Tag Archives: Fox News Channel

Fox & Friend-ly Fire?

Of all the odd statements, verbal tics, word salads, and tweets coming from Il Douché, the ones that strike my ear most clangorously are the ones like this:

Screen Shot 2017-06-23 at 1.04.38 PM

It’s that overly proud “Enjoy!” (also used in the covfefe kerfuffle) that grates. He’s the President, I don’t need to “Enjoy!” his televised appearances; I just want to be assured that there’s an adult at the wheel. That “Enjoy!” makes him sound less like a world leader than a Chef explaining the dish he’s prepared: “Today, we’ll be having a foreign policy pigeon a la Russe, with ketchup and mayonnaise. And on the side: spaghetti Putin-esca dusted with a secret Spicer blend. Enjoy!”

As for the interview itself, it was just as you’d expect. Of course they sent Ainsley Earhardt, because, other than bragging about how much he knows to military strongmen, Tr**p likes nothing more than bragging about how much he knows to a blonde woman.

(But first—he’d never heard the word “unmasking” before?)

And he wants to make sure she knows the reason he didn’t tape Comey had something  to do with government surveillance (and, of course Obama), which makes you wonder: he didn’t record them because he’s worried that the government might record them. He’s been in office for six months. You’d think he’s realize he is the government.

It would appear, though, that his lawyers have gotten to him. He had the phrase “I didn’t tape” set on repeat.  But even with Earhardt lobbing him softball questions and stroking him with compliments, managed to incriminate himself.  When she gushed that pretending to have tapes “was a smart way to keep [Comey] honest,” you could see his chest inflate and his eye brows rise as he leaned in conspiratorially. “It wasn’t stupid,” he told her (although admitting he made a threat to influence a witness’ testimony probably was), proud that he got Comey to change his story and admit that he wasn’t under investigation.  (It may have been the case when he met with Comey but, to quote Ron Ziegler, “that statement is no longer operative.”)

But before he could get himself in too deep, Earhardt threw him a line and asked about Mueller. Returning to his lawyers advice, he put “there was no obstruction, there was no collusion” on auto-repeat, adding “virtually everyone agrees to that,” notwithstanding the fact that probably everyone in that room didn’t agree to that.

If enjoyment was the objective here, I’ll have to take it for later, when interviews like this could be used as evidence in an impeachment trial.


When Did Fox News Becomes So Sensitive?

Bob Bechel was always Fox News version of a “liberal”: rumpled, his honk of a voice scuffed by years of cigarettes, whiskey, and screaming, a little bloated, either coming off of or just about to start a five-day bender. On “The Five”, he made the perfect punching bag for Eric Bolling, a barrel-chested bully, and Greg Gutfield, the 50-ish former editor of Maxim who is Fox’s idea of a young person. And they fired him for “for making an insensitive remark to an African-American employee.”
Given what is said on camera about African-Americans (and didn’t Sean Hannity, Presidential Proctologist recently point a loaded gun at Juan Williams), you have to wonder what, exactly, he said…

%d bloggers like this: