entry referred a 2013 Honda Civic for secondary inspection. After an imaging system detected anomalies in the car’s firewall, they discovered six packages of white fentanyl powder worth roughly $113,600 along with 8.4 pounds of cocaine worth an estimated $161,600.

CBP OFFICERS SEIZE OVER $14M OF ALLEGED METHAMPHETAMINE AT SOUTHERN BORDER

That same day at the Calexico East Port of Entry, about 100 miles away, a 2011 Nissan Cube was also sent to secondary inspection. Agents there discovered 63 packets of methamphetamine after a scan of that vehicle detected anomalies in its flooring.

Officials praised both detections.

"Sunday may be a day of rest for many, but criminals don’t take days off, and neither do our CBP officers," San Diego Director of Field Operations Sidney Aki said

"Our officers remain vigilant around the clock, and these significant seizures are a direct result of their commitment to keeping dangerous drugs like these from entering our country."

SOUTHERN BORDER APPREHENSIONS PLUNGE MORE THAN 90% FROM YEAR AGO IN APRIL, CBP SAYS

The agency believes its operations are a continuation of efforts laid out by President Donald Trump and DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin, even as immigration border crossings have come down.

Since the end of 2024, border crossings have plummeted, going from over 144,000 encounters in December 2024 to just 10,000 in April.

Even so, CBP has reported several high-profile smuggling attempts that have sought to bring weapons, narcotics and humans across the U.S. border.

ARREST OF GANG MEMBER CONVICTED OF MURDER PUTS DEM STATE’S SANCTUARY POLICIES ON BLAST

Recently, CBP has released reports on how it had prevented a car carrying a rocket-propelled grenade launcher from crossing the border, detected dozens of immigrants crammed into a semi-truck and even detained a boat off the coast of the Dominican Republic with the help of a Black Hawk helicopter.

"CBP officers along the southwest border stop illegal activity, including the smuggling of drugs and humans, and facilitate lawful entry for millions of legitimate travelers into the United States," CBP said in a statement.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/3fJYLor
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

A routine traffic stop spiraled into chaos when a handcuffed suspect allegedly commandeered a Dallas police cruiser, drove off with an officer in the back seat and bailed out while the vehicle was still moving, authorities said.

Newly released body camera and dash camera footage captured the moments leading up to the suspect's escape from his restraints and the dramatic chain of events that followed.

Police said the incident began around 5:35 p.m. on May 30 after two officers conducted a traffic stop in the 2300 block of South Marsalis Avenue.

Stacey Huffman, 37, was arrested and placed in the back seat of a patrol car while handcuffed.

WATCH: VIDEO SHOWS SUSPECT PUSH TROOPER TO GROUND BEFORE STEALING PATROL CRUISER ON CHRISTMAS DAY

Video recorded inside the vehicle appears to show Huffman slipping his left hand out of the handcuffs before concealing his hands behind his back.

As officers began transporting him to jail, Huffman allegedly attempted to open the locked rear door and removed his seatbelt.

Officers stopped the squad car on Interstate 35 around 6:10 p.m. to further restrain Huffman, according to police.

ILLINOIS MAN'S MEMORIAL DAY WEEKEND IN KEY WEST WAS DERAILED AFTER HE WENT BAR HOPPING IN A STOLEN POLICE CAR

Moments later, as both officers exited the vehicle, Huffman allegedly climbed into the driver's seat and sped away.

One officer managed to enter the back seat before the vehicle took off and deployed his Taser, but police said it was ineffective after Huffman pulled the wires away.

The officer can be heard repeatedly shouting, "Stop the car!" as Huffman allegedly continued accelerating.

WILD VIDEO SHOWS MASKED RUFFIANS ATTACKING POLICE CRUISER WITH OFFICER INSIDE DURING ILLEGAL STREET TAKEOVER

Police said the officer then drew his duty weapon and struck Huffman on the side of the head after he accelerated the vehicle.

Video shows the officer being violently tossed around the back seat as the patrol car swerved down the roadway.

Authorities said Huffman opened the driver's-side door while traveling at approximately 50 mph and jumped from the moving vehicle.

WILD VIDEO SHOWS MAN SWIPE DELIVERY TRUCK WITH FEMALE EMPLOYEE STILL INSIDE

The patrol car traveled roughly 1,000 feet during the incident, according to police. The video indicates that Huffman was in control of the vehicle for about 30 seconds.

Immediately after Huffman exited the vehicle, the officer lunged into the front seat and regained control of the patrol car, avoiding a potential crash.

Huffman was rendered unconscious and taken back into custody, officers said. Both Huffman and the officer were transported to a local hospital for treatment.

Huffman is expected to face charges including driving while license invalid, possession of a controlled substance, unlawful possession of a firearm, unauthorized use of a motor vehicle and escape from custody.

The incident remains under investigation.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/bHyNXmE
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

A very high-ranking Trump White House official once told me the key to the president's behavior.

It happens when his advisors talk him into something that he doesn't particularly want to do.

The next time he's around reporters, this person says, President Trump will blurt out what he really thinks.

He'll either walk it back, soften the language, create confusion or flatly contradict what he said a couple of days before. It's his way of rebelling against being handled.

And, of course, he'll lash out at Republicans who disagree with him, post insulting messages, or endorse their primary opponents.

To Trump, that's just counterpunching.

RELATED: TRUMP SUFFERS RARE HOUSE DEFEAT AS BIPARTISAN VOTE MOVES TO WITHDRAW TROOPS FROM IRAN CONFLICT

After the House narrowly voted Wednesday to invoke the War Powers Act, to force an end to the Iran conflict, four Republicans — Thomas Massie, Warren Davidson, Brian Fitzpatrick and Tom Barrett — broke with their party.

Trump's Truth Social response:

"Yesterday, in a meaningless vote, the House voted, 4 bad Republicans and all of the Democrats, to limit my War Powers, right in the middle of my final negotiations to end the War with the Islamic Republic of Iran," Trump wrote. "Who would do such an unpatriotic thing? They know where the negotiations stand. The Democrats are fueled by Trump Derangement Syndrome. They would rather have our Country fail than give me another, of many, victories. The four Republicans, that's a whole other story – They're GRANDSTANDERS! They should be ashamed of themselves."

And I'm sure there will be more to come.

Even if the 215-208 vote is followed by Senate approval, Trump can simply veto it. And there is a legal dispute about whether Congress can actually undermine the commander-in-chief, given that presidents of both parties have waged undeclared wars.

An even sharper example involves the $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" fund that triggered on-the-record outrage from Republicans as well as Democrats. The idea that the bulk of the money would go to the Jan. 6 rioters who beat up cops and threatened lawmakers struck a very deep chord among members who were in the Capitol on that dark and depressing day in 2021.

Trump could see this was a losing issue — or was persuaded of that — and after a leak that he was considering abandoning the project, he said it was dead. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said it was dead.

RELATED: GOP ADVANCES ICE FUNDING PACKAGE AFTER FORCING TRUMP'S CONTROVERSIAL $2B FUND RETREAT

But the next time he saw reporters, he pried open the crypt door he had supposedly shut.

He absolutely unloaded on CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins for asking why he had changed his mind about what everyone was calling a slush fund — in other words, doing her job.

"So, I love it. I think it's so important… What happened to great people, great American people, the way they were victimized, the way they were savaged, you have suicides, they killed themselves. They were bankrupt. They were weaponized by the Biden administration, by a bunch of thugs, including Obama people. And like nobody's probably ever been. I mean, I can think of maybe two instances in this country where they've had it to somewhere [at] that extent. I'm not even sure if it was so much," Trump said. "They were put in jail for long periods of time. They were accused of things that never happened. They had prosecutors that were radical lunatics, and their lives were destroyed. And frankly, we had a lawsuit that, against us on the weaponization where the judge, a radical left judge, ruled against it. And we'll see how that all works out. But a radical left judge ruled against it."

We'll see how it all works out.

Is it dead?

"I'd have to ask the lawyers," Trump said.

Uh, the lawyers work for him.

The president wasn't done.

"But these people, their lives have been destroyed. Their families have been destroyed — many of them. I'm not just talking about a few people," he said. "Many have been destroyed, many of them. I'm not just talking about a few people. Many of them. I'm one of them, I look, they raided my house, Mar-a-Lago. That never happened. Nobody ever thought of anything like that."

And then it got really personal.

"They're crooked as hell. CNN's a very corrupt organization, but, with a corrupt reporter standing right there. Never smiles. You never— she's a young, beautiful woman. Never smiles, I never see a smile off her face, I see her standing there with hatred in her eyes. She has hatred because we have borders, because we have a strong military, because we cut our taxes, because we do things that everybody wanted. And then we win our election in a massive landslide. We win 87 percent of the counties in this country," Trump said.

CNN's response: "Kaitlan Collins is an exceptional journalist, reporting every day from the White House and the field with real depth and tenacity. She skillfully brings that reporting to the anchor chair and CNN platforms every day, which audiences around the world know they can trust."

So is the fund again showing signs of life? Who knows?

Trump was just saying what he really believed all along.

The Senate failed Thursday by one vote to ban any attempt to revive the fund. The tally was held open for hours as the leadership tried to count noses. They have the option of trying again to drive a stake through the project. These guys want it in writing.

The larger takeaway is that Trump's iron grip on the party has loosened just a bit. After 16 months in which GOP lawmakers gave him virtually anything he wanted, the slush fund prodded them into realizing they could chart their own path and (mostly) survive — and that sentiment seems contagious right now.

What's more, while Trump's MAGA support remains rock solid, the swing vote in the midterms will be independents as well as disillusioned Republicans. And that's why putting a little distance between themselves and the president seems like a sensible course of action.

At least until the next Trump controversy erupts, any moment now.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/KObdxT0
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

On Nov. 4, 1979, I was serving as duty officer at the headquarters of the 8th Infantry Division in Bad Kreuznach, West Germany. Late that day, a message arrived: Radical Iranian revolutionaries had stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and seized dozens of Americans. My job was to carry that report to the division commander, Maj. Gen. William J. Livsey, and keep him informed as the situation developed.

No special orders came down. No one fully grasped that we were watching the birth of a geopolitical problem that would outlast the Cold War, consume seven American presidencies, and remain unsettled half a century later.

That seizure exposed something beyond a diplomatic humiliation: When the embassy fell, America did not even have a military command responsible for the Persian Gulf. CENTCOM did not yet exist. The hostage crisis, followed weeks later by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, forced the realization. President Carter stood up the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force in March 1980 — the organization that became today’s CENTCOM in January 1983. The 1979 embassy seizure did not merely embarrass a superpower. It restructured how America organizes itself to fight in the Middle East.

FROM HOSTAGE CRISIS TO ASSASSINATION PLOTS: IRAN’S NEAR HALF-CENTURY WAR ON AMERICANS

Today, as Washington negotiates a tentative 60-day memorandum of understanding to extend the ceasefire, reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and establish a framework for nuclear talks, I keep returning to that November evening in Bad Kreuznach. The particulars have changed. The fundamental dynamic has not.

Washington’s current headlines focus on ceasefires, sanctions relief, Iran’s 440-kilogram stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% — a short technical step from weapons-grade — and competing memorandums of understanding. Those details matter. But they are not the central story.

The central story is one of strategic patience. For 47 years, every American administration has tried some combination of deterrence, diplomacy, sanctions, covert operations, and direct military force to change Iran’s behavior. Seven presidents pursued different approaches and produced different results. The regime has outlasted all of them.

WHY THE MIDDLE EAST AGREES WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP MORE THAN AMERICA REALIZES

The clerical government survived the Iran-Iraq War, crippling economic pressure, domestic uprisings, cyberattacks against its nuclear infrastructure, targeted assassinations of senior commanders, Operation Midnight Hammer, and now Operation Epic Fury. Through all of it, the objective in Tehran never shifted.

They mean to survive.

THE REAL IRAN THREAT IS IN BLACK AND WHITE: IT'S EVEN IN THEIR CONSTITUTION

That may sound unimpressive. It is not. Survival is not a byproduct of Iran’s strategy — it is the strategy. Understanding that distinction is what separates clear-eyed analysis from the wishful thinking that has distorted Washington’s Iran policy for five decades.

The reason Washington keeps misreading Tehran is not a lack of intelligence. It is a failure of imagination. Americans instinctively view Iran as a conventional nation-state pursuing recognizable geopolitical interests. We assume that enough pressure or inducement will eventually persuade Tehran to behave like a normal member of the international community. That assumption has been wrong for 47 years.

Iran’s clerical rulers do not see themselves as managers of a nation-state. They see themselves as guardians of a revolutionary project launched in 1979 and divinely mandated to resist what they regard as permanent Western hostility. Sanctions relief is useful. Diplomatic legitimacy is welcome. But neither objective overrides the imperative to protect the regime itself.

THINK WE'RE LOSING THE WAR IN IRAN? CONSIDER WHERE THINGS REALLY STAND

In my book "Preparing for World War III," I argued that America’s principal adversaries think in terms of decades rather than election cycles. They absorb setbacks and pursue long-term strategic positions. That observation applies to China and Russia. It applies with equal force to Iran. In "Kings of the East," I warned that authoritarian regimes possess a strategic patience that democracies struggle to match because their leaders are not constrained by election calendars or media cycles. Tehran has demonstrated both principles for half a century.

