HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Fox News chief’s failed a...

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:08 AM

Fox News chief’s failed attempt to enlist Petraeus as presidential candidate

Source: Washington Post

So in spring 2011, Ailes asked a Fox News analyst headed to Afghanistan to pass on his thoughts to Petraeus, who was then the commander of U.S. and coalition forces there. Petraeus, Ailes advised, should turn down an expected offer from President Obama to become CIA director and accept nothing less than the chairmanship of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the top military post. If Obama did not offer the Joint Chiefs post, Petraeus should resign from the military and run for president, Ailes suggested.

The Fox News chairman’s message was delivered to Petraeus by Kathleen T. McFarland, a Fox News national security analyst and former national security and Pentagon aide in three Republican administrations. She did so at the end of a 90-minute, unfiltered conversation with Petraeus that touched on the general’s future, his relationship with the media and his political aspirations — or lack thereof. The Washington Post has obtained a digital recording from the meeting, which took place in Petraeus’s office in Kabul.

McFarland also said that Ailes — who had a decades-long career as a Republican political consultant, advising Richard M. Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush — might resign as head of Fox to run a Petraeus presidential campaign. At one point, McFarland and Petraeus spoke about the possibility that Rupert Murdoch, the head of News Corp., which owns Fox News, would “bankroll” the campaign.

“Rupert’s after me as well,” Petraeus told McFarland.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/fox-news-chiefs-failed-attempt-to-enlist-petraeus-as-presidential-candidate/2012/12/03/15fdcea8-3d77-11e2-a2d9-822f58ac9fd5_story.html



Fox News' chief and owner both working directly for the GOP?

What a shock!

20 replies, 3808 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 20 replies Author Time Post
Reply Fox News chief’s failed attempt to enlist Petraeus as presidential candidate (Original post)
onehandle Dec 2012 OP
bucolic_frolic Dec 2012 #1
darkangel218 Dec 2012 #2
dixiegrrrrl Dec 2012 #3
Baitball Blogger Dec 2012 #5
darkangel218 Dec 2012 #9
Rozlee Dec 2012 #10
Ken Burch Dec 2012 #4
Peace Patriot Dec 2012 #12
Berlum Dec 2012 #6
politicaljunkie41910 Dec 2012 #7
RoccoR5955 Dec 2012 #8
Sunlei Dec 2012 #11
BadGimp Dec 2012 #13
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #14
rhett o rick Dec 2012 #15
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #16
rhett o rick Dec 2012 #17
Initech Dec 2012 #18
olddad56 Dec 2012 #19
darkangel218 Dec 2012 #20

Response to onehandle (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:11 AM

1. McFarland an "Agent without Portfolio"

As they say in the spook biz

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:11 AM

2. I bet his affair was a major reason why he didnt run. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to darkangel218 (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:28 AM

3. was his affair ongoing at that time, I wonder.

if it was, it shows he really believed it would remain a secret.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dixiegrrrrl (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:35 AM

5. They all do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dixiegrrrrl (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:01 AM

9. I belive so. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dixiegrrrrl (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:16 AM

10. They always think their rank will protect them.

In the first and second Gulf War, high ranking officers always fraternized and hooked up with younger lower-ranking women. Some even left wives at home to marry them like my bunk buddy did. It was pretty blatant; there wasn't even any attempt at discretion. And I might just be jaded by all I saw, but if Petraeus is a serial adulterer now, I'm sure he's been one for quite a while. He probably just thought since everyone else was doing it, he could get away with it or buy off any females. He should have stuck with the young impressionable girls instead of a hardened obsessed woman if he wanted secrecy. And not left a cyber trail for the CIA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to darkangel218 (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:33 AM

4. Or...did Fox push the story of his affair BECAUSE he didn't run?

Payback, perhaps(since Ailes and Murdoch may have thought Petraeus was the only candidate who could beat the president)...And .I'm also wondering if it could possibly be that Ms "All In" herself was actually part of an entrapment project designed to set up the whole Petraeus takedown in the first place.

(Did Faux break the Petraeus story, or am I imagining that, btw?)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:24 PM

12. i like your mind.

I agree it was a takedown. But my guess is that Leon Panetta did it. For one thing, Panetta is a close associate of Bush Sr. --member of Bush Sr.'s "Iraq Study Group" ("old CIA") which I believe ousted Rumsfeld in 2006, mostly over Cheney/Rumsfeld's intention to nuke Iran (Bush Sr. disagreed with that) but also because of the war between the Pentagon and the CIA that Cheney/Rumsfeld had started, which was dividing the war machine and endangering Jr. (CIA retribution--Fitzgerald investigation, etc.). Panetta was at the CIA for a year, now at the Pentagon, to heal the wounds (and cover up the breach). Some well-connected analysts tout Panetta as the most powerful man in the world. His connections to Bush Sr. provides a motive to take down Betray-Us: Jeb, 2016.

But I don't think Panetta would have done it (taken down Betray-Us) without further reason. The most immediate problem may have been a Romney/Betray-Us/Rove plot to steal the 2012 election from Panetta protege Obama. This attempted coup d'etat (if that's what it was) involved Benghazi in some way (LIHOP, MIHOP or mere opportunism), Betray-Us leaks to Romney (including what his mistress said, CIA torture dungeon down the street from the embassy), Romney gets his "talking points" ready (which struck me as treasonous all by itself--candidate jumping into a highly sensitive national security crisis, in the midst of the crisis, with U.S. personnel at risk around the globe), and Rove tries to steal Ohio (and his failure to do so causes Rove's meltdown on Faux News election night). (One of the fun parts of this theory is that Anonymous may be Leon Panetta.)

