All posts tagged "rupert murdoch"

Trump knows one man has the strength to finish him off

By Andrew Dodd, Professor of Journalism, The University of Melbourne and Matthew Ricketson, Professor of Communication, Deakin University.

If Rupert Murdoch becomes a white knight standing up to a rampantly bullying US president, the world has moved into the upside-down.

This is, after all, the media mogul whose US television network, Fox News, actively supported Donald Trump’s Big Lie about the 2020 presidential election result and paid out a $787 million lawsuit for doing so.

It is also the network that supplied several members of Trump’s inner circle, including former Fox host, now controversial Defense Secretary, Pete Hegseth.

But that is where we are after Trump filed a writ on July 18 after Murdoch’s financial newspaper, The Wall Street Journal, published an article about a hand-drawn card Trump is alleged to have sent to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in 2003. The newspaper reported:

A pair of small arcs denotes the woman’s breasts, and the future president’s signature is a squiggly “Donald” below her waist, mimicking pubic hair.

The Journal said it has seen the letter but did not republish it. The letter allegedly concluded:

Happy Birthday – and may every day be another wonderful secret.

The card was apparently Trump’s contribution to a birthday album compiled for Epstein by the latter’s partner, Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence after being found guilty of sex trafficking in 2021.

Trump was furious. He told his Truth Social audience he had warned Murdoch the letter was fake. He wrote, “Mr Murdoch stated that he would take care of it but obviously did not have the power to do so,” referring to Murdoch handing leadership of News Corporation to his eldest son Lachlan in 2023.

Trump is being pincered. On one side, The Wall Street Journal is a respected newspaper that speaks to literate, wealthy Americans who remain deeply sceptical about Trump’s radical initiative on tariffs, which it described in an editorial as “the dumbest trade war in history.”

On the other side is the conspiracy theory-thirsty MAGA base who have been told for years that there was a massive conspiracy around Epstein’s apparent suicide in 2019 that included the so-called deep state, Democrat elites and, no doubt, the Clintons.

Trump, who loves pro wrestling as well as adopting its garish theatrics, might characterize his lawsuit against Murdoch as a smackdown to rival Hulk Hogan vs Andre the Giant in the 1980s.

To adopt wrestling argot, though, it is a rare battle between two heels.

Friendship of powerful convenience

Murdoch and Trump’s relationship is longstanding but convoluted. The key to understanding it is that both men are ruthlessly transactional.

Exposure in Murdoch’s New York Post in the 1980s and ‘90s was crucial to building Trump’s reputation.

Not that Murdoch particularly likes Trump. Yes, Murdoch attended his second inauguration, albeit in a back row behind the newly favoured big tech media moguls. He was also seen sitting in the Oval Office a few days later looking quite at home.

But this was pure power-display politics, not the behaviour of a friend.

Remember Murdoch’s derision on hearing Trump was considering standing for office before the 2016 election, and his promotion of Ron DeSantis in the primaries before Trump’s second term. Murdoch’s political hero has always been Ronald Reagan. Trump has laid waste to the Republican Party of Reagan.

Murdoch knows what the rest of sane America knows: Trump is downright weird, if not dangerous. This, of course, only makes Murdoch’s complicity in Trump’s rise to power, and Fox News’ continued boosterism of Trump, all the more appalling.

But, in keeping with Murdoch’s relationship to power throughout his career, what he helps make, he also helps destroy. Perhaps now it’s Trump’s turn to be unmade. As a former Murdoch lieutenant told The Financial Times:

He’s testing out: Is Trump losing his base? And where do I need to be to stay in the heart of the base?

And here is Murdoch’s great advantage, and his looming threat.

Double-edged sword

The advantage comes with the scope of Murdoch’s media empire, which operates like a federation of different mastheads, each with their own market and aspirations. While Fox News panders to the MAGA base, and The New York Post juices its New York audience, The Wall Street Journal speaks, and listens, to business. Each audience has different needs, meaning they’re often presented with the same news in very different ways, or sometimes different news entirely.

Like a federation, though, News Corp uses its various operations to drive the type of change that affects all its markets.

It might work like this. The Wall Street Journal breaks a story that’s so shocking it begins to chip away at MAGA’s unquestioning loyalty of Trump. This process is, of course, willingly aided by the rest of the media. The resulting groundswell eventually allows Fox News and the Post to tentatively follow their audiences into questioning, and then perhaps criticising, Trump.

The threat is that before that groundswell builds, Murdoch is seriously vulnerable to criticism from a still dominant Trump, who can turn conspiracy-prone audiences away from Fox News with just a social media post. Trump has already been busy doing just that, saying he is looking forward to getting Murdoch onto the witness stand for his lawsuit.

If the Fox audience decides it’s the proprietor who’s behind this denigration of Trump, they may decide to boycott their own favoured media channel, even though Fox’s programming hasn’t yet started questioning Trump.

The Murdochs’ fear of audience backlash was a major factor in Fox’s promulgation of the Big Lie after Trump’s defeat in 2020. The fear their audience might defect to Newsmax or some other right-wing media outfit is just as real today.

History littered with fakery

We also need to consider that Trump might be right. What if the letter is a fake?

Murdoch has form when it comes to high-profile exposés that turn out to be fiction. Who can forget the Hitler Diaries in 1983, which we now know Murdoch knew were fake before he published.

Think also of the Pauline Hanson photos, allegedly of her posing in lingerie, all of which were quickly proved to be fake after they were published by Murdoch’s Australian tabloids in 2009.

There was also The Sun’s despicable and wilfully wrong campaign against Elton John in 1987 and the same paper’s continued denigration of the people of Liverpool following the Hillsborough stadium disaster in 1989.

But while Murdoch’s News Corp has a history of confection and fakery, the Wall Street Journal has a reputation for straight reportage, albeit through a conservative lens. Since Murdoch bought it in 2007, it has been engaged in its own internal battle for editorial standards.

Media rolling over

What Trump won’t get from Murdoch is the same acquiescence he’s enjoyed from ABC and CBS, which have handed over tens of millions of dollars in defamation settlements following dubious claims by Trump about the nature of their coverage.

In December 2024, ABC’s owner Disney settled and agreed to pay $15 million to Trump’s presidential library. The president sued after a presenter said Trump was found guilty of raping E. Jean Carroll.

Trump had actually been found guilty by a jury in a civil trial of sexually abusing and defaming Carroll and was ordered to pay her $5 million.

CBS’ parent company, Paramount, did similarly after being sued by the president, agreeing in early July to settle and pay $16 million to Trump’s library. This was despite earlier saying the case was “completely without merit”.

Beware the legal microscope

From Trump’s viewpoint, two prominent media companies have been cowed. But his campaign against critical media doesn’t stop there.

Last week, Congress passed a bill cancelling federal funding for the country’s two public-service media outlets, the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and National Public Radio (NPR).

Also last week, CBS announced the cancellation of Stephen Colbert’s stridently critical comedy show, although CBS claims this is just a cost-cutting exercise and not about appeasing a bully in the White House.

Presuming the reported birthday letter is real, Murdoch will not bend so easily. And that’s when it will be important to pay attention, because at some point Trump’s lawyers will advise him about the dangers of depositions and discovery: the legal processes that force parties to a dispute to reveal what they have and what they know.

If the Epstein files do implicate Trump, the legal fight won’t last long and the media campaign against him will only intensify.

Right now we have the spectre of Murdoch joining that other disaffected mogul, Elon Musk, in a moral crusade against Trump, the man they both helped make. The implications are head-spinning.

As global bullies, the three of them probably deserve each other. But we, the public, surely deserve better than any of them.

'Liars on notice!' Trump issues ominous threat as he collects millions in settlement

U.S. President Donald Trump took to social media Tuesday to rub salt in the wounds of CBS News by announcing he has now received the $16 million settlement amount agreed to earlier this month.

"BREAKING NEWS!" the president wrote. "We have just achieved a BIG AND IMPORTANT WIN in our Historic Lawsuit against 60 Minutes, CBS, and Paramount. Just like ABC and George Slopadopoulos, CBS and its Corporate Owners knew that they defrauded the American People, and were desperate to settle."

Trump sued "60 Minutes" over an October interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris that Trump claimed was edited "completely and corruptly" to change Harris's answers.

The settlement was seen as a way to appease Trump during Paramount's $28 billion merger with Skydance, which required sign-off by the Federal Communications Commission. Political satirist Stephen Colbert called the deal "a big fat bribe," and was fired shortly thereafter.

Trump's post continued, "Paramount/CBS/60 Minutes have today paid $16 Million Dollars in settlement, and we also anticipate receiving $20 Million Dollars more from the new Owners, in Advertising, PSAs, or similar Programming, for a total of over $36 Million Dollars."

Trump called the settlement "another in a long line of VICTORIES over the Fake News Media, who we are holding to account for their widespread fraud and deceit." He then threatened other outlets he has beef with, including The Wall Street Journal, which recently published a story about Jeffrey Epstein that he tried to quash. Trump filed a $10 billion suit against WSJ and owner Rupert Murdoch.

"The Failing New York Times, The Washington Post, MSDNC, CNN, and all other Mainstream Media Liars, are ON NOTICE that the days of them being allowed to deceive the American People are OVER. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"

Only one scandal could really hurt Trump — and make him more dangerous than ever

Elon Musk is probably chuckling as Trump flails — the firestorm around the Epstein documents arguably started when the Tesla and SpaceX owner tweeted that Trump was in the files. Which has led to some significant changes in the Trump/media/politics/deep-state landscape that it’s important to review. They include questions about the future of Trump, his cult followers, a possible power struggle between Trump and Rupert Murdoch, and JD Vance’s presidential ambitions.

To begin: if you want everything around the Epstein furor to make sense, all you have to understand is that Donald Trump has been leading a cult.

Like Jim Jones did. Like Charles Manson did. Like Rajneesh did here in Oregon. Unlike Manson, but more like Rajneesh and Jim Jones, however, Trump’s cult is fairly large and preexisted his appearance on the scene. And that’s part of his problem.

It’s large enough to have in it three kinds of people.

The first kind of person is the “true believer.” They make up most of the Trump cult members, what we call MAGA. They’re usually pretty much willing to overlook anything Dear Leader does, much like the devoted followers of Rajneesh and Jim Jones.

And then there are the “facilitators.” These are cynical people who don’t believe the cult leader’s BS, but go along with it — and even promote it — because it works to their benefit. They are typically parasitic. They usually make their money from the members of the cult, or get power from them (votes in this case), and often use their position in the cult to gain other benefits like sexual favors or fame.

In this case the facilitators are the Republican politicians who are begging money from their followers and voters, and then vote to screw those followers on behalf of the cult leader — Trump — and his billionaire friends. The morbidly rich keep the cult facilitators in line by funding their elections and, in the case of Republican Supreme Court justices, their lavish lifestyles.

When you understand that it’s a cult and that some of the people who seem high-up in it are true believers and not facilitators, suddenly Marjorie Taylor Greene’s behavior makes sense when she seems to attack Trump: she’s a true believer. She’s completely bought into the conspiracy nuttery that brought him to office twice.

You also begin to understand why Chuck Grassley ran that Senate judiciary committee the way he did to push through Emil Bove over the objections of the Democrats and literally hundreds of former lawyers, judges, and Department of Justice officials: Grassley is a cynical facilitator.

And you understand why the Republican congressman from Kentucky, Thomas Massey, has joined with Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna to demand release of the Epstein documents and essentially turned on Trump.

Massey represents the third kind of person in a cult, who only shows up typically toward the early stages of the collapse of the cult, and then presents a real danger to the cult leader.

This third category are “the true believers who have suddenly seen a crack in reality,” the false reality that the cult leader has created around them. You could call them former true believers.” Once they saw the light through that crack — saw the real world — they realized that they were being lied to.

When a cult is on the verge of collapse, these kinds of people become more and more numerous as more and more people begin to wake up from the cult leader’s trance.

At that point, they turn on the cult leader the way a spurned lover turns on the previous object of their affection. They become angry and vengeful. They demand answers. They want to know how they got sucked in and why: “Who did this to me? And to whose benefit?”

This is how Donald Trump’s world is disintegrating right now, and the danger is that, like Jim Jones, Charles Manson, and Rajneesh, he may destroy a lot of lives when he goes down.

He may not kill them like Jim Jones did — although he already arguably killed a half-million of his cult followers with the malicious, incompetent way he handled COVID — but he will destroy many of the people and institutions around him. This is what narcissists do when they begin to psychologically collapse.

As I noted two weeks ago, my late friend Armin Lehmann was there when he gave Hitler the information that the war was lost. He stood outside Hitler’s door when he shot himself. He wrote a book about it, and told me that Hitler wanted Germany destroyed by the Allies because the German people, he believed, had “let him down.”

This is “narcissistic collapse,” which I’ve written about several times over the past dozen or so years. Donald Trump is almost certainly going to hit this state of mind (he’s already close), and many of his “true believer” followers are in the midst of their own personal narcissistic collapses right now.

And that is what makes this a very dangerous moment for America.

Suing Murdoch, for example, was an extraordinarily reckless and dangerous thing for Trump to do. Newscorp isn’t going to roll over and pay Trump a bribe, in all probability, because he needs them more than they need him.

Murdoch, after all, is the guy who created the cult that Trump has come to dominate: they’re called “Fox News viewers.” He created it long before Trump came along: he and Roger Ailes simply let Trump into it back in 2015 because he was good for ratings and thus increased profits.

So, once Murdoch decided that Trump could benefit his cult and make money for his television network (and even lower his taxes), he let Donald believe that he was the leader of the cult. And for many people in that Fox “News” Viewer cult, Trump actually did become the leader.

But the real guy who controls the cult is Rupert Murdoch. It’s not Donald Trump. Trump is just today’s figurehead. Sort of like with the Catholic Church, Trump is the pope right now. But when the pope goes, he gets replaced.

The institution lives on, and you can bet your bottom dollar the Murdoch family is not going to let the cult that they’ve built with Fox “News,” the cult that has made them billions of dollars and given them the power to influence governments on three continents, dissolve.

They’ll jettison Trump long before they’ll let go of that kind of power.

The way Murdoch’s father, Sir Keith Murdoch, first created this cult back in the 1940s was by feeding the readers of his newspapers in Australia a steady diet of racist outrage, fear, and anger. As historian John C. McManus writes in his definitive book Fire and Fortitude: The US Army in the Pacific War, 1941-1943:

“As American soldiers began arriving in numbers during the early months of 1942, they were greeted with tremendous enthusiasm by the Australians, many of whom couldn’t hide their immense relief at the soothing presence of the GIs. … Appreciative crowds gathered at piers and station platforms to greet incoming ships and troop trains. Waving and cheering, they studied the newcomers with great curiosity.”

But Sir Keith Murdoch thought he could make a pile of money by turning Australians against Americans. Inflaming nationalist and xenophobic sentiments would sell papers, goose advertising, and make him rich.

Thus, as McManus documents:

“A chain of newspapers owned by Sir Keith Murdoch, father of latter-year media magnate Rupert Murdoch, earned a reputation among the yanks as relentlessly anti-American. Truth, a particularly brassy Melbourne tabloid, often published lurid tales of GI rapes of innocent Australian girls and seduction of married women.

“On occasion, Australian soldiers vented their frustration over such tales with violence. Small groups of Diggers roamed around some of the cities, beating up any American soldiers whom they saw dating local girls. … An American soldier was even shot and killed one morning as he emerged from the house of a married woman.”

Eventually, the hate against Americans that Murdoch had stirred up blossomed into full-fledged riots in multiple Australian cities, creating a real problem for the war effort but boosting Murdoch’s newspaper sales (and, presumably, profits) into the stratosphere as his papers developed their own cult following in Oz.

Keith then passed the cult and the media outlets that had created it along to Rupert, who then took his brand of cult-forming “journalism” (Fox called it “entertainment” when they were sued by Dominion Voting Systems) to England and then, ironically, to America.

By definition, people who live in a cult live in an unreality. A fictitious world. That’s the key to how the cult and its leaders control them: they convince the cult members that they’re the only ones who truly understand how the world works, that they have “secret knowledge,” and that everyone outside the cult is either blind, evil, or both.

This creates an us-versus-them narrative so powerful it replaces facts, isolates them from reality, and makes loyalty to the cult and its perceived leader more important than truth itself.

People who watch Fox “News,” for example, believe that what they hear on NPR is “liberal propaganda,” which is why they support defunding public broadcasting. What they actually hear on public broadcasting, however, is just the news. It reflects reality. Actual reality. But they think it’s liberal propaganda because their cult told them so.

In much the same way Jim Jones’ followers and Charles Manson’s followers didn’t listen to their friends when they tried to share reality with them or point out how they had been indoctrinated, brainwashed, and lied to, the people in the Fox “News” cult don’t want to listen to reality. They want the comfortable lies and the excuses for hate and outrage that they have wrapped themselves in for years.

Murdoch now has to make a tough decision. He’s already gotten most of what he needed from Trump — a massive tax break for himself and his family, and deregulation of the broadcast and internet space — so he only needs Trump now because Donald makes for good television.

But “good television” can work two ways for a public official, for or against them. If Trump has sufficiently pissed off Murdoch, or he thinks that Trump’s beginning to harm the GOP and thus the cult that the Murdoch family and their well-paid talent largely control, he could give Trump the old heave-ho.

So if Trump gets thrown out of the Fox “News” Viewer cult — essentially gets fired as the cult leader — the cult will continue. It would simply lose a very small percentage of its hard-core true believers who’d completely surrendered their personalities to Trump, and even those folks are probably retrievable.

The problem for Murdoch and other facilitators of the Fox “News” Viewer cult that Trump now leads is who will fill the vacuum that’ll be created when Trump is gone, whether it’s from natural causes or an impeachment or 25th Amendment action that Murdoch and Fox could provoke. Who will continue to defend the interests of the morbidly rich and the monopolistic parts of corporate America and become the next leader of the GOP?

JD Vance is unlikely to be able to fill Trump’s shoes, which has to be giving Murdoch heartburn. Vance has virtually no hold at all on the Fox “News” Viewer cult that Trump today dominates.

He is not beloved by the cult; if anything they think of him as weak and effeminate. He supposedly uses eyeliner. He married a brown-skinned woman and has brown-skin children. His wife refuses to adopt Christianity.

“He must be weak,” is the consensus across much of the white racist base that constitutes the MAGA-sphere.

Nonetheless, Vance himself apparently thinks he can take over for Donald. He’s deluding himself, of course, but he appears to believe it. Just look at how he just publicly demanded that Trump’s “artwork” be released by the Wall Street Journal or the FBI.

He knows a release of more damaging evidence of Trump’s long-term relationship with Epstein — and thus, in the minds of the cult followers, participation in the deep state conspiracy that exploits children while it runs the world — could inflict incredible damage on Trump, and even make Vance president.

What man who believes destiny and God want him to become president wouldn’t jump at something like that? Remember, JD Vance said the following about Donald Trump:

“I go back and forth between thinking Trump is a cynical asshole like Nixon … or that he’s America’s Hitler.”
“[Trump is] a disaster and a bad man. A morally reprehensible human being.”
“Fellow Christians, everyone is watching us when we apologize for this man.”

Vance understood the cult even before he cynically pretended he was part of it when he saw Trump was prevailing: like most other Republican politicians and the billionaires who fund them, he’s an exploiter, a cult “facilitator.”

It’s extremely unlikely, however, that he’ll ever become the leader of the Fox Viewer cult; it’s unlikely, in fact, that the subset of the Fox cult that has formed around Trump will survive as Trump followers.

As John Hobbes famously said, “Men heap together the mistakes of their lives and create a monster they call destiny.” With the Epstein revelations turning into a torrent, that’s now the story of Donald John Trump.

When Trump is gone — and that day will eventually come — his corner of the Fox “News” Viewer cult will most likely shatter back into dozens of smaller organizations, many of which will simply be returning to their roots: Proud Boys, Three Percenters, anti-abortion freaks, rightwing preachers hustling their congregations, etc.

After all, as Maureen Dowd points out, Trump has now become the deep state he once decried. He’s creating the very “FEMA Camps” that had Republicans and Fox “News” Viewer cult members hysterical when Obama was president.

He’s developing a masked, anonymous, unaccountable nationwide secret police force and is compiling massive amounts of intelligence on everyday Americans. Between his spy agencies and data brokers, he has access to anybody’s social media posts, emails, and medical and travel records. He’s given ICE full and unfettered access to everybody’s Medicaid and other government records.

If rightwingers keep protesting him or demanding more information about Jeffrey Epstein, they will be next in his crosshairs and that could begin the final stage of his participation in the Fox “News” Viewer cult. He’s already called them stupid, hysterical, and told them they’re dupes for the Democrats, claiming he no longer wants their support.

Thus, we stand very close to what may be a true crossroads moment for America.

If Trump survives this politically, he’ll most likely begin a serious crackdown modeled after the June, 1934 Night of the Long Knives (albeit probably less bloody), purging his opposition within his own ranks much like Putin did a decade ago in Russia and Orbán is doing now in Hungary. It’ll further damage American democracy and make it much harder for us to recover our previous New Deal and Great Society political and economic systems.

On the other hand, if Trump goes down in flames and Vance, Mike Johnson, Ted Cruz, or somebody equally weak tries to step in and take over the cult, it could spell doom for the GOP for a generation.

So get out the popcorn, but maybe you should also have something a little more defensive than that. Get ready. It’s gonna be a rough ride, but in all probability we’ll make it through without the kind of damage that Germany or the people at Jonestown suffered.

Wish us all luck. We need it — and citizen activism — now more than ever before.

'Blood sport': Journalist claims Rupert Murdoch relishing chance to 'embarrass' Trump

Veteran journalist Tina Brown claimed in a new Substack article that "old crocodile" Rupert Murdoch was very much looking forward to taking on Donald Trump over The Wall Street Journal's report on the president's relationship with sex-trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

Trump filed a $10 billion libel suit against Murdoch, Dow Jones, News Corp, and its CEO, Robert Thomson, plus two Journal reporters for causing "overwhelming" damage to the president's finances and reputation. The suit came shortly after the Journal published a report suggesting that Trump and Epstein were closer friends than the president has admitted to. The proof included a bawdy birthday card of a naked woman that Trump allegedly drew on while wishing Epstein that "every day be another wonderful secret."

Brown called it a "rich irony" that Murdoch, whose Fox News has faced criticism for helping boost Trump into power, was now the object of Trump's slings and arrows.

"Even at a grumpy 94, Murdoch is still a tabloid man to his core," Brown wrote. "Nothing gets his juices going more than a sex scandal that beats the competition. The old-fashioned populist thrill of embarrassing those in power (and leveraging their fears) has been the six-decade blood sport of Murdoch's cash-cow newspaper empire."

And yet, Brown lamented, defending the all-important freedom of the press must not be entrusted to Murdoch or any other billionaire-funded outlets for fear they could turn their backs on the First Amendment if it suited them financially.

Murdoch may look as if he's standing up to Trump's assault on freedom of the press, but that's only because the Murdoch family got what they needed out of Trump during his first term, with the no-snags sale of 21st Century Fox to Disney in 2017. The deal netted the Murdoch children a cool $2 billion apiece, according to Brown.

While the "blood sport" may be entertaining to watch from the sidelines, Brown warned that only "direct-to-subscriber platforms" like Substack provide "safe harbor" for true freedom of speech. Still, without great financial backing, it may be near impossible for independent journalists to "do battle in lawfare or conduct complex investigations of corporate or government corruption without institutional backing."

Read the Tina Brown Substack piece here.

'Strange moment': Fox News host's promised Trump-Epstein report 'never came'

Media reporter Brian Stelter recounted "a strange moment on Fox" when the Murdoch-owned entity failed to deliver on its promised coverage of the major Wall Street Journal scoop regarding President Donald Trump.

On Thursday night, the WSJ dropped a bombshell about Trump's participation in a "bawdy" 50th birthday greeting for sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. The letter is "framed by the outline of a naked woman," with Trump's signature made to mimic "pubic hair," WSJ reported.

Stelter gave credit to WSJ on social media, writing, "At a time when other media outlets are hesitating and capitulating, Rupert Murdoch and the Wall Street Journal just stood up to President Trump and scooped one of the biggest political stories of the summer."

He added, "And yet... Murdoch's Fox News has not mentioned the story once."

In his "Reliable Sources" newsletter, Stelter quoted CNN media reporter Andrew Kirell, who wrote, "Halfway through her 7 p.m. hour last night, Fox's Laura Ingraham seemed poised to cover the bombshell reporting from from a fellow Murdoch-owned outlet. 'We have new news coming on about this as well from The Wall Street Journal. A new report tonight, next,' she said."

Kirell continued, "But that 'new report' never came. Ingraham did not mention the Journal story at all during the rest of her hour; Neither did the rest of the Fox primetime lineup."

Kirell noted that right-wing outlet "Newsmax ignored the WSJ story, too."

On Friday morning, Trump threatened to put Murdoch on the stand, writing on Truth Social, "I look forward to getting Rupert Murdoch to testify in my lawsuit against him and his 'pile of garbage' newspaper, the WSJ. That will be an interesting experience!!!"

Read the Reliable Sources newsletter right here.

Trump threatens to put Rupert Murdoch on the stand: 'An interesting experience!'

Donald Trump doubled-down on his threat to sue The Wall Street Journal over its bombshell story on his intimate relationship with sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

On Truth Social, the president posted Friday, "I look forward to getting Rupert Murdoch to testify in my lawsuit against him and his 'pile of garbage' newspaper, the WSJ. That will be an interesting experience!!!"

Murdoch is the media-magnate owner of the WSJ, Fox News, and hundreds of other outlets.

Thursday night, the WSJ dropped a report that Trump joined other celebrities to send a "bawdy" birthday letter to Epstein in 2003 that's "framed by the outline of a naked woman," according to the outlet.

"A pair of small arcs denotes the woman’s breasts, and the future president’s signature is a squiggly 'Donald' below her waist, mimicking pubic hair," WSJ reported.

The message included the salutation, "Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret," according to the WSJ.

Trump reportedly tried to squash the story from publication before it dropped.

Tucker Carlson shares eye-popping request from ex-Fox News bosses after ouster

Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson claimed Tuesday that his shock firing wasn't the last of his dealings with the powerful Murdoch family.

Fox Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch reportedly fired Carlson — arguably the network's biggest star — over his conspiratorial coverage of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, in which he blamed government agents for provoking the attack.

A lawsuit by former producer Abby Grossberg accusing Carlson of harassment and retaliation was also reportedly a factor in the host's firing. Fox denied Grossberg's allegations but settled with her for $12 million.

During a new episode of his online program, "The Tucker Carlson Show," the host claimed that after he was fired, the Murdochs wanted him to run for president against Donald Trump last year.

The Murdochs really hate Trump," Carlson said, despite allegations that Fox News tailors its news coverage to promote MAGA and the Trump agenda. Trump has tapped several Fox News alumni for his administration, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and interim U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro.

Carlson continued, "There’s no one who hates Trump more than the Murdochs. I got fired in April 2023. In May of 2023, they asked me to run for president against Trump and said they would back me. Obviously, I'm not running for any — you know, I would never get elected any — plus, I like Trump!"

Carlson burst into a fit of laughter, adding, "I mean, that's the funny thing is, I genuinely — I mean, I get frustrated. I'm frustrated now. But, I like Trump."

Trump and Carlson recently butted heads over whether to attack Iran or honor the president's "America First" campaign promise.

Carlson continued his story, saying he was approached by Murdoch's eldest son, Lachlan, about running against the then-former president.

"Lachlan Murdoch said, 'You should run for president; we'll back you." Carlson said.

He claimed that the Murdochs promised to dedicate the full force of Fox News, The Wall Street Journal, and other media powerhouses owned by the family if Carlson agreed to run.

"I was already gone, they already cancelled my show," Carlson continued. "I was still under contract, but they cancelled my show. 'You should run, we support you, you should run.'"

Watch "The Tucker Carlson Show" clip here.

Kamala Harris endorsed by one of Rupert Murdoch's sons

Vice President Kamala Harris received an endorsement from an unlikely place on Friday: A son of right-wing media mogul Rupert Murdoch.

CNBC reports that James Murdoch, the one-time CEO of 21st Century Fox, was one of 88 corporate leaders who signed onto a letter backing Harris's White House bid.

In the letter, the businessmen argued that "the business community can be confident that it will have a president who wants American industries to thrive" should Harris defeat former President Donald Trump in November.

The letter also emphasizes that "the best way to support the continued strength, security, and reliability of our democracy and economy" is by electing Harris.

ALSO READ: 'Some folks need killing': Mark Robinson’s 13 most extremist controversies and scandals

Murdoch, the younger brother of current News Corp chairman Lachlan Murdoch, has long been something of a dissident within the Murdoch family.

He resigned from the board at his father's company in 2020 and said in his resignation letter that he was stepping down "due to disagreements over certain editorial content published by the Company's news outlets and certain other strategic decisions."

In an interview with The New Yorker the year prior, he hinted at the nature of these disagreements.

“The connective tissue of our society is being manipulated to make us fight with each other, making us the worst versions of ourselves,” James Murdoch said at the time. “There are views I really disagree with on Fox."

Murdoch newspapers sounding alarms warning Trump 'looking like a loser again': report

Rupert Murdoch doesn't need to say he thinks Donald Trump is running a losing campaign against Kamala Harris – his newspaper's front pages and editorials are broadcasting it loud and clear, according to The Daily Beast.

Recent headlines appear to channel the media mogul's dismissive attitude toward Trump, who has held a grudge against Murdoch since Murdoch made the call in 2020 allowing Fox News to report that Trump lost Arizona.

“Trump Is Looking Like a Loser Again,” was the headline of a Wall Street Journal column Monday from editor-at-large Gerard Baker.

“Does Donald Trump Still Have It?” another Journal op-ed asked Sunday.

ALSO READ: Harris has figured out Trump’s greatest liability

“Trump Meets Half the Moment,” read another Journal opinion headline after Trump’s rambling keynote at the Republican National Convention last month.

In concert, the headlines seem to paint a picture that Murdoch is less than pleased with Trump’s attempts to take down Harris. Murdoch “vehemently opposed” Trump’s choice of J.D. Vance as a running mate, and even sent top staffers to meet with Trump, who failed to convince him to change course, according to The Daily Beast.

“If Fox News has, for now at least, stayed fully signed up to the Trump train, the two leading Murdoch newspaper titles in the U.S. are sounding their own passenger alarms,” writes The Daily Beast.

A spokesperson from Journal told the Beast there is “complete editorial independence,” in the newsroom.

Don’t be fooled: Project 2025 is already happening

Project 2025, Donald Trump’s authoritarian playbook on Christian nationalism, is already in motion. While the media debates Trump’s disingenuous disavowals of the masterplan, the real story is the extent to which the Supreme Court has already begun implementing it.

Project 2025 seeks to degrade civil rights nationwide by outlawing abortion, mandating Christianity and reducing LGBT+ citizens to second class status.

But these culture war flashpoints are merely a ruse, a distraction for the media to consume while its backers disguise their real objective. Project 2025 is a massive undertaking financed by fossil fuel wealth to protect fossil fuels, abetted by Supreme Court justices with ties to Big Oil.

Trump’s connection to — and disavowal of — Project 2025

Project 2025 was launched by the rightwing Heritage Foundation with Trump’s blessing.

In 2022, Trump described Project 2025 as “the groundwork,” a detailed plan “for exactly what our movement will do ... when the American people give us a colossal mandate to save America.”

Despite Trump’s embrace, emerging details about Project 2025 have become so unpopular that Trump now claims to know nothing about it, and says he has “no idea” who is behind it.

ALSO READ: We asked 10 Republican senators: ‘Is Kamala Harris Black?’ Things got weird fast.

Trump can’t plausibly claim ignorance, at least not outside the MAGA bubble.

As Politico reported, Project 2025 is the brainchild of Trump’s closest advisers, who helped write the plan’s main components to protect fossil fuels: Bernard McNamee, who served in Trump’s Energy Department, urges the repeal of climate laws; Perry Pendley, who led Trump’s Bureau of Land Management, argues that fossil fuel extraction is more important than preserving federal lands and monuments; and Mandy Gunasekara, Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency chief of staff, wrote the plan to gut EPA staff and reduce EPA enforcement of environmental regulations.

Supreme Court advances Project 2025’s agenda

While many pundits have acknowledged the implausibility of Trump’s “lack of knowledge” about Project 2025, few (none?) have noted that the Supreme Court has already begun to implement its key objectives.

This is the hidden reality of Project 2025: Trump’s remaking of the Supreme Court in his authoritarian image has already enabled the Court’s majority to adopt key components of the plan:

Abortion: The high court facilitated Project 2025’s anti-abortion goals with the Dobbs decision. In overturning Roe v. Wade after 50 years of protected abortion access, Justice Samuel Alito summarily declared that the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause could no longer protect women’s medical privacy, because the Supreme Court previously determined “that a State’s regulation of abortion is not a sex-based classification.” After Roe deemed abortion access a “liberty” protected by the Due Process and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Alito and his Catholic colleagues ruled that “classification precedent” and ancient common law history were more important.

Bribery: SCOTUS implemented Project 2025’s deference to a strong (and crooked) chief executive in Snyder v. the United States. Republicans on the Supreme Court declared in Snyder that bribing an elected official isn’t bribery if it’s paid to the official after the fact, because then it’s really more of a “gratuity.” Despite (because of?) two justices facing backlash for accepting lavish gifts from donors with cases before the Supreme Court, the majority in Snyder weakened the federal anti-corruption statute, 18 U.S. Code § 666, which made it a crime for officials to corruptly solicit, accept or agree to accept “anything of value intending to be influenced or rewarded in connection with” any business or transaction worth $5,000 or more.

Weakening federal regulations: The Supreme Court continued implementing Project 2025’s goal of killing the administrative state and stopping “the war on oil and gas” in Loper Bright Enterprises vs. Raimondo. In Loper, Republicans on the Court overturned the well-established Chevron doctrine, the law of administrative agencies for the last 40 years, ruling outrageously that judges should not rely on federal experts’ scientific or medical expertise, but should rely instead on their own personal opinion, bias and scientific ignorance in interpreting statutory ambiguities. This ruling, coupled with other recent cases eviscerating the regulatory power of the EPA, will cripple climate initiatives in service to Project 2025 donors for years to come if this rogue court is not stopped.

Advancing Christian nationalism: The Supreme Court helped advance Project 2025’s Christian nationalism in 303 Creative LLC and Kennedy v. Bremerton School District. In 303 Creative, the conservative majority designated the right to refuse to do business with gay people not as discriminatory conduct but as “free speech,” and held that requiring web designers to serve same sex couples was “coercing” them to make “statements” with which their Christian religion disagreed.

In Kennedy, the court’s religious bloc ruled that a football coach could lead his team in prayer on a public school football field despite Establishment Clause precedent dating back to the 1940s. Until Kennedy, courts prohibited school prayer because of the coercive pressure it put on atheist, Jewish, Muslim and other non-Christian students to either pray along or be ostracized. In both 303 Creative and Kennedy, the court’s extreme bloc distorted the 1st Amendment’s shield – freedom of religion – into a sword: Christians’ freedom to impose their religion on others.

Biden’s extraordinary response to a rogue court

Each of these decisions, punctuated with the shocking presidential immunity ruling that presidents can break criminal laws with impunity, is in lockstep with the authoritarian goals of Project 2025.

This Trump-packed Supreme Court is so extreme, its roughshod violation of legal precedent so dangerous, that even President Joe Biden, an avowed institutionalist who has long resisted Supreme Court reform, now urges it.

Last week, Biden wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post outlining the Biden-Harris proposal to rein in the court, starting with term limits of 18 years.

He correctly noted that the United States “is the only major constitutional democracy that gives lifetime seats to its high court,” and attributed the court’s current dysfunction to lifetime appointments. Biden’s candid observation that “what is happening now is not normal” was an understatement many Americans won’t understand for years, after the damage is evident.

Biden, like many Americans, was aghast when the Supreme Court’s Republican majority granted Trump broad immunity from prosecution for crimes committed while in office. As Biden put it, “If a future president incites a violent mob to storm the Capitol and stop the peaceful transfer of power — like we saw on Jan. 6, 2021 — there may be no legal consequences.”

Or, for Trump extremists on the Supreme Court, that was exactly the point.

Without recusal, justices in bed with Big Oil will impede climate action

Term limits must be accompanied by an enforceable Code of Ethics requiring justices to recuse from all cases in which they are conflicted. This last point will continue to stick, because each of the six Republican-nominated justices is in bed with fossil fuels.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s father was a “highly active and respected member of the American Petroleum Institute for more than two decades.”

Justice Samuel Alito’s family leases over 100 acres of land for oil and gas private development.

Justice Clarence Thomas, who has accepted over $4 million in “gifts” from conservative donors, has been in fossil fuel investor Harlan Crow’s pocket for years.

ALSO READ: Texas sheriffs engage conspiracy theorist who created Trump enemies 'target list'

Not only do Coney Barrett, Alito and Thomas have direct, personal ties to fossil fuels, all six conservative justices belong to the Federalist Society, and are backed by the Heritage Foundation.

Both of these organizations, funded in large part by secret money, are driven by fossil fuel wealth, and it is no mere coincidence that Big Oil affiliated Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News amplifies their false messaging. Although they use non-stop culture wars to distract the voting public, they and Project 2025 exist largely to advance climate change denial to protect their own formidable, private wealth.

Project 2025 and its uber-wealthy puppeteers aren’t going away, regardless of what happens in November, because climate wars to hold Big Oil accountable for climate destruction are just getting started. Voters need to understand that American, Russian and Hungarian authoritarians are weaponizing Christianity in a coordinated attack to distract from their true efforts to protect fossil fuels.

Court reform, as embraced by Kamala Harris but deemed “dead on arrival” by Trump republicans, has now become an election imperative. The media needs to step up, expose the dark money ties between Project 2025, Trump and the six conflicted justices defending fossil fuels. Most critically, anyone concerned about rising temperatures and disappearing water sources needs to vote in November as if their lives depend on it.

Sabrina Haake is a columnist and 25 year litigator specializing in 1st and 14th Amendment defense. Her Substack, The Haake Take, is free.