Attorney for Stormy Daniels says that she can describe Donald Trump's genitalia in "great detail."

(Relevant portion starts at around the 9:00 mark.)

Courtesy of Mediaite:  

Michael Avenatti, the lawyer to porn star Stephanie Clifford (better known as Stormy Daniels), said in a Wednesday interview with Megyn Kelly Today that his client has a whole lot more to say about her alleged affair with the president. 

The interview arrived after a 60 Minutes segment featuring Clifford in March, in which she described her interactions with Trump and claimed to have sex with the president shortly after the birth of his youngest son. In the segment, host Anderson Cooper focused largely on the timeline of events, as well as the threat she said she received in the parking lot of a fitness class while in the midst of sharing her story on Trump with a tabloid magazine years before the election. 

Apparently, there’s a lot left to be told about the affair. 

“When she sat for that interview, it actually lasted over two hours in length … the portion that the American public saw was only about 14 or 16 minutes,” Avenatti said Wednesday. “CBS, they’re a conservative network. There’s a lot of information that was said that did not make it into the final 60 Minutes piece.” 

“For instance, she can describe the president’s genitalia in great detail, that did not make it into the piece,” he added.

God I hate Megyn Kelly, who I still think is carrying water for the conservatives, but I thought that this interview was interesting and worthy of being shared.

I actually think that one of Trump's greatest fears is for one of the many women who saw his penis describing it on national television.

Putin says that he does not care if Russians hacked the US election, and suggests that they might have been Jews or that they were paid by Americans.

Courtesy of NBC News:  

Russian President Vladimir Putin has told NBC News that he "couldn't care less" if Russian citizens tried to interfere in the 2016 American presidential election because, he claims, they were not connected to the Kremlin. 

In an exclusive and at-times combative interview with NBC's Megyn Kelly, Putin again denied the charge by U.S. intelligence services that he ordered meddling in the November 2016 vote that put Donald Trump in the White House. 

"Why have you decided the Russian authorities, myself included, gave anybody permission to do this?" asked Putin, who will probably be returned as president in the March 18 elections.

"So what if they're Russians?" Putin said of the people named in last month's indictment. "There are 146 million Russians. So what? ... I don't care. I couldn't care less. ... They do not represent the interests of the Russian state." 

Putin even suggested that Jews or other ethnic groups had been involved in the meddling. 

"Maybe they're not even Russians," he said. "Maybe they're Ukrainians, Tatars, Jews, just with Russian citizenship. Even that needs to be checked. Maybe they have dual citizenship. Or maybe a green card. Maybe it was the Americans who paid them for this work. How do you know? I don't know.

Putin also claimed that he had seen no evidence that the Russians actually did any of the hacking, which is odd because you would think he would be eager to read the updates they sent him on their progress.

I do not know why NBC allows Megyn Kelly, a former operative from Fox News, to even interview this guy when they know he is simply going to lie his ass off?

The only person that I want to hear interviewing Vladimir Putin is Robert Mueller.

Under oath if at all possible.

There is at least one positive outcome from all of this. At least now Kelly realizes that Trump is likely compromised by Putin.

Courtesy of The Hill:  

“I would not say that Putin likes Trump,” she said. “I did not glean that at all from him. I did glean that perhaps he has something on Donald Trump." 

“I think there’s a very good chance Putin knows some things about Donald Trump that Mr. Trump does not want repeated publicly,” she added.

Gee, no shit.

More about Donald Trump's affair with adult film star Stormy Daniels.

As it turns out there was a reporter from Slate working on the story about Trump and Daniels before the election.

Jacob Weisberg did not post that story because he did not feel he had enough corroboration to write it with confidence that it could stand up to scrutiny.

Now that the Wall Street Journal has written their account of Daniels receiving $130,000 in hush money Weisberg has written about what he learned during multiple interviews with Daniels.

From the article: 

Daniels, whose given name is Stephanie Clifford, did indeed have a story about Trump, which she related to me in a series of phone conversations and text exchanges that took place between August and October of 2016. 

Daniels told me she’d gone to Trump’s hotel room after meeting him at a celebrity golf tournament in Nevada in 2006. There they’d begun a sexual relationship, which continued for nearly a year. They’d met in New York and more than once in Los Angeles. In early 2007, Trump had invited her to a party to promote Trump Vodka, where she was photographed. He’d also invited her to his Miss USA pageant that year. 

In our conversations, Daniels said she was holding back on the juiciest details, such as her ability to describe things about Trump that only someone who had seen him naked would know. She intimated that her view of his sexual skill was at odds with the remark attributed to Marla Maples.

You may remember that Maples reported that it was "The Best Sex" she had ever had.

You know just like Trump is the least racist person you have ever met, the best businessman in history, and the healthiest person to ever occupy the White House.

Weisberg sort of glossed over the more prurient details and instead focused on what was then a pending financial agreement between the lawyers for Donald Trump and Stormy Daniels' attorney: 

Daniels said that, through intermediaries, she and Trump had worked out an agreement for the presidential candidate to pay her a six-figure sum to keep quiet. More specifically, she said her lawyer Keith Davidson, a Beverly Hills–based attorney who specializes in claims against celebrities, had worked out the terms with Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen. 

Daniels told me that agreement involved a complicated arrangement to shield the real names of the parties. She texted me an unsigned two-page document spelling out this arrangement, the title of which was “Exhibit ‘A’ to the Confidential Settlement Agreement and Release: Assignment of Copyright and Non-Disparagement Agreement.”* The document she texted me indicated that in the main agreement—a document I never saw—“Stephanie Gregory Clifford aka Stormy Daniels is referred to by the pseudonym ‘Peggy Peterson,’ and ___________ is referred to by the pseudonym ‘David Dennison.’ ” 

The document Daniels sent me included two additional pseudonyms, “David Delucia” and “RCI,” but did not indicate which person and/or entity those pseudonyms referred to. Another provision in the document I saw stated that only Daniels’ lawyer Keith Davidson and a lawyer for the other party would be allowed to retain copies of the side-letter agreement identifying the parties by their actual names.

About a week before the election Daniels stopped responding to texts and emails, likely due to the fact that she had reached that financial agreement which the Wall Street Journal reported on recently.

Now it is very unlikely that this story by Weisberg would have changed the outcome of the election, because let's face it unless this was gay sex, or sex with a black person, Trump's deplorables would not be bothered in the least.

However, as has been pointed out by a number of commentators, this story would have DESTROYED the candidacy of any other politician that we can think of, and that right there tells us just how far away from our moral center we have drifted since Donald Trump rode down that escalator to announce his candidacy.

In Touch got even more information about this fling from Daniels back in 2011. Here is their story:

Stormy told In Touch, “[The sex] was textbook generic,” while discussing the fling they had less than four months after Donald’s wife, Melania, gave birth to their son, Barron. “I actually don’t even know why I did it, but I do remember while we were having sex, I was like, ‘Please, don’t try to pay me.’” 

At one point, Stormy told In Touch, she excused herself to go to the bathroom. “When I came out, he was sitting on the bed and he was like, ‘Come here.’ And I was like, ‘Ugh, here we go.’ And we started kissing.” After having sex, Stormy said, “We hung out for a little while and he just kept saying, ‘I’m gonna call you, I’m gonna call you. I have to see you again. You’re amazing. We have to get you on The Apprentice.’” 

Of course Trump never did get Daniels that gig on "The Apprentice" or kept any other promises that he made to her.

However he DID pay her off, which is why she is denying all of this now.

On a final note the fellow adult film star that Stormy Daniels invited to a threesome with Donald Trump appeared on the Megyn Kelly show to tell her side of things.

I do not typically post video of Kelly's show, but I think you will like this.

“Picture this: Donald Trump chasing me around the bedroom in his tighty whities isn’t something you forget.”

And now none of us will be able to forget it, or that such an embarrassing POS is occupying the People's House. 

Megyn Kelly's new show is already starting to bomb.

Why does everybody hate me?

Courtesy of Politico:  

Megyn Kelly’s new NBC hour following the “Today” show, in which the former Fox News star shuns political interviews for a softer, more lifestyle-driven focus, premiered on Monday to jeers from many critics. 

The Washington Post’s Hank Stuever was particularly cutting: “The debut was like watching a network try to assemble its own Bride of Frankenstein, using parts of Ellen DeGeneres, Kelly Ripa and whatever else it can find.”

CNN’s Brian Lowry allowed that, “It's absurdly early, of course, to draw any conclusions about the efficacy of the Kelly experiment.” Still, he continued, “After tepid marks for her prime time newsmagazine and now her addition to ‘Today,’ it's worth considering that NBC News brass leapt at the opportunity to snag a high-profile news star without having fully thought through how best to deploy her.” 

Jezebel also mocked the show, saying Kelly looked like “a HomeGoods catalog brought to life” and Newsweek was critical, as well.

This is how Time Magazine described Kelly's debut:

The host — a law school alum whose best-known skill has long been her prosecutorial zeal — served as her own defense attorney throughout the hour, pushing the case that she's not the person you remember from her years of political coverage. "The truth is, I'm kind of done with politics for now," Kelly said in a lengthy opening monologue that told her entire life story from childhood to TV stardom. "It's everywhere, everywhere, and I'm just like, it's over."

It's not just the sentiment that makes Kelly's case; it's the bearing. Kelly, a precise, crystalline wordsmith when in takedown mode, awkwardly sprinkled slang into her speech. She talked with her hands as though someone had said it was humanizing. When the cast of Today walked out with mimosas, Kelly declared, "O.M.G.!" A person who until as recently as last summer, during her Sunday-night newsmagazine show, sought to represent herself as deeply engaged in issues of the public interest now just thought it was over. Have a mimosa!

Can you say "disingenuous?"  Sure you can.

But done with politics or not, Kelly simply could not quite get that conservative stank off of her.

Courtesy of Yahoo News: 

The former FOX News correspondent welcomed the cast of "Will & Grace" onto her new morning show on Monday morning ahead of the hit NBC sitcom's revival, and a comment that she made while talking to a superfan of the show is garnering Kelly criticism on Twitter.

Kelly brought lawyer Russell Turner onto the stage to meet his idols saying, "Russell didn't know this was going to happen!" 

"Is it true that you became a lawyer -- and you became gay! -- because of Will?" she jokingly asked. 

After informing Turner that he would be getting tickets to a live "Will & Grace" taping and a behind-the-scenes tour of the set, Kelly turned to him and said her most head-turning statement of the morning. 

"I don't know about the lawyer thing, but I think the 'Will & Grace' thing and the gay thing is going to work out great," she said.

Well that "gay thing" may work out, but it very unlikely that this "new show thing" will.

How many attempts to repackage this Fox News turd does this make now?  

Ellen DeGeneres explains to Megyn Kelly, and her audience, why she would NEVER have Donald Trump on her show.

Courtesy of Truth Examiner:

Ellen DeGeneres spoke with Megyn Kelly today about her new morning talk show on NBC. During the interview, DeGeneres asked Kelly if she would have Donald Trump on her show. “Definitely,” Kelly said. “I mean, I wouldn’t say no to the sitting president of the United States. Absolutely not. Would you?” Without missing a beat, DeGeneres swiftly said, “Yeah.” 

As the audience began cheering, Kelly seemed genuinely surprised by DeGeneres’s response. An awkward silence ensued until DeGeneres explained, “He is who he is. He has enough attention. He has his Twitter account and he has ways to get his message across. There’s nothing I’m going to say to him that’s gonna change him.”

I think that Kelly's response proves that once a Fox News bimbo, always a Fox News bimbo.

She spent years spewing Right Wing talking points and outright lying to her audience, while flashing her legs in short skirts to attract the mostly male demographic and cloud their primitive little lizard minds.

On the other hand Ellen DeGeneres is a host who actually grew an audience based on her intelligence, compassion, and talent.

Her explanation is a good reason for ALL talk shows, and cable news programs, to keep Donald Trump at arm's length.

By the way I would not watch Megyn Kelly's new show with a gun to my head. 

Greta Van Susteren is out at MSNBC!

I am out at MSNBC -

— Greta Van Susteren (@greta) June 29, 2017

Courtesy of Vanity Fair: 

The anchor, whose show struggled to gain traction even as the rest of her colleagues were buoyed by anti-Trump hysteria, has parted ways with the network. She will not appear on the show on Thursday evening. She will be permanently replaced by Ari Melber, the network’s chief legal correspondent and host of the The Point on weekends. He will continue to appear across NBC and MSNBC shows as he takes over the 6 p.m. slot next month. (MSNBC and NBC News declined to comment. Reached by phone Thursday afternoon, Van Susteren had no comment.)

The decision comes as much of the rest of MSNBC has been enjoying a ratings resurgence, and, in some cases, dominance over Fox News. For the first time in 17 years, the network beat both Fox News and CNN in prime-time viewership on weeknights in May amongst the crucial 25-to-54 age demographic—a giant 118 percent leap from a year earlier. In the full second quarter, according to ratings released by Nielsen earlier this week, the network came in second behind Fox for total day viewers, but its growth from a year earlier outpaced both its rivals. Much of this growth is due to prime-time anchors like Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnell, whose nightly newscasts have tapped into a potent mix of liberal anxiety and schadenfreude over the Trump presidency.

Good, about damn time!

And she should be followed by Megyn Kelly ad Hugh Hewitt just as soon as possible. 

They are simply not good journalists, nor are they in line with the politics which make people tune into MSNBC.

I am proud to say that I have never watched a single episode of Greta's show, and I would even turn the volume down when she appeared on other MSNBC shows to provide commentary.

I have not forgotten what she and her associates did during the Obama presidency, nor how she helped to validate Sarah Palin and her husband to her Fox News viewers.

She was part of the Fox "Fake" News and she has no place on a cable news network that prides itself on accuracy.

Now perhaps MSNBC has learned its lesson and will discard this ridiculous experiment of giving Right Wing trolls their own shows, and start getting more intelligent progressive voices on the air.

Megyn Kelly's interview with conspiracy theorist Alex Jones is blowing up in her face.

So Megyn Kelly, a recent NBC hire after walking away from Fox News, has an interview with Info Wars Alex Jones airing this next Sunday night.

However the blowback on this thing has now reached epic levels.

First off she is under fire from at least on parent of a Sandy Hill shooting victim.

Courtesy of the Washington Post:  

NBC’s Megyn Kelly is under fire for her one-on-one interview with Infowars’s Alex Jones. 

One of the immediate critics is a mother whose daughter was killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, a massacre that Jones has dismissed as a government hoax. 

Nelba Márquez-Greene saw the interview, scheduled to air Sunday — Father’s Day — as an “egregious offense” to fathers whose children were murdered Dec. 14, 2012, in Newtown, Conn. 

“To give Alex Jones a platform on Father’s Day is especially cruel to me,” she told The Washington Post.

Since Jones has claimed that the shooting was fake and no children actually died, one can understand this mother's anger.

Kelly responded to these comments with this tweet:

POTUS's been on & praises @RealAlexJones' show. He's giving Infowars a WH press credential. Many don't know him; our job is 2 shine a light. https://t.co/5e88BJyqnz

— Megyn Kelly (@megynkelly) June 12, 2017

However that was not good enough for the organizers of the Promise Champions Gala, an event that raises money for the gun violence prevention group the Sandy Hook Promise foundation, who have now dropped Kelly as their host this year.

It was also not good enough for JP Morgan who has now pulled their ads from NBC News over this controversy.

This has led others to call for the firing of Megyn Kelly, and the revelation that so far Kelly has been a "ratings disaster" for the network: 

“NBC is freaking out,” a source told Radar. “They didn’t pay her $15 million for this. They are now worried that her numbers will be bad when she joins the 9 am hour of Today.” 

“If Kelly tanks at 9 am she will also bring down Kathie Lee Gifford and Hoda Kotb at 10am,” warned the source. 

In order to do damage control, producers are scrambling to land Kelly some major “gets” to improve the 46-year-old journalist’s ratings.

Personally I have no idea why NBC and MSNBC keep hiring these Fox News cast offs.

They have zero journalistic integrity and they bring with them years of baggage from their time at Fox News.

Ahead of Megyn Kelly's NBC debut, a reminder of all the awful things she said at Fox News: https://t.co/W0CFlq8Dd4 pic.twitter.com/zyqGWLaKiz

— Media Matters (@mmfa) June 3, 2017

I for one will NEVER watch any show that Megyn Kelly hosts, just like I have never watched Greta Van Susteren since her move to MSNBC.

Call me a snob but I like my journalism to have actual journalism in it.

Megyn Kelly jumps ship and leaves Fox for NBC News.

Courtesy of USA Today: 

Megyn Kelly is signing off on Fox News to join rival NBC News. 

The popular cable network personality is joining the peacock network, where she will anchor a new, one-hour daytime program, Andrew Lack, chairman of the NBCUniversal News Group, said in a statement today. 

As part of a broad, multi-year deal, Kelly will also anchor a new Sunday evening news magazine show and contribute to NBC’s breaking news, political and special events coverage.

“Megyn is an exceptional journalist and news anchor, who has had an extraordinary career” Lack said. “She’s demonstrated tremendous skill and poise, and we’re lucky to have her.” 

NBC said details on Kelly's duties will be announced in the coming months.

I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that those details involve truckloads of money.

I have developed a little grudging respect for Kelly since she took on Donald Trump early in the campaign season but since it was she who once suggested that Sarah Palin sue me, I don't see myself ever becoming a huge fan.

Personally I will be interested to see how much of Kelly's partisanship depends on which news outlet employs her.

Remember she was all in on that war on Christmas, vociferously attacked Hillary Clinton, and spent the last eight years lobbing insults at the Democrats without any signs of remorse.

So is she suddenly going to embrace liberal politics, or is she going to remain apolitical and simply report the news dispassionately?

Megyn Kelly states that certain TV hosts were "play acting" when they interviewed Donald Trump. Sean Hannity immediately takes offense.

(Pertinent portion starts at the 2:00 mark.)

Courtesy of Mediaite:  

Kurtz recounts from her book the charge that there were pro-Donald Trump TV hosts who “would arrange with Trump in advance to ask him certain critical questions or do certain hits on him so they would appear to have some credibility.”

He asked if she means they were “play-acting.” Kelly responded, “Yes. It was acting.

”She confirmed it happened at more than one network, but could not divulge any more information. “But trust me,” she added, ‘this did happen, and it’s been confirmed to me by more than one television executive.”

Now you will notice that Kelly did not name any one TV host, nor even identify the station they may or may not have worked for.

However somebody got a wee bit defensive. And by "wee bit" I mean lost their shit completely.

No idea who @megynkelly is talking about. When I asked ?'s about Justices, The wall, Refugees, Obamacare, economy etc I wanted real answers! https://t.co/AZxax2rpur

— Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) November 20, 2016

I would love to know who was "Acting". https://t.co/AZxax2rpur

— Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) November 20, 2016

Curious who she was referring to. I am transparent, I want to defeat Isis, protect the homeland and get people out of poverty and working! https://t.co/tranPp7y2k

— Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) November 20, 2016

I'm just curious. All year long I talked about the number of people not working in poverty on food stamps I wanted real answers and got them https://t.co/62F0etYnxS

— Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) November 20, 2016

I would also like to know what people were offered by DT, I was never offered a thing. Never stayed at a DT property played a DT golf course https://t.co/62F0etYnxS

— Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) November 20, 2016

Damn, talk about having no poker face.

Sean Hannity might as well have Oh God she's talking about me!" tattooed across his forehead.

However to be fair I don't think that he is alone.

I think that Bill O'Reilly, most of the other talking heads on Fox, and Joe Scarborough from MSNBC are also guilty of play acting as well.

In order to tamp down threats Fox News had to explain to Trump lawyer why it would be bad for their campaign if Megyn Kelly were killed.

Courtesy of Slate:  

Donald Trump’s feud with Megyn Kelly was way darker than any of us knew. Kelly received so many death threats and so much harassment from Trump supporters after confronting him at the first Republican debate with a challenging question about his many, many misogynistic statements that she needed a special security detail for a year. 

The Trump campaign stoked the flames of the Kelly hate, the Fox News host told CNN’s Anderson Cooper in an interview on Wednesday, to the point that one of the top executives at Fox News had to explain to one of Trump’s top employees why if she “gets killed” it might be bad for their campaign. 

“Michael Cohen, who is Trump's top lawyer and executive vice president with the Trump Organization had retweeted ‘let’s gut her,’ about me,” Kelly said. “At a time when the threat level was very high, which he knew. And Bill Shine, an executive vice president of Fox, called him up to say, 'You got to stop this. We understand you are angry but she's got three kids and is walking around New York.' ”

“And he didn't much care,” Kelly continued. “And what Bill Shine said to Michael Cohen was, ‘Let me put it to you in terms you can understand: If Megyn Kelly gets killed it is not going help your candidate.’ ”

Yes let's help crazed Trump supporters learn to respect human life by telling them that somebody being killed might hurt their candidate's chances in an election.

Seriously?

In fact things got so bad that Kelly brought armed security staff with her and her family on their trip to Disney World:

By the time the mother of three flew to Disney World for vacation, it was with her “family — and our security guard,” she writes. “Yes, we took an armed guard to the Magic Kingdom. More guns, more guards. My year of Trump.”

And look America you just reinforced this type of behavior by allowing the internet troll come to life who inspired to move into the White House.

Excepts from new Megyn Kelly book reveal that Donald Trump pays off journalists, and had debate questions leaked to him ahead of time.

The New York Times received an early copy of Kelly's book and found that it contained some rather explosive inside information about Fox News, Roger Ailes, and Donald Trump.

On leaked questions before the first Republican debate on Fox:

He called Fox executives, saying he’d heard that her first question “was a very pointed question directed at him.” This disconcerted her, because it was true: It was about his history of using disparaging language about women. 

She doesn’t speculate where the leak came from. (She reports. You decide.) But that’s another unambiguous takeaway from this book: Parts of Fox — or, at the very least, Roger Ailes, the network’s chairman until July, when he was given the boot after several allegations of sexual harassment were made against him — seemed to be nakedly colluding with the Republican presidential nominee.

“Folks were starting to worry about Trump — his level of agitation did not match the circumstances,” Ms. Kelly writes. “Yes, it was his first debate. But this was bizarre behavior, especially for a man who wanted the nuclear codes.”

On Kelly's concern about Donald Trump's treatment of women:

She was the hen in the Fox house, taking it upon herself to ask at nearly every turn: Shouldn’t we be concerned that the Republican nominee for president is profoundly disrespectful of women in his public discourse? And accused of being a sexual predator at that?

On Trump's often unpredictable and erratic responses to her show:

Ms. Kelly writes that her problems started in August, the Monday before the first Republican presidential primary debate. She had just done a segment on her show, “The Kelly File,” that infuriated Mr. Trump. He refused to make his own scheduled appearance on her show unless she phoned him personally. 

“I almost unleashed my beautiful Twitter account against you,” she says he told her, “and I still may.”

And then later:

As we all know, Mr. Trump did unleash his beautiful Twitter account on Ms. Kelly after that debate, and it threatened to upend her life. He called her “overrated,” “angry,” “crazy” and “a bimbo”; he went on CNN with Don Lemon, opposite her show’s time slot, and said there was blood coming out of Ms. Kelly’s eyes, “blood coming out of her … whatever.” (My favorite response to this: Katie Couric wrote Ms. Kelly a note asking: “Are you okay? Do you need some Tampax?”)

And the book also reveals another possible explanation for Trump's animosity toward Kelly:

Part of Mr. Trump’s response seemed like that of a man betrayed: Months before announcing his candidacy, he had tried hard to curry Ms. Kelly’s favor. He sent her notes, including an attagirl scrawled across her picture in The New York Times Magazine. (When Vanity Fair reported this, Mr. Trump denied it; Ms. Kelly includes proof, a picture.) Ms. Kelly and her husband declined an invitation to Mar-a-Lago, Mr. Trump’s fabled estate in Palm Beach, Fla. Then Mr. Trump tried, repeatedly and unsuccessfully, to persuade her to let him pick up the tab for the weekend she spent with two girlfriends at the Trump SoHo hotel. 

“This is actually one of the untold stories of the 2016 campaign,” Ms. Kelly writes. “I was not the only journalist to whom Trump offered gifts clearly meant to shape coverage. Many reporters have told me that Trump worked hard to offer them something fabulous — from hotel rooms to rides on his 757.” 

Well we all know how Trump responds when he is rejected by women.

However if this is accurate, and part of Trump's seemingly unrelenting irritation with Kelly had to do with her rejection of him, should we then assume that the hosts of the shows on which he regularly appears (Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Joe Scarborough) accepted those bribes?

And where was Fox News head Roger Ailes during this time when one of his most popular anchors was under attack?

“Every time he started in,” Ms. Kelly writes of Mr. Trump, “I’d get a call from Roger (who was getting calls from Trump). Was I being fair to Trump? Was I being too hard on him? He felt the bar for skeptical Trump coverage should be higher.” 

When Mr. Trump discharged his first round of spite tweets, Ms. Kelly’s husband, the novelist Douglas Brunt, demanded to know what Fox was going to do. “I told him the truth. ‘Nothing for now.’” Instead, the network tried appeasement. “Roger was talking to Trump daily,” she writes, “trying to calm him down.”

Personally I would think that, unless Fox News is about to go an entirely different direction, Megyn Kelly's chances of renewing her contract with the cable news station are somewhere between nil and "Are you fucking kidding me?"

But somehow I don't think that she will have much difficultly finding another job.

Excerpts leak from new Megyn Kelly book. I don't think it is going to make Roger Ailes' must read list.

Courtesy of Radar Online:

Kelly — who is in the final months of a $15-million-a-year contract with the network — claims in the book that when Carlson first filed her complaint, Ailes commenced an “intense campaign” to get her and other stars to speak in his defense. 

“I was approached several times, and several times I refused,” she claims in the book, obtained by Radar. 

She insists, however, “There was no way I was going to lie to protect him.” 

Ailes vehemently has denied any misconduct. But Kelly claims in the book that he started to harass her, too, in the summer of 2005, a few months after she was hired as a legal correspondent in Fox’s Washington bureau. 

She writes that she was informed by her managing editor that she’d “captured the attention of Mr. Ailes” and she was summoned to the first of a series of meetings in his Manhattan office. 

“Roger began pushing the limits,” she alleges. “There was a pattern to his behavior. I would be called into Roger’s office, he would shut the door, and over the next hour or two, he would engage in a kind of cat-and-mouse game with me — veering between obviously inappropriate sexually charged comments (e.g. about the ‘very sexy bras’ I must have and how he’d like to see me in them) and legitimate professional advice.”

Kelly claims that Ailes attempted several times to get her to exchange sexual favors for career advancement but she rebuffed him each time.