Betray-Us may have been appointed CIA Director (following Panetta, who had been welcomed there with open arms and champagne corks popping, according to reports) with the understanding that he would help consolidate the "peace" between the CIA and the Pentagon that Panetta was negotiating. But Betray-Us got ambitious and used his position to try to overthrow his nominal boss, Obama, and his real boss, Panetta, allying with the uber-fascists who want to use the war machine in the bluntest of fashions (nuke Iran, oil war in Latin America, God knows what-all, and "big boots" repression at home). There are for sure uber-fascist (Cheney-Rumsfeld) moles embedded at CIA, Pentagon and elsewhere. (For one thing, it's probable that they did the Honduran coup, which happened only six months into Obama's first term and left Obama flat-footed in LatAm--discredited from the start, with Brazil's president, Lula da Silva, stating in a speech that "The U.S. has not changed.")

In short, Betray-Us betrayed his mentors, perhaps angling for Joint Chiefs chair under Romney (or future VP or Prez) or creating his own "mastermind" position (a la Panetta). His email correspondence with his mistress certainly points to hubris. (One of the most hilarious parts of the official, corporate-news narrative is about the FBI agent "stumbling upon" the CIA Director's mistress. Oh, Leon! Such a priceless humorist!)

Anyway, that's my work-in-progress theory. It's less likely, to my mind, that Faux News would take down Betray-Us just because he didn't want to be presidential puppet of Faux-Murdoch. He was too useful a figure to throw away like that.

Thinking out loud: Something caused the Romney Benghazi "talking point" to come to a dead halt just before the election. That part of the coup attempt (if that's what it was) was failing as well (or being foiled). And then, bang, the election, Obama wins and Betray-Us is out (like the next day, wasn't it?). So, it may be that, say, McCain (or some such uber-fascist operative) clued Faux News in, that the coup had failed and they better get out ahead of the Betray-Us story ("he's toast," in other words).

It's quite interesting that Faux News-Murdoch wanted to run him as president (the gist of this OP). Looks like there may be a corporate news "war" going on, something akin to the Pentagon-CIA "war," this one about who controls the war machine's propaganda. Washington Post is CIA. How did they get this recording? is one question. Why are they piling on, is another? I mean, Betray-Us is history--why go on about it? Maybe they smell the coup attempt. (Could they be actually intending to practice journalism again? Naw. And I've recently begun wondering if Watergate was journalism or something else--a takedown of Nixon for some hidden reason.) It's looking more like a battle move against Faux-Murdoch.

--

The Fox News chairman’s message was delivered to Petraeus by Kathleen T. McFarland, a Fox News national security analyst and former national security and Pentagon aide in three Republican administrations. She did so at the end of a 90-minute, unfiltered conversation with Petraeus that touched on the general’s future, his relationship with the media and his political aspirations — or lack thereof. The Washington Post has obtained a digital recording from the meeting, which took place in Petraeus’s office in Kabul. --from the Psst OP (my emphasis)

--

WHAT is an "unfiltered" conversation? (Just wondering.)

Somebody's TAPING the Big War Chief in his war office in Kabul?!

This raises a lot of questions, first and foremost, did he know he was being taped? Was somebody (McFarland?) taping the Big War Chief without his knowledge? That would be...well, interesting (I was going to say mind-boggling.) And, if it was with his knowledge, how did he let this tape get out of his control? And, if it was McFarland, how did the Washington Psst get hold of a Faux News tape? And, if it wasn't McFarland, who was it?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:54 AM

6. The Republican soul is corrupt to the core. Fox (R) is beneath contempt as a...

...so called "news" operation. Pure unadulterated propaganda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:59 AM

7. Why is the Fox Network still in the News business?

Anyone who so blatantly proposes to bankroll a presidential candidacy while still mascarading as a news organization should have all their licenses revoked. Particularly after what we've learned that transpired at NewsCorp's other newpapers and venues. These people have no integrity and should not be allowed to use the term News and Fox in the same sentence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:01 AM

8. The *PERFECT* Slogan if he runs

Petraeus will betray us!

As if he already hasn't!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:29 AM

11. sounds like more republican tries for control using blackmail over the affair.

Fox lies is an arm of the republican party and very similar to hitlers propaganda machine.

Wonder who planned, funded the womans author career and got her that position in the first place. Authorities should also check every one of those 30k !! emails sent by the other woman 'groupie' and make sure they all were penned from her personal computer alone.

Doesn't excuse the Generals stupid dumbass personal choices and another woman who goes after married men.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:04 PM

13. ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?????

A US media outlet geting this deeply involved in US Politics is FUCKING SCARY AS SHIT!!!!

Where is the fucking outrage??

Can you imagine if Rachel Maddow did this for MSNBC??

This is dangerous shit people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:27 PM

14. Why is a media company interfering with national security affairs

and trying to direct (and pay for) Petraeus's career moves? This is bizarre and unseemly even for Fox.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #14)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 05:45 PM

15. Is that rhetorical? nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #15)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 06:09 PM

16. LOL, I guess so. I don't really expect a good answer.

I just feel like this should be illegal, somehow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 06:46 PM

17. I knew what you meant. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 06:55 PM

18. Is Fox News attempting to establish a coup?

If so brand them as traitors, shut 'em down and revoke their license. Arrest the high levels of the network.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:14 PM

19. what if he had run and the affair wasn't discovered until a week before the erection

that would have been interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to olddad56 (Reply #19)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:02 AM

20. "erection"?

Were you trying to be sarcastic?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread