Tag: sean hannity
Fox News Drives Trump Bus Over 'Disloyal, Trump-Hating Leaker' Joe Kent

Fox News Drives Trump Bus Over 'Disloyal, Trump-Hating Leaker' Joe Kent

The White House responded to Joe Kent’s Tuesday resignation as director of the National Counterterrorism Center over President Donald Trump’s ill-conceived war of choice in Iran with a comically lazy smear campaign that Fox News’ MAGA propagandists vigorously channeled.

After Kent wrote in a letter to the president that he was stepping down because he could not “in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran” and that it “posed no imminent threat to our nation,” Fox’s hosts and guests described him as the “liberal darling du jour” and a “Trump hater” who “was about to be fired” and “never should have been in that position of leadership.”

Notably, none of them seem to blame Trump for elevating Kent — a notorious conspiracy theorist who unsuccessfully ran for Congress with backing from the likes of Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones — to the nation’s top counterterrorism post in the first place. Nor did Kent himself blame Trump for starting the war with Iran: He argued the president had been “deceive[d]” by an “echo chamber” composed of Israelis (a revival of blood-soaked antisemitic narratives) as well as “influential members of the American media,” a possible reference to Fox’s own stars.

Fox did not have much to say in the first hours after Kent’s announcement. But after Trump denounced Kent from the Oval Office, saying he had “always thought” Kent was “very weak on security” and calling it “a good thing that he’s out because he said that Iran was not a threat,” the propaganda network geared up on the president’s behalf.

Aishah Hasnie, a Fox White House correspondent, was the vector for an anonymous “senior administration official” to attack Kent. Hasnie posted to social media that her source had said Kent was “a known leaker” who “was cut out of POTUS intelligence briefings months ago” and “has not been part of any Iran planning discussions or briefings at all.” (The source also claimed “the WH told DNI Tulsi Gabbard he should be fired for suspected leaks,” but other Hasnie sources disputed that.)

Likewise, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt criticized Kent’s claim that Iran posed “no imminent threat to our nation,” claiming: “As President Trump has clearly and explicitly stated, he had strong and compelling evidence that Iran was going to attack the United States first. This evidence was compiled from many sources and factors.”

The administration’s argument is thus Trump appointed Kent as the nation’s top counterterrorism official even though the president believed he was “very weak on security,” and he subsequently didn’t see all the bulletproof evidence that Iran was an imminent threat to the United States because he had been cut out of classified meetings on the subject — but not fired — for being a “known leaker.”

Meanwhile, the administration has produced no evidence that Iran was preparing an attack to either the public or Congress. Indeed, according to Reuters, Pentagon briefers “acknowledged in closed-door briefings with congressional staff … that there was no intelligence suggesting Iran planned to attack U.S. forces first.”

Fox runs with the Kent attacks — without implicating Trump

None of this hangs together, but it was more than enough for Fox’s stable of propagandists, who ran with those talking points while ignoring their damning implications for the president.

“Respect to Joe Kent's service, he is an American veteran, but he never should have been in that position of leadership,” Hudson Institute senior fellow Rebeccah Heinrichs said on Fox’s America Reports, albeit without referencing who nominated him to the post in the first place.

“He was leading a counterterrorism unit, and Iran is the greatest source of terrorism,” she continued. “And even last year, Joe Kent even alluded to the fact that the Iranians were trying to assassinate President Trump. So clearly he should never have been in that position of leadership, and it's a good thing that he has decided to step aside.”

Fox host Laura Ingraham called Kent “the liberal darling du jour,” citing praise of his “very huffy letter” on other networks.

Ingraham then brought on Dan Bongino, the Fox contributor who sandwiched a year as deputy director of the FBI between tenures as a right-wing podcaster. Bongino downplayed Kent’s role in the administration and claimed that the “open source” evidence shows Iran was an imminent threat and that Trump “has a bevy of material that if he could do the Men in Black thing and erase your mind tomorrow, if he told you right now, you would come to the imminent threat conclusion in a snap.”

Ingraham added that “a senior U.S. official told Fox on background that Joe Kent was cut out of presidential intel briefings months ago due to allegations that he was suspected of leaking and that he hasn't been part of any Iran discussions or briefings,” though she caveated that “he's beloved” and “served his country, you know, proudly.”

Fox host and Trump shill Sean Hannity, after praising the Iran campaign, commented, “Now, a handful of very loud, oh, let's say isolationist Democrats, people that have agendas, once pretending in some cases to be part of President Trump's base, they're not happy.”