Ultimately Ailes became more aggressive:

But in January 2006, she claims, he “crossed a new line — trying to grab me repeatedly and kiss me on the lips.” When she shoved him away, she alleges, “he asked me an ominous question: ‘When is your contract up?’ And then, for the third time, he tried to kiss me.”

Kelly claims all of that stopped in about six months after she reported the behavior to a supervisor.

Kelly also claims that she knew crossing Ailes was "a major risk" as the reason for her years of silence.

Radar Online also notes that the book is being published by Harper Collins which is owned by the same company which owns Fox News, so that might mean that though Kelly has free rein to talk about Ailes, she could be limited in making accusations against Fox News itself.

However it is also true that her contract with Fox is up in just a few months, so who knows, we might just get the whole lurid story someday.

During on air clash over allegations against Donald Trump, Newt Gingrich accuses Megyn Kelly of being "fascinated with sex."

Courtesy of NPR:

"You are fascinated with sex, and you don't care about public policy," Gingrich said. 

Kelly replied, "Me, really?" 

Gingrich: "That's what I get out of watching you tonight." 

Kelly: "You know what, Mr. Speaker? I'm not fascinated by sex, but I am fascinated by the protection of women and understanding what we're getting in the oval office ... "

Of course then Gingrich attempts to make the case that Bill Clinton is also a sexual predator and dares Kelly to say that out loud on her show.

She refuses.

And then she ends the contentious exchange with this: 

"We're going to have to leave it at that, and you can take your anger issues and spend some time working on them, Mr. Speaker. Thanks for being here."

You know I am not always Megyn Kelly's biggest fan, but that was fairly impressive.

By the way it should be pointed out that Gingrich is a slimeball of epic proportions, and that while he was working to impeach President Clinton for that blowjob, he himself was cheating on his first wife (Update: Oops sorry, his SECOND wife.) with his current, much younger, wife.

P.S. Gingrich was upset enough about the exchange with Kelly that he channeled his boss and took to Twitter to defend himself.

For the record, @megynkelly was wrong, i don't have anger management issues. I do have media bias issues!

— Newt Gingrich (@newtgingrich) October 26, 2016

Notice he did not say he was not a hypocritical philandering POS. So I guess we can assume he accepts that about himself.

P.P.S. Apparently Trump also weighed in on this.

Donald Trump: "Congratulations, Newt on last night. That was an amazing interview." pic.twitter.com/9WriTNG3is

— CSPAN (@cspan) October 26, 2016

And of course he was very impressed.

Perhaps he is preparing for his own defeat by watching another entitled white man getting his ass handed to him by a woman.

Believe it or not Judge Napolitano of Fox News gives the best defense of Hillary Clinton that I have heard yet.

Courtesy of Crooks and Liars:  

All of Trump's surrogates have been wielding these past incidents like a hammer, making wild and unfounded accusations to fill time slots and distract viewers, and amidst the screaming the actual charges are rarely fact-checked by cable TV hosts.

Judge Napolitano said, "The three that are accusing him [Bill] are cases that were never proved or alleged many, many years after the series of events." 

He continued, "The only case Bill Clinton paid out any money was after the case was dismissed because they feared it would be reinstated, he was the sitting president." 

Kelly said, "Paula Jones settlement sounds like a nuisance value settlement, he pad 850K, the vast majority was legal fees, only 200K went to her." 

She continued, "That's what you do to get rid of these matters when you're President." 

Judge Napolitano said, "We all know they all had a serious problem with proof, which is why none of them ever were laid out in front of judge and jury."

I am almost slack jawed to find Napolitano defending Hillary in this way, and that he is clearly backed up by Megyn Kelly, who is also a lawyer and knows about these things.

And of course they are correct that these are old cases that have already been litigated and found to be lacking in evidence.

The Trump surrogates can bring up these moldy old cases all day long if they want, but the fact is that the allegations against Trump have that new scandal smell and there appears to be a new one every few hours.

And they seem to be getting grosser by the day.

I may be reading too much into this, but I just don't think that Robert DeNiro likes Donald Trump.

I love that this came from Fox News.

By the way I read up on that Wikileaks stuff and it is really just another nothing burger.

And in light of these news stories about Trump it is even less than that.

Five new things we just learned about the Roger Ailes sexual harassment case.

So yesterday New York Magazine did a deep dive into the Roger Ailes/Fox News sex scandal.

I read through most of it and was planning to write about it today.

However Talking Points Memo just offered a summary which hits the main points that I was planning to cover so let's follow their lead.

Number one:  

Gretchen Carlson secretly recorded alleged instances of Ailes' sexual harassment 

Sherman’s report confirmed speculation that former Fox News host Gretchen Carlson, who is suing Ailes for sexual harassment and retaliation, possesses taped recordings of Ailes’ alleged advances that back her suit, which opened the floodgates for the Fox News boss’ eventual downfall.

Apparently Carlson took her I-Phone in with her when she met wtih Ailes in his office and hit "record" when he started acting like a frat boy on Spring Break, and the rest is history. Just like his career at Fox News.

I saw the author of the New York Magazine piece being interviewed yesterday and when asked if the tapes had been played for Ailes and his attorneys, he said that they had been a central part of the case, so yes.

I'm not going to lie this made me seriously reconsider my former dislike for Gretchen Carlson.

She's a bad ass!

Number two:

Fox News allegedly hacked journalists’ phone records 

As Rupert Murdoch’s British newspaper empire was embroiled in a phone-hacking scandal, Fox News allegedly employed “legally questionable means” to obtain a U.S. journalist’s phone records.

Okay now I have been waiting to hear evidence that Fox News was hacking people here in American ever since Rupert Murdoch's  News of the World was busted for that back in 2011.

To me that sounded EXACTLY like something that Ailes would do, and once it was confirmed that Rupert Murdoch's papers did it in Britain, I knew that it was only a matter of time before we learned for certain that it was happening here as well.

Number three:

Megyn Kelly reportedly rallied Fox women to speak to investigators 

As Sherman tells it, fired Fox anchor Gretchen Carlson’s lawsuit provided an opening for the network's star anchor. Ailes was no longer lending Kelly his support and she was in the midst of ongoing contract negotiations. When Kelly alleged to James Murdoch that Ailes had once made harassing comments and hugged her inappropriately in his office, Murdoch reportedly urged her to speak to the investigators at the law firm Paul, Weiss, which is conducting an internal probe into the Ailes allegations. 

Kelly was the third or fourth woman to speak with investigators, an anonymous source briefed on the investigation told Sherman. After her interview, she reportedly called up current and former Fox staffers to encourage them to speak with the lawyers, and many more women came forward.

Damn! SO now I have to reconsider my dislike for Megyn Kelly too?

Number four: 

Real fears of a Trump TV network are reportedly swirling at Fox 

Although there’s been wide speculation that Donald Trump’s 2016 endgame may be to break into cable news with a conservative network that would rival Fox News, anonymous network insiders talked about Trump TV as a near-certainty that was casting a pall over the network’s future. 

The current top talent and leadership will only last through Election Day, one unnamed host told Sherman. 

“As of November 9, there will be a bloodbath at Fox,” the host said. “After the election, the prime-time lineup could be eviscerated. O’Reilly’s been talking about retirement. Megyn could go to another network. And Hannity will go to Trump TV.”

Okay that's it.

If Fox News is actually worried about competition from Trump TV, then it virtually confirms that it is likely a real thing.

So Donald Trump's entire campaign is essentially a coming attractions trailer for his soon to be launched cable news network.

God Republicans are dumb!

As predicted more allegations are coming out about sexual harassment at Fox News, and they are NOT all about Roger Ailes.

Rudi Bakhtiar

Courtesy of Raw Story: 

On Saturday, the New York Times reported that it had spoken to a dozen women currently or formerly employed by the news network, all of whom say that they personally experienced sexual harassment or intimidation at work. 

Former Fox personality Rudi Bakhtiar told the Times about a run-in she had with her then-supervisor Fox News Washington Bureau Chief Brian Wilson. In 2007, Wilson dangled the possibility of a promotion in front of Bakhtiar and when she said she’d be excited to take the job, he reportedly told her, “I’d like to see the inside of your hotel room.” He said that he wanted them to have a “friends with benefits” relationship. 

Bakhtiar declined and says that immediately her career at the company went into free-fall. Her appearances were canceled and when she attempted to address the issue with other executives, they told her to go to Human Resources. 

Within weeks she was fired. Ailes told her that it was for performance-related reasons. 

“In a short time, she went from thinking she was in line to land the job she coveted to unemployment,” wrote the Times‘ Jim Rutenberg and Emily Steel. “After a mediation process, she reached a settlement in which Fox News paid her an undisclosed amount.” 

Bakhtiar said that part of the agreement was that she must never speak publicly about the harassment, but she felt emboldened by Gretchen Carlson’s lawsuit against Ailes, who stepped down on Thursday.

Several of the women interviewed by the New York Times claimed that they were set up on "dates" with superiors by their supervisors.

One former staffer even claimed to have walked into a dark office in 2009 to find a senior manager receiving oral sex from a junior staffer.

Interestingly enough Gawker did a piece in 2011, that discussed something called the "leg cam" used to allow the audience to ogle the legs of the female presenters. 

Did you ever wonder why Megyn Kelly is the only prime time Fox host whose desk is see through?

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump was asked about these allegations directed at Roger Ailes and his response was as predictable as it was disgusting: 

Meet the Press host Chuck Dodd asked Trump about the allegations against Ailes, and the candidate replied, “Well I don’t want to comment. But he’s been a friend of mine for a really long time. And I can tell you that some of the women who are complaining, I know how much he’s helped them. And even recently. And when they write books that are fairly recently released, and they say wonderful things about him.”

 He went on, “And now all of a sudden they’re saying these horrible things about him. It’s very sad. Because he’s a very good person. I’ve always found him to be just a very, very good person. Any by the way a very, very talented person. Look what he’s done. So I feel very badly. But a lot of people are thinking he’s going to run my campaign.”

There you go Republicans THAT is your presidential candidate for 2016. 

And Fox News is your preferred source for "news."

Aren't you proud?

Megyn Kelly becomes the latest to accuse Roger Ailes of sexual harassment. Update!

Courtesy of New York Magazine:  

As a chorus of prominent Fox News women have gone public defending Roger Ailes against the wave of sexual-harassment allegations sparked by former Fox News host Gretchen Carlson’s lawsuit, the network’s biggest star, Megyn Kelly, has been conspicuously silent. Kelly’s refusal to join in Ailes’s orchestrated defense has led to speculation about why. 

Now we have the answer. According to two sources briefed on parent company 21st Century Fox’s outside probe of the Fox News executive, led by New York–based law firm Paul, Weiss, Kelly has told investigators that Ailes made unwanted sexual advances toward her about ten years ago when she was a young correspondent at Fox. Kelly, according to the sources, has described her harassment by Ailes in detail. 

