Fox News

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump and Tucker Carlson were codependent. Their venn diagram was one angry white circle

      by

      At an 18 February 2017 rally, Donald Trump railed against immigrants and violence. He was unusually focused on Sweden, warning the crowd about recent terrorist attacks in the country: “You look at what’s happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this?” If a terrorist attack in Sweden seemed unbelievable, it’s because it was. There had been no attack by immigrants the night before Trump spoke. The most recent attacks on Sweden, at the time, were a series of bombings between November 2016 and January 2017 that were allegedly connected to the neo-Nazi group the Nordic Resistance.People in Sweden shared photographs of their very un-bombed houses. Reporters did their due diligence and wrote stories about how nothing at all had happened in Sweden the previous night. It was a news cycle of nothing. But all that nothing could not persuade the president he was wrong. Trump repeated the story over and over. He was right, he insisted in multiple interviews: Sweden had been bombed by immigrant terrorists and he knew because he’d seen it on Tucker Carlson Tonight.Trump and Carlson were locked in a folie à deux that made each other’s careers. As Trump demanded a wall between Mexico and the United States, Carlson aired show after show cherry-picking stories to inflate the dangers of immigration. As Trump railed against Muslims, Carlson aired aggrieved segments about Macy’s selling hijabs. Together, they tapped into a nativist anger in America. Trump’s audience was Carlson’s audience. The Venn diagram was one big white angry circle. And Carlson even went further than Trump. While Trump encouraged his supporters to get vaccinated, Carlson likened the vaccine to Nazi experiments.There are still questions about exactly why Fox fired Carlson on Monday morning. But it’s clear that in his wake, he leaves wreckage. Not just from advising his elderly viewers that they didn’t need the vaccine. Not just from downplaying the insurrection as “mostly peaceful” and “embarrassingly tepid”. Not just for normalizing racist and neo-Nazi ideology or for the way he demonized individuals he disagreed with even if they weren’t public figures. But in the way he redefined truth and helped define the Trump presidency. He certainly wasn’t the first, or even the most eloquent, but Carlson was the loudest John the Baptist leading the way of the Trump era, evangelizing for a politics built on petty grievances and outrage.And the connection between Trump and Carlson wasn’t accidental. They often texted and conversed. Trump sought Carlson’s advice on his presidential run. And while past presidents have had close relationships with media figures, theirs was more transactional. Carlson’s disinformation informed Trump’s approach to his presidency and Trump capitalized on the anger Carlson incited.Richard West, professor of communications studies at Emerson College and author of a forthcoming book on the media, told me that Carlson elevated “factitis” to an art. Factitis, as West defines it, is “[an]irrational fear and avoidance of reporting facts”.“He ushered in this perception that whatever you think is OK, whatever you feel can be viewed as real and factual,” West says. “And it has to be because I’m on TV reading a teleprompter. Years ago, we used to call this blogging. Now it’s called TV anchorship on Fox.”West described the symbiosis of Carlson’s influence, which peaked under the Trump administration, as the “Tucker-Trump transactional threat”. He describes it as a feedback loop, “where one person reports something that’s not a fact. The other says, ‘That’s true.’ And the other one says, ‘Yes, I told you it was true.’ It’s just kind of an odd transactional aversion to truth.”The journalist Brian Stelter, former host of CNN’s Reliable Sources, described the cratering legacy of Carlson more succinctly. “Tucker Carlson made cable news cruder, uglier, more toxic. And as much as he turned on some fans, he also turned off a lot of people.”Trump and Carlson knew that one of the most powerful tools at their disposal was scapegoating individuals, often those not used to the media spotlight. The researcher Nina Jankowicz was targeted by Carlson after she was appointed to head the newly formed Disinformation Governance Board of the US Department of Homeland Security. The board was disbanded after it became the target of disinformation, and Jankowicz is still dealing with harassment. She told me in an interview that she could always tell when she’d been mentioned on Carlson’s show, by the fresh new wave of harassment. She doesn’t hold out hope that whoever replaces Carlson will be better: “And even if they replace Tucker with somebody who is more palatable, that legacy is one of lying for profit, lying for sport and lying without regard to the consequence of your lies. And that has really engendered this kind of normalization of political violence in America.”Jankowicz wasn’t the only woman Carlson targeted; it was regular feature on his show. The reporters Kim Kelly, Taylor Lorenz, and Lauren Duca all experienced Carlson’s ire. Sometimes they lost their jobs as a result, but they always received harassment from his fans, an army of angry viewers, ready to focus their vitriol on any target. The Trump-Carlson legacy is to transform both the right and the left into a nation of shitposters, a republic of dunk tweeters. A place where cruelty and disinformation is a bankable business model.I interviewed Carlson for a profile in the Columbia Journalism Reviewin 2018. I asked him if he felt responsible for the words he spoke, and the impact he had. I’d seen loved ones echo Carlson’s language about Black people and immigrants, in ways so nasty it left me devastated.My life and my community were cratered by Carlson’s rhetoric. He was dismissive and accused me of promoting censorship. But since the profile was published, it’s become clear that the lives of his viewers and the people he targeted where just rhetorical strategy to him. There was no care or concern over the damage he caused or the lives he ruined. And until his recent firing, there were very few consequences.At the time, people I talked to for the story insisted that Carlson didn’t believe what he said because it was just entertainment. And as his texts from the Dominion lawsuit show, he didn’t believe some of what he was claiming every night. But anyone who has read Hamlet knows that you become what you pretend you are. People die; a kingdom was ruined.Trump is running for re-election now without Carlson’s platform. What that does to his political power remains to be seen.But there’s no doubt that another of Murdoch’s apostles will take his place on Fox’s nightly lineup, just as Carlson replaced Bill O’Reilly. Maybe his replacement will be even more extreme, more willing to spin conspiracy theories for the Maga right. From O’Reilly to Glenn Beck to Carlson – that has tended to be the direction of travel.Like John the Baptist, despite having his head severed and delivered to Rupert Murdoch on a platter, Carlson’s gospel of hate will endure. It’s too embedded in the nature of American politics – both its tone and its language – to divest ourselves of it. And it’s too profitable. Carlson’s legacy is very real and we’re living in its ruins. More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Tucker Carlson breaks silence after abrupt departure from Fox News

      by

      Tucker Carlson has broken his silence for the first time since his abrupt departure from Fox News, posting a video to Twitter that did not directly address his reported firing.Carlson was one of the network’s biggest stars, and gained a large following while spouting xenophobic and racist rhetoric on his show, Tucker Carlson Tonight. He left Fox News without explanation on Monday. News outlets have reported that Carlson was fired on the personal order of Fox owner Rupert Murdoch for, among other things, using vulgar language to describe a female executive.On Wednesday, Carlson shared a cryptic two-minute video on his Twitter account that did not explain his exit, but offered sweeping complaints about the state of American discourse. He said what he noticed “when you step away from the noise for a few days,” is how nice some people are.“The other thing you notice when you take a little time off is how unbelievably stupid most of the debates you see on television are,” he added. “They’re completely irrelevant. They mean nothing. In five years we won’t even remember we heard them. Trust me, as somebody who participated.”Fox hasn’t commented publicly on why it cut ties with Carlson, but it came after Fox News last week agreed to pay voting equipment company Dominion $787.5m to settle a high-profile defamation lawsuit.Carlson’s stunning departure is reportedly connected to a lawsuit filed by the his former senior booking producer Abby Grossberg, who claimed she faced sexism and a hostile work environment.Fox News said in an official statement that Carlson and the network had “mutually” agreed to separate.On Monday, Fox News immediately replaced Carlson’s slot with a rotating roster of hosts until a permanent replacement can be found, the network said. In his video on Wednesday, Carlson implied his fans had not seen the last of him.“Where can you still find Americans saying true things?” he said. “There aren’t many places left but there are some and that’s enough. As long as you can hear the words, there is hope. See you soon.”Associated Press contributed to this story More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Tucker Carlson’s vulgar language in texts contributed to Fox News firing – report

      by

      Tucker Carlson’s firing from Fox News came after he used vulgar language to describe a network executive, the Wall Street Journal reported.Carlson described a senior Fox News executive as a C-word in a text message obtained by lawyers as part of a defamation lawsuit between the network and Dominion Voting Systems, according to the Journal, which like Fox is part of the Murdoch media empire.In a case settled last week for $787.5m, Fox lawyers reportedly convinced the Delaware judge to redact the message from public filings. Carlson, however, was still reportedly furious the network was not doing enough to protect him.Other messages in which he called the Donald Trump adviser and attorney Sidney Powell attorney a C-word and a “bitch” were made public as part of the lawsuit.The primetime host’s internal messages were among the most embarrassing for Fox, as he said he “passionately hated” Trump, called for a colleague to be fired for accurately fact-checking claims about voting machines, and bluntly criticized Powell.More embarrassing information about Carlson may yet come to light. Rolling Stone reported on Tuesday that the network has a dossier of damaging information about him.The thrust of Dominion’s defamation claims involved other anchors: Maria Bartiromo, Jeanine Pirro and Lou Dobbs. Dobbs’s show was cancelled in 2021 but Bartiromo and Pirro remain.Carlson was one of Fox’s biggest stars before he was abruptly fired on Monday, reportedly learning of his fate 10 minutes before it was announced.The Fox executives Suzanne Scott and Lachlan Murdoch reportedly made the decision on Friday. The Los Angeles Times reported that Rupert Murdoch, the 92-year-old patriarch of the owning family, decided to fire Carlson with input from top officials.Carlson faces a separate lawsuit from Abby Grossberg, a former senior booking producer who claims there was a sexist and hostile working environment on his show.Staffers sat around joking about which female politicians they would rather sleep with, Grossberg alleges.She also claims she was encouraged to lie when Dominion’s lawyers presented her with the message in which Carlson called Powell the C-word and a “bitch”.Grossberg told lawyers it did not make her feel uncomfortable and she did not know how she would react if that type of language was used by Carlson and those around him. In reality, she said in a court filing, she knew Carlson was capable of using that language and felt “terrible” each time she heard it in the office.Some at Fox had become concerned that Carlson, the network’s most-watched anchor, had begun to go too far in racist themes on his show, got the network in too much trouble with advertisers, and was operating as if he was bigger than the network, the Journal reported.Carlson broadcast his show from a private studio in Maine. He has not commented on his firing.Approached by Daily Mail reporters in Florida on Tuesday, the 53-year-old said: “Retirement is going great so far” and added: “I haven’t eaten dinner with my wife on a weeknight in seven years.”Asked about future plans, he “flashed a broad smile and joked, ‘Appetizers plus entree,’” the tabloid website reported.Announcing his departure on Monday, Fox News said: “Fox News Media and Tucker Carlson have agreed to part ways. We thank him for his service to the network as a host and prior to that as a contributor.”It is not the first time Carlson has come under fire regarding vulgar language. In 2015, his brother Buckley Carlson sent an email to Carlson and Amy Spitalnick, then a spokesperson for the New York City mayor, Bill de Blasio, calling her a “whiny bitch”.“Whiny little self-righteous bitch … and with such an ironic name, too … Spitalnick? Ironic because you just know she has extreme dick-fright; no chance has this girl ever had a pearl necklace. Spoogeneck? I don’t think so. More like LabiaFace,” Buckley Carlson wrote.Carlson did not seem to have any issue with the language, telling BuzzFeed News, which obtained the email: “I just talked to my brother about his response, and he assures me he meant it in the nicest way.”On Wednesday, Spitalnick told the Guardian in an email: “Fox News knew exactly who Tucker Carlson was when they handed him a primetime show in 2016 – and they saw his misogyny and white supremacy as an asset, at least until they faced legal liability.“We should be clear: it’s not just his vulgar comments about women. Like with so many extremists, that misogyny was an early warning sign as he quickly became