“This includes the now former director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kent,” he added, before suggesting Kent is a “Trump hater” pushing “conspiracy theories” and a “Democratic talking point.”

Hannity went on to claim that Trump would not “be swayed by lobbyists, politicians, countries, world leaders, the media, or anyone else on planet Earth,” and disputed Kent’s claim that Iran had not posed an “imminent threat” on the grounds that Iran was purportedly “a week away from 11 nuclear bombs potentially being built.”

On Fox News @ Night, former Republican National Committee spokesperson Elizabeth Pipko cited past Kent comments she said made “the perfect argument” for Trump’s strikes on Iran. “I fear that what he did was actually not sincere, not genuine,” she added. “And I think when American troops overseas are risking it all for us, a move like this and a statement like that is actually dangerous.”

And the co-hosts of Fox & Friends provided a perfect on-message recap for their viewers on Wednesday morning:

Lawrence Jones first brought up Kent, prompting Brian Kilmeade by saying that “some people in the administration” are “known to be leakers.”

Kilmeade, one of the biggest Iran hawks on Fox, replied that it was “just incredible,” branding Kent as part of “the podcast isolationist wing” and that his letter “said hey, Democrats, we have something for you to talk about.”

After the group talked up the case for war and aired Trump’s comments criticizing Kent, Jones commented, “That's why the administration cut him out of briefings months ago.”

“He didn’t have the intel, and obviously they didn't trust him to be in the inner circle on the decision making,” Jones added.

Kilmeade stressed that by issuing his letter, Kent had been disloyal to Trump. “You can do whatever your conscience wants you to do,” he commented. “But by doing it in this way, he's actually hurting the guy that gave him the best job of his life after he lost two straight congressional races.”

“Good point, good point,” Ainsley Earhardt commented. “And they say he was about to be fired, people had suggested that.”

None of them questioned why Trump nominated such an ignorant, disloyal, deceitful person to such an important post in the first place.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Fox's Ultra-Hawkish Hosts Are Thrilled With Iran War -- And Eager To Escalate

Fox's Ultra-Hawkish Hosts Are Thrilled With Iran War -- And Eager To Escalate

Less than two weeks after President Donald Trump launched an ill-conceived, ill-planned war in Iran, the Fox News Cabinet members who urged him to launch military strikes there are either pushing him to escalate or stressing what a great job he’s done.

Zeteo’s Justin Baragona and Asawin Suebsang confirmed on Thursday that televised input from the Fox propagandists Trump trusts played a role in the president’s decision to launch a war of choice. Trump regularly shapes policy based on what he sees on the network, and hosts Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, and Brian Kilmeade were loudly urging the president to attack Iran in the days before he did so.

Though U.S. and Israeli forces have successfully bombed a wide array of Iranian targets and assassinated its former supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the U.S. military also appears to have killed scores of Iranian children with a Tomahawk missile strike on a school, Iran has now taken the incredibly obvious step of closing the Strait of Hormuz — the chokepoint through which about 20 percent of global crude oil and liquified natural gas flows — and it remains unclear what a strategic victory could look like.

But if Trump is watching his favorite morning show, Fox & Friends, he’s hearing Kilmeade call for an expanded mission that would require putting troops on the ground in Iran.

“We killed their commander, and we’re killing a lot more, and the Israelis’ intelligence on the ground is unbelievable,” he said on Thursday. “Hopefully, that leads to grabbing that uranium out of some of those destroyed sites, maybe that’ll be something that will be announced shortly.”

Kilmeade’s casual invocation of “grabbing that uranium” elides the difficulties involved in attempting to secure and transfer potentially over a thousand pounds of material that has likely been dispersed across a hostile foreign country and possibly outside of it.

Robert Pape, a political science professor at the University of Chicago, detailed the potential dilemmas of such an operation in a Wednesday appearance on MS NOW.

Kilmeade has also suggested U.S. forces seize Iranian territory — using language that seems carefully chosen to appeal to the president.

“I just wonder how soon until we decide to grab that Kharg Island, where 90% of all the Iranian oil is shipped,” Kilmeade offered on Wednesday.

“If we have that, you want the ultimate leverage, we have it,” he added, “I just think that that's something the president has talked about since the ‘80s, everyone knows it, and that would really get their attention.”

Kilmeade went on to say that the administration could be hesitating because if the U.S. seizes Kharg Island, there would be “a temporary uptick” in the cost of oil during the “transition.”

“But Iran can't adjust economically without it,” he added. “So if you want to create ultimate leverage on a regime that is so scared, they are afraid to put their supreme leader out in public, I think that's one way to do it.”

He concluded, appearing to address Trump directly: “If you are in control of it, you literally are doing what you did with [Venezuelan President] Delcy Rodriguez. We took all their ships and said nothing is coming in or out. We will control your oil. We flipped the government to take Maduro out, and now we’re refining their oil.”

Kharg Island “is arguably the country’s most sensitive economic target,” Dan Sabbagh, defense and security editor for The Guardian, wrote on Wednesday, but “an effort to seize the island, given its size, would be likely to require a sizeable and sustained operation, greater than a typical special forces incursion.”

He further reported that “experts say bombing or capturing the site with US forces would be likely to cause a sustained increase to already surging oil prices, as it would amount to taking the entirety of Iran’s daily crude exports offline.” That could cause a “tailspin” for global markets, even if oil shipments subsequently resumed.

Levin and Hannity can’t stop praising the “extraordinary leader” who launched the war

While Kilmeade is focused on coming up with new ways for Trump to risk the lives of American service members and undermine global financial and political stability, Hannity and Levin have been telling their viewers — which could include the president on any given night — that the war is going swimmingly and that anyone who says otherwise is lying.

“After just one week, Iran's Air Force, Army, Navy is in tatters,” Hannity said Monday. “Its radical leaders, they're all dead. A murderous regime is now a shadow of its former self.”

He went on to explain that in Iran, “a new supreme leader, ayatollah, has been announced and his days as of this hour are likely numbered” and the country “is apparently struggling to put up a fight.”

On Tuesday, Hannity praised Trump for demanding Iran remove any mines it had placed in the Strait of Hormuz, commenting: “Tonight, the message from the Trump administration and President Trump is crystal clear. Any Iranian ship that poses a threat to the freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz will be obliterated without warning and sent straight to hell and the bottom of the sea in a million pieces.”

He added, “A little advice to anyone still alive in Iran's Navy, dock your vessel, head to dry land, and maybe you want to go home and join your families.”

And on Wednesday, Hannity began his nightly monologue with “the very latest figures out of Operation Epic Fury.”

SEAN HANNITY (HOST): Iranian ballistic missile attacks, they’re down by over 90%. More than 5,000 targets, now, have been eliminated.
Air dominance has been secured. More than Iranian vessels have been obliterated, including all four Soleimani-class warships. The old ayatollah, supreme leader, and all of his top deputies and the next layer of leadership are all dead.
The new ayatollah is too afraid to appear anywhere in public. In fact, we don’t even know if he’s dead or alive.
Now, all of this in less than 11 days. America and Israel are dominating the evil regime in Iran.

On Saturday, Levin lavished Trump with praise for attacking Iran, calling him “an extraordinary leader and president who spent most of his life as a captain of industry, several industries, in fact, who gave up an enormously successful career to serve his country, a country he so dearly loves.”

He went on to attack those who suggest U.S. aims in Iran are unclear.

“Now, lot of people are saying, people who know better, what's the mission? Why are we acting now and so forth and so on?” he said. “Ladies and gentlemen, it's just appalling to hear Democrats and commentators and others make these statements when they know damn well what the mission is. We've faced this for 50 years.”

Levin subsequently asked Richard Goldberg of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, “It's so important that we have this commander-in-chief when we have this commander-in-chief because literally none of this would be happening, would it?”

“Mark, I don't believe that presidents know when history is going to come knocking,” Goldberg replied. “It happens at times you can't expect. But what makes a great president is being willing to answer the call, not to shy away, not to cower, not to be deterred, as many past presidents have, and repeatedly throughout his two presidencies, when history knocks, President Trump answers the call, and that is what he just did.”

Goldberg went on to say of the war: “We are six days in, seven days in and this is moving at a pace no one could ever have imagined. We are decimating their missiles, their drones, their Navy, their ability to remake a nuclear weapons program, and soon, with the help of our allies in Israel, decapitating their ability to wage war against the Iranian people as well.”

“Understand what is at stake here for our national security. Donald Trump is delivering for the United States of America,” he concluded.

“Beautifully put, and conversely, the Democrats are trying to obstruct him every step of the way,” Levin replied.

The president was watching Levin and Goldberg wax poetic about how great he is.

“Rich Goldberg was GREAT on Mark Levin tonight,” Trump posted that night. “Two guys who really get it! Thank you both.”

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Fox Hosts Urge Flooding Iran With Small Arms To Incite Regime Change (Or Civil War)

Fox Hosts Urge Flooding Iran With Small Arms To Incite Regime Change (Or Civil War)

Fox News hosts Sean Hannity, Brian Kilmeade, and Jesse Watters have suggested flooding Iran with small arms to incite regime change, a reckless proposal that even some of their guests have rejected.

The United States and Israel last week launched an unprovoked war on Iran with shifting stated goals, one of which is regime change — or, perhaps more accurately, regime collapse. That could take several forms, including a mass uprising of the population in Iran or possibly the introduction of proxy forces, such as Kurdish militias, whom the CIA is reportedly working to arm. (The United States has a decadeslong history of encouraging Kurds across several countries to rise up and then betraying them.)

The risks of such a development are numerous, the most obvious being the threat of sending Iran into a spiral of violence that could turn into a civil war like in Syria after the Arab Spring or Iraq during the U.S. occupation. The United States poured weapons into both of those countries, helping to fuel the violence and worsen the internal conflicts.

Although such an outcome would appear disastrous on its face, there is ample evidence that the United States and Israel want to turn Iran from a regional power into a failed state incapable of countering their influence. Flooding the country with weapons could do that, and Fox News personalities are leading the charge.

Host Sean Hannity is the network’s most vocal supporter of the idea, both on his Fox prime-time show and on his radio program, which airs on Premiere Radio Networks.

“I already know” that arming Iranians is “part of the plan,” Hannity said on his March 2 radio show, telling a caller that “if you have millions of Iranians that, in fact, do have weapons and they rise up against the remnants of this regime — and there's not a lot — or for those Revolutionary Guard forces that will not put their weapons down, there's only one way to get rid of them.” (Whether Hannity’s claim to “already know” President Donald Trump’s war plans was bluster or not, the administration has been leaking insider information to its allies in right-wing media.)

Hannity returned to the topic several times during that show. “The Iranian people need to have elections, and they need to get armed, and they need to be able to fight back” against the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, he said. Later, he added, “I’m hoping that the students, the people in Iran, I’m hoping that they get the arms for any remaining Revolutionary Guard forces that won't lay down their weaponry.”

“You can't win a revolution with a slingshot — at some point they are going to need to be armed to take out the remaining loyalists,” he said the following day.

That evening, Hannity broached the idea on his Fox show during an interview with network contributor and retired Army Gen. Jack Keane, one of the war’s most vocal cheerleaders outside the Trump administration.

“Do we need to arm the civilians that had taken to the streets, that were being mowed down by the tens of thousands?” Hannity asked.

“In terms of arming the people themselves, I would pause on doing that,” Keane said. “I wouldn’t rush into that.” He added, “I don’t think just arming them and creating that — upgunning that level of violence is what we need.”

Seemingly unsatisfied with that answer, Hannity later in the same show asked retired Army Gen. David Petraeus, who oversaw the arming of U.S.-backed “death squads” in Iraq during the so-called surge, what he thought of the idea.

“Should part of the plan be to arm the people that have been slaughtered on the streets that were looking for freedom and change, so that it won’t take any American or Israeli forces?” Hannity asked. “I’ve got to believe there is going to be holdovers that are loyal to the former regime.”

“Well, I agree with my old boss and mentor and friend, Gen. Jack Keane, who earlier said that he’s not certain about that given there’s no organization there.”

Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade has floated the idea too.

“I just wonder at some point is the CIA or Mossad going to be able to arm the people?” Kilmeade said on March 3. “If you arm the people so they're not slaughtered in the streets, that would begin to get the IRGC’s attention.”

“We've got to find a way to arm that population and open up these prisons,” Kilmeade said on March 4, referring to Kurds in Iran.

His colleague Jesse Watters made a similar suggestion.

“Trump has even been on the phone with the Kurds," Watters said on March 3. “We might be able to arm them and use them as boots on the ground.” (Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, formerly a co-host of Fox & Friends’ weekend edition, said on March 4 that “none of our objectives are premised on the support of the arming of any particular force.”)

The Trump administration has done such a poor job explaining its war on Iran that even right-wing media allies are having a hard time articulating the conflict’s larger strategy and goals. Predicting the direction any war will take is a fool’s errand, but it doesn’t take a crystal ball to know that flooding Iran with weapons is a recipe for disaster and potentially state collapse. For Fox News hosts, that appears to be an acceptable outcome.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World