Kelly’s comments to investigators might explain why the Murdochs are moving so quickly to oust Ailes.

I've been waiting for Megyn Kelly to add her name to the list.

And now that she has there is no doubt that Ailes is toast.

Personally I hope it does not stop with Ailes.

I have a strong feeling that misogyny and sexual harassment are rampant at Fox News.

Remember Gretchen Carlson originally named Steve Doocey as well, and back in 2004 Bill O'Reilly settled a sexual harassment suit filed by his former producer, Andrea Mackris.

Update: It appears that Ailes is in the "advanced stages" of a discussion to leave Fox News.

So, I guess they're not waiting until after the GOP convention then?

Gretchen Carlson files lawsuit against Fox News saying she was fired for refusing Roger Ailes' sexual advances. Update!

Courtesy of the Daily Beast: 

Former Fox News host Gretchen Carlson has sued the network’s president, Roger Ailes, claiming that he fired her after she rebuffed his sexual advances. 

In a lawsuit filed Wednesday morning, the former daytime host says the Fox News mastermind repeatedly harassed and demeaned her with “severe and pervasive” sexual harassment before she was officially fired on June 23—the final day of her contract.

According to the lawsuit, Ailes tried to convince Carlson to sleep with him “by various means,” including the inclusion of “sexual and/or sexist comments” into everyday conversation. Last September, the 76-year-old executive allegedly told her: “I think you and I should have had a sexual relationship a long time ago and then you'd be good and better and I'd be good and better.” 

“Sometimes problems are easier to solve that way,” Ailes purportedly added.

Carlson also claimed that Fox and Friends co-host Steve Doocy harassed her as well: 

Carlson claims in her complaint that Ailes called her a 'man hater' and accused her of wanting to 'show up the boys' when she complained about what she alleges was diminishing treatment and 'pervasive sexual harassment' by her Fox & Friends co-host Steve Doocy. 

 Doocy also 'created a hostile work environment by regularly treating her in a sexist and condescending way, including by putting his hand on her and pulling down her arm to shush her during a live telecast,' claims the complaint. 

These complaints about Doocy are why she was fired from the marquee show in 2013 and placed as the host of her own afternoon show, claims Carlson in her complaint. 

So I guess the next logical question to ask is will this open a floodgate of sexual harassment charges against Fox News?

And if not does that mean that the other female hosts such as Megyn Kelly, Andrea Tantaros, and Martha MacCallum, did NOT get sexually harassed by Roger Ailes, or did they acquiesce to his requests?

And if it is the latter does that explain how this unqualified moron ended up with a million dollar contact?

Pretty sure I know the answer to that question .

Update: The Huffington Post is saying that Gretchen Carlson is not the only one and that many others have been sexually harassed by Ailes: 

“He always brags to people about how he doesn’t do polling or testing when he chooses his on-air talent. He told me that if he was thinking of hiring a woman, he’d ask himself if he would fuck her, and if he would, then he’d hire her to be on-camera,” the employee said.

Yep, that's what we thought. 

Update 2: At least ten more women have contacted Carlson's attorney now. 

Fox News accuses Donald Trump of having a "sick obsession" with Megyn Kelly.

Everybody should boycott the @megynkelly show. Never worth watching. Always a hit on Trump! She is sick, & the most overrated person on tv.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 18, 2016

Trump tweeted the above after Kelly did a segment about him on her show, which by the way virtually EVERY cable news network does several times a day it seems.

Fox News responded by issuing this statement:   

Donald Trump's vitriolic attacks against Megyn Kelly and his extreme, sick obsession with her is beneath the dignity of a presidential candidate who wants to occupy the highest office in the land. Megyn is an exemplary journalist and one of the leading anchors in America. We're extremely proud of her phenomenal work and continue to fully support her throughout every day of Trump's endless barrage of crude and sexist verbal assaults. As the mother of three young children, with a successful law career and the second highest rated show in cable news, it's especially deplorable for her to be repeatedly abused just for doing her job.

Now Trump goes after just about everybody who dares to criticize him, so is it fair to accuse him of having a "sick obsession" with Megyn Kelly?

Let's check his tweets for more evidence.

"@gregens21: @BertShad @FoxNews @megynkelly She's choking on the results! Call her justifiable Kelly. Justifying everything she says."

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 15, 2016

"@jsconlon11: @BertShad @Foxnews @megynkelly I tried to give them a shot tonight, but they have the whole anti Trump cheerleading team."

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 15, 2016

"@SCNAK45: @megynkelly is trying so hard to bash @realDonaldTrump it's ridiculous" Don't worry, everyone is wise to Crazy Megyn!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 15, 2016

Can't watch Crazy Megyn anymore. Talks about me at 43% but never mentions that there are four people in race. With two people, big & over!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 16, 2016

Watching other networks and local news. Really good night! Crazy @megynkelly is unwatchable.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 16, 2016

Yeah okay, I definitely see their point.

This is really the thing about Donald Trump.

Not only is he so thin skinned that he must respond to virtually every criticism, but when that criticism comes from a woman it seems to piss him off like a thousand percent more.

In this case he is literally attacking a star of the Republican party's go to propaganda outlet, and turning the entire cable news station against him, simply because he cannot stand for a woman to stand up to him.

Man, I can hardly wait to watch him self destruct while facing off against Hillary Clinton.