Tag: laura ingraham
Jesse Watters

Pentagon Inspector General Report Demolishes Excuses For Hegseth's 'Signalgate'

A forthcoming report from the Defense Department’s watchdog dismantles the excuses that Pete Hegseth’s former Fox News colleagues offered in March after The Atlantic reported that the secretary of defense had shared plans for an imminent U.S. strike against Houthi targets in Yemen on a Signal chain with other top Trump administration officials — and, inadvertently, Atlantic editor-in-dhief Jeffrey Goldberg.

The Atlantic and CNN reported Wednesday that the DOD inspector general concluded after a monthslong probe into Hegseth’s conduct that the information Hegseth shared had been classified at the time he received it, and that sending the attack plans through unsecured networks had endangered U.S. national security and the lives of the military service members tasked to the mission. An unclassified version of the report is scheduled for release Thursday.

Fox’s right-wing stars scrambled to downplay Hegseth’s actions in the days after The Atlantic first reported on his text messages, denying that the information had been classified or that its transmission through unsecured channels carried risks and generally mocking the notion that anything untoward had occurred beyond Goldberg’s addition to the chain.

“It's abundantly clear that none of this put national security at risk,” Fox host Laura Ingraham claimed of the texts. “And there was no risk to our troops, and the entire world is safer because of the actions that our troops took. Now, some of us are actually happier about that, others are rooting for the United States to fail.”

Sean Hannity insisted to his prime-time viewers that “there was no classified material revealed in those texts,” later adding, “I would spend more time on this Signal issue, but it's such a nonissue, I don't even think it's worth talking about at this point.” On his radio show, Hannity expanded on his argument: “The distinction between sensitive and top secret classification information is very critical because we're dealing with sensitive information. The administration has reiterated no classified material was discussed, and, more importantly, the mission was operationally a complete success.”

Jesse Watters initially treated the story as a joke, asking his viewers: “Did you ever try to start a group text? You’re adding people and you accidentally add the wrong person? All of a sudden your Aunt Mary knows all your raunchy plans for the bachelor party? Well, that kind of happened today with the Trump administration.” After Goldberg released the texts, Watters declared the scandal “dead in 48 hours,” saying that all they showed was that officials “accidentally leaked to a reporter. It was a mistake. Hopefully it doesn’t happen again.”

Will Cain, Hegseth’s former co-host on Fox & Friends’ weekend edition, claimed on his eponymous show that while “it is incredibly concerning that sensitive information would be sent with a journalist included in the thread.” With that out of the way, he explained why this was actually good: “But the bigger takeaway from me is it is an insight, a transparent insight, into the thought process and dialog of our national leaders.”

And for Greg Gutfeld, texting battle plans over unsecured channels is simply “how winners live their lives.”

While Hegseth’s old buddies at Fox News were bloviating on his behalf, legal and military experts were explaining to journalists — including Fox’s own Jennifer Griffin — the grave risks of Hegseth’s actions. As more evidence arose of Hegseth’s malfeasance, including reports that Hegseth’s messages were derived from a classified email labeled “SECRET/NOFORN” and that he had also shared attack plans in a second text chain that included members of his family, they went quiet rather than either admit fault or double down on their support for the defense secretary’s actions.

The IG report’s release comes as Hegseth faces media and congressional scrutiny for reportedly ordering extrajudicial killings in the Caribbean that legal experts argue would constitute “at best, a war crime under federal law.”

It turns out there are downsides to promoting a second-tier Fox pundit best known for his defenses of alleged war criminals to lead the most powerful military in the history of the world and a sprawling bureaucracy with millions of employees.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

ingraham and trump

Trump Burned For Transforming White House Into 'Dollar Store Mar-a-Lago'

President Donald Trump showed off his latest White House project to Fox News host Laura Ingraham on Tuesday: A presidential "walk of fame" complete with Trump's signature style of gold accents and cursive writing.

As he was escorting Ingraham down the West Wing Colonnade of the White House on Tuesday evening, Trump proudly showed off the 47 portraits of all U.S. presidents, complete with the words "The Presidential Walk of Fame" on the wall. At one point Trump referred to the sign as "half-inch thick bronze," before referring to it as "pure brass" in the same breath.

"Take a look at this, fellas, if you want to see detail," Trump told Ingraham's camera crew. "Most people do a sign and paint it on the wall. So that's half inch thick bronze. Carved. By a very talented person. And it's brass. It's pure brass."

Trump's segment quickly attracted a wave of ridicule from various journalists, commentators and other experts on social media. According to Sequoia Brass & Copper in West Hayward, California, bronze and brass are two different alloys, with bronze being made up of copper and tin, while brass is made up of copper and zinc. Former Jeopardy champion Clinton Reese reminded the president of this fact in all caps: "BRASS IS AN ALLOY. IT CAN'T BE PURE. JFC WHAT A MORON."