This distinction explains the negotiating pattern we keep witnessing. Each new proposal generates cautious optimism. Then new conditions emerge. Timelines shift. Demands multiply. The head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization has already said Iran will not accept limits on its nuclear enrichment. Foreign Minister Araghchi stated last year that enrichment is a nonnegotiable right. Iranian lawmakers called it "a red line" and "an inalienable right." The memorandum of understanding under discussion would address what happens to existing enriched material — but the right to enrich again remains Iran’s hill to die on.

Consider the pattern across the full timeline. The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action capped enrichment at 3.67% and limited stockpiles to 300 kilograms. Iran accepted those terms and used the sanctions relief to rebuild its regional network. Trump withdrew in 2018. Tehran then systematically rolled back every constraint — raising enrichment to 20%, then beyond 60% — until military force disrupted the program again.

ANY NEW IRAN DEAL SHOULD BE JUDGED BY RESULTS, NOT VICTORY-LAP RHETORIC

The deeper lesson is not structural — it is theological. Ayatollah Khomeini did not build the Islamic Republic as a government that could be negotiated into normal statehood. He built it as a revolution with a divine mandate. His successors inherited that mandate. No memorandum of understanding renegotiates a creed. If the talks produce a deal, Iran will parse every provision for leverage. If they collapse, Tehran will absorb the damage, reconstitute where possible, and present itself to the Muslim world as the power that defied America again.

Either way, the regime’s revolutionary identity remains intact — and that is the truth no press release can paper over.

Diplomacy is preferable to another round of major military operations in the Middle East. No serious strategist should welcome an outcome that further destabilizes global energy markets, puts American forces at additional risk, or closes off any possibility of a durable settlement. President Trump deserves credit for pressing negotiations and for sustaining military pressure when Tehran stalled.

But successful diplomacy requires honest analysis, not wishful thinking. The danger is not that America negotiates with Iran. The danger is that America negotiates while assuming Tehran’s fundamental calculation has changed.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Nothing in the Islamic Republic’s record — across nine American administrations, two Israeli wars, and the most intensive sanctions campaign in modern history — supports that assumption. The regime that seized our embassy in 1979 built its entire identity around surviving American pressure. It has done so consistently ever since.

Forty-seven years after I carried that first message to General Livsey, Washington is still wrestling with the same adversary. The names have changed. The weapons have changed. The uranium enrichment percentages have changed.

The regime’s core objective has not.

Tehran is playing the long game again — and the memorandum of understanding on the table may only buy time for the next round. The question is whether Washington finally negotiates as a realist — or whether we walk in, as we have so often before, as the more eager party at the table.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM ROBERT MAGINNIS

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/3ahleVN
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

Scott Pelley went down swinging.

For that, he is being widely praised as a journalistic hero by the media-industrial complex.

And also widely mocked as a self-promoting phony.

Let’s face it, the onetime CBS anchor wanted to be fired – and made sure it happened.

BATTLE BETWEEN BARI WEISS AND ‘60 MINUTES’ EXPLODES AS SCOTT PELLEY ACCUSES HER OF MURDERING THE SHOW

He gave Bari Weiss and the program’s new boss, tech journalist Nick Bilton, not the slightest opening for trying to work together to see how it goes.

Once you accuse Weiss, the editor-in-chief, of "murdering" the show you’ve been on for more than two decades, you are in full bridge-burning mode.

Once you confront your new boss, Bilton, by calling him minimally qualified – and Weiss not at all – you are handing them the rope.

SCOTT PELLEY FIRED AT CBS NEWS AFTER BLOWUPS WITH BARI WEISS, NEW '60 MINUTES' PRODUCER

Weiss, in damage-control mode, told the staff "there must be trust and mutual respect…That foundation was broken on Monday, and despite our attempts to engage with Scott Pelley and to find a way back, unfortunately we weren’t able to do so, and so we had to part ways.

"We did not want that to happen, but that’s the path that he chose. That unfortunate outcome does not discount from the amazing contributions and work that Scott Pelley has done for CBS and for ‘60 Minutes’ over the course of his career."

The British-born Bilton got his revenge in a blistering letter to Pelley:

"You hijacked my first meeting with staff to disparage me, my qualifications, and my intentions with remarkable incivility and contempt." He called this a "performative display of hostility enacted in front of the staff."

Pelley, for his part, says the new management has already handled some of his stories unethically.

At least one person was pleased. "Look, Scott Pelley’s a stiff," President Trump told the New York Post. "And he’s afraid. And he’s part of this gang of stupid, crooked people that don’t care about our country."

Let’s pull back the camera. Weiss has fired correspondents Sharyn Alfonsi and Cecilia Vegas and executive producer Tanya Simon. Anderson Cooper quit to return full time to CNN. (And the "CBS Evening News" has been a ratings disaster under anchor Tony Dokoupil.)

SCOTT PELLEY HAS HEATED CONFRONTATION WITH NEW '60 MINUTES' BOSS, ACCUSES BARI WEISS OF 'MURDERING' SHOW

The left caricatures Weiss as a crazy conservative, though that’s not true (she’s more of a moderate liberal with some right-leaning views). But she and Bilton, who have worked together in the past, both have no TV experience. 

If you examine it from an if-it-ain’t-broke perspective, "60 Minutes," across Manhattan’s 10th Avenue from the main building, produces $200 million in advertising revenue for the network. Its ratings are up 9 percent from last year. After 58 seasons, dating back to Mike Wallace and Morley Safer, it is averaging 9.1 million weekly viewers, an impressive figure in today’s fractured environment. And there’s been significant growth on the digital side.

So for an average viewer who doesn’t follow all the inside baseball, a lot of familiar faces are disappearing from the most successful news franchise in television history. It’s the show’s worst crisis since 1995, when CBS killed Wallace’s story on a tobacco whistleblower’s disclosures because it feared a multi-billion-dollar lawsuit. 

In a lengthy statement after his exit, Pelley said "good people were silenced because they stood up for our audience…

"For my part, new management has instructed me to inject falsehoods and bias into a politically sensitive story. I’ve been told to include assertions that are unverified," though he has managed to ignore these instructions or refuse them."

And there was this: "In a case involving one of my stories, the entire program came within 19 minutes of not getting on the air at all."

Pelley told the New York Times on Tuesday: "I have been in combat in
Afghanistan. I have been in combat in Iraq. I have been in the war zone in Ukraine multiple times, risking my life and the happiness of my family because of my devotion to the broadcast."

Yet that brought him some ridicule because he was not actually "in combat," nor was that his job.

CBS NEWS CHIEFS TOLD SCOTT PELLEY THEY WANTED HIM TO STAY ON ‘60 MINUTES’ BEFORE TENSE CLASH WITH NEW PRODUCER

Pelley, 68, was raised in Lubbock, Texas, and worked in local television before joining CBS in 1989. He considered  another Texan, Dan Rather, a mentor, but lacked the same cowboy swagger. Pelley’s demeanor has always been sober and serious. 

He made his way up the ladder with such jobs as chief White House correspondent, and has won 51 Emmy Awards. 

The political overlay is hard to miss. The new owners of CBS, Oracle cofounder Larry Ellison and his son David, are billionaire friends of Trump. In fact, they threw a private dinner to honor Trump in April, attended by Bari Weiss as well as Norah O’Donnell and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche. Their company obtained the administration’s approval to buy Warner Bros. Discovery in a blockbuster deal.

Some at CBS believed the dinner projected an image of excessive coziness with the White House. But the Ellisons didn’t spend that kind of money without planning to make changes. 

Reaction to this mess has been, well, pretty intense on both sides, as reported by Mediaite:

MSNOW host Rachel Maddow said "I made a crack there talking about the Scott Pelley news as being sort of Hungarian, oligarchic-style takeover of the media." 

Tim Miller, a onetime Republican spokesman who is fiercely anti-Trump, siad "60 doesnt have another Pelley in the pipeline talent-wise."

Liberal commentator Harry Sisson said Pelley was battling "right wing grifters." 

Tommy Vietor, an Obama White House official, cracked: "Pelley seems to be attempting a murder/suicide. So far he’s halfway there." 

SUBSCRIBE TO HOWIE'S MEDIA BUZZMETER PODCAST, A RIFF ON THE DAY'S HOTTEST STORIES

On the conservative side, Outkick founder Clay Travis said: "Scott Pelley has been fired by ‘60 Minutes.’ Pelley will soon find out that no one else in media will come close to paying him millions a year to do a few stories a year. I think a lot of these old school TV guys are delusional about their market worth in today’s media." 

Newsmax host Rob Schmitt was dismissive: "Scott Pelley was a mid talent with an ego the size of Jupiter. Adios."

Steve Krakauer, Megyn Kelly’s producer:"With Stephen Colbert and Scott Pelley now out the door at CBS, we're seeing the systematic elimination of smug, old, straight, white guys who think they're better than you."

So Pelley departs in a swirling cloud of controversy – but I’m sure he won’t have trouble finding another job.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/Yyjvq9z
via IFTTT