"Gotta love a billionaire real estate developer who doesn't know the difference between brass & bronze," TV writer and producer Jill Weinberger posted to Bluesky.

"He’s turning the White House into Dollar Tree Mar-a-Lago," wrote former Obama and Biden White House appointee Andrew Weinstein.

"This is like bad 90s web design brought to life," quipped software developer Andrew Coyle.

Other observers hoped that Trump's mark on the White House wouldn't be permanent. Former Seattle Times reporter Chuck Taylor wrote that the display was "so tacky it's sad. But at least it can be undone."

"It gives me a tiny jolt of pleasure to know that someday-- maybe not for decades, but someday-- we'll have a president who will take the claw-end of hammer to this," anthropologist Jonah Blank wrote.

Trump: Take a look at this if you want to see detail. Most people do a sign and paint it on the wall. So that's half inch thick bronze. Carved. By a very talented person. And it's brass. It's pure brass.

[image or embed]
— Acyn (@acyn.bsky.social) November 11, 2025 at 8:01 PM

Reprinted with permission from Alternet



Laura Ingraham

Star Fox Host Laura Ingraham Is Now In Business With President's Son

Fox News star Laura Ingraham spent years railing against the purported corruption caused by the business interests of President Joe Biden’s son. But now she’s going into business with Donald Trump Jr., federal records show, a wildly and obviously unethical conflict of interest that no credible news outlet would tolerate.

Ingraham and Donald Trump Jr. are among the directors of “Colombier Acquisition Corp. III,” a special-purpose acquisition company which is seeking to raise $260 million in an initial public offering in order to acquire another company, according to a registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Friday and first reported by Bloomberg.

The firm’s CEO is Omeed Malik, co-founder and managing partner of the venture capital fund 1789 Capital, which invests in companies aligned with the MAGA movement and has “grown into a financial powerhouse” since November, when Trump was elected president and his son became a partner. Several other executives and directors for the SPAC are also 1789 Capital employees, the filing shows.

The SPAC’s prospectus positions the company as a way to benefit from “the market’s excitement to fund the next chapter of American Exceptionalism by investing in the Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Growth (‘EIG’) economy, a set of era-defining business and investment opportunities that we believe will build the next period of American prosperity.”

It continues: “These opportunities are rooted in America-first cultural shifts after the 2024 U.S. election, a resurgence of merit-based investing in growth equity, a focus on market-based solutions for America, and a celebration of America’s most prominent founders. Opportunities in the EIG economy include but are not limited to companies that reindustrialize the American economy and enhance American prosperity and security.”

Ingraham’s bio in the document identifies her as “the host of ‘The Ingraham Angle,’ an hour-long cable news program, which launched in October 2017, on Fox News (weeknights),” a program which “features Ms. Ingraham’s analysis of politics, business, legal matters and the culture, along with her interviews with prominent individuals in those fields.”

The potential conflicts of interest created by Ingraham’s roles with the SPAC and Fox are legion:

  • She stands to financially benefit from a business plan that is explicitly tied to the success of the MAGA movement.
  • She stands to financially benefit from the sprawling business interests of the president’s son, which otherwise could have been fodder for critical reporting.
  • She seems to have received the opportunity due to her loyalty to the MAGA cause, which creates the implication that failure to remain loyal would prevent future such opportunities.
  • She is slated to chair the SPAC’s compensation committee, meaning she could directly control payments made to the son of a president she covers on her show.
  • The SPAC’s prospectus cites its team’s “unique access to celebrities, technologists, tastemakers, investors, and entrepreneurs,” which “will assist in our target sourcing efforts,” as well as their “track record of building and boosting brands by partnering with influential figures with large followings”; applied to Ingraham, this language corrupts Fox’s booking process by suggesting a potential secondary rationale for appearances on her show.

Notably, Ingraham regularly claimed the business dealings of Hunter Biden in the years prior to his father’s presidential election implicated Joe Biden in rampant corruption. Hunter Biden’s name was mentioned during at least 164 episodes of Ingraham’s Fox show in the less than two years from January 3, 2023, when Republicans took control of the House of Representatives after promising to use their power to investigate those business interests, through Trump’s election on November 5, 2024, according to a Media Matters review of the Kinetiq video database.

Ingraham claimed during one such program, in June 2023, that Hunter Biden’s clients were “sophisticated players” who were “prepared to pay millions” because “they believed they would get certain benefits in return from the U.S. government.”

“Every single person in the White House press room knows how all this works,” she added. “The only defense that they have is that we can’t prove that Biden himself did lobbying or was directing Hunter’s business.” Ingraham concluded by bemoaning that “these foreign interests are now encouraged to believe that America is for sale” and arguing that “one pillar of the 2024 campaign for Republicans should be, the Bidens are getting richer while your family is getting poorer.

A few short years later and President Trump’s son is overseeing a business empire which includes not only the venture capital funding through 1789 Capital but also foreign real estate deals; massive crypto investments; and nebulous advisory roles with several companies. And Ingraham has looked at the various financial schemes involving the president’s family and decided to join him and cash in.

Again, no credible news outlet would allow a conflict of interest of this magnitude, roughly analogous to if Hunter and MSNBC star Rachel Maddow were to have gone into business together during the Biden administration. But don’t expect the Fox brass to step in: Once you’ve put the president’s daughter-in-law on the payroll and given her an hour a week to produce propaganda for the administration, you’ve acknowledged that you are in a different line of work.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters


Trump Has Intimidated MAGA Outlets As Epstein Scandal Boils Over

Trump Has Intimidated MAGA Outlets As Epstein Scandal Boils Over

President Donald Trump has succeeded in getting his media supporters to stop talking about his old friend Jeffrey Epstein, the deceased sex offender and financier. Prominent MAGA media figures ignored a wave of Epstein news on Tuesday, signaling that Trump’s pressure campaign has paid off with their silence — even as (or, perhaps, because) his own corrupt involvement in the story has grown.

The initial resistance but eventual submission of Fox stars, Newsmax hosts, and MAGA influencers demonstrates that the Trumpist right’s only defining principle is that the president is good and his position at any time is the correct one — everything else can be tossed over the side at his command.

MAGA media figures lashed out at the Trump administration in July after the FBI and Justice Department released a memo which debunked foundational claims of the right’s Epstein narrative. Trump, who has a host of connections to Epstein, responded to that criticism by demanding his allies move on from the story and offering up new common enemies for them to focus on instead.

Meanwhile, Trump’s DOJ made a series of shady moves related to the case. First, the DOJ attorney who successfully prosecuted Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell in 2022 was fired. Then the department’s No. 2, former Trump personal lawyer Todd Blanche, interviewed Maxwell in prison with clemency from her old friend the president all but dangling over the conversation. The Trump administration subsequently transferred Maxwell to a minimum-security prison camp and released transcript and audio from the interview, in which the convicted sex trafficker asserted that she never saw Trump “in any inappropriate setting.”

Nothing to see here!

On Tuesday, members of Congress returned to Washington following the summer recess and brought with them a passel of Epstein news:

  • The House Oversight Committee met behind closed doors with six women who say they were sexually trafficked by Epstein.
  • Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) filed a discharge petition to force a vote on his bill with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) requiring the release of files related to Epstein that have not been publicly released.
  • House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-KY), in an apparent effort to forestall momentum around the bill, put 34,000 pages of Epstein files online — but as reporters and committee Democrats quickly noted, the documents included redactions and the overwhelming majority had already been released.
  • Massie accused Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) of orchestrating a cover-up of the Epstein story.

The influx of Epstein news, combined with a press conference on Wednesday featuring 10 of the disgraced financier’s victims, led Politico’s Playbook to declare this “the story Trump can’t kill.”

But while mainstream news outlets are providing plenty of coverage of the Epstein case, many Republican voters are likely not hearing about any of it. The propagandists they listen to prioritize remaining in Trump’s good graces over everything else, and they are largely following his command to sweep Epstein and his victims under the rug.

Fox host Laura Ingraham signaled she planned to cover the Epstein story, teasing the Oversight Committee’s document release at the top of her Tuesday broadcast. “We'll bring you any breaking details as they come,” she said.

But Ingraham never returned to the story. And her prime-time colleagues Jesse Watters, Sean Hannity, and Greg Gutfeld did not mention Epstein that night. On Wednesday, while CNN, MSNBC, and a host of other networks carried the press conference with Epstein’s victims live, Fox instead aired a few minutes of remarks from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) before cutting away. The Trump administration even helped the network counterprogram, providing an appointee for Fox to interview.

Fox isn’t the only MAGA outlet giving the Epstein story short shrift.

Newsmax’s prime-time hosts — including Greg Kelly, whose show took a bizarre pro-Maxwell turn last month — also did not mention Epstein on Tuesday.

And several MAGA commentators who initially criticized the Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein story after the release of the DOJ/FBI memo did not mention Epstein on Tuesday on their X accounts, including Tim Pool, Laura Loomer, Charlie Kirk, and Jack Posobiec.

Trump told them to stop caring about Epstein and his victims, and after some initial resistance, they’ve done it. Instead, the MAGA right’s most prominent figures are focusing on stories the president wants covered in the way he wants them discussed. They are spending their energy greasing the skids for Trump’s federal invasion of Chicago and praising the military strike he ordered on a vessel the administration claims was carrying Venezuelan gang members and drugs.

Perhaps the stories Epstein’s victims tell at Wednesday’s press conference will force these people to find their consciences. But for now, it appears any effort to inform Republican voters about developments in the Epstein story will run up against the reality that their preferred news providers have dropped the story at Trump’s insistence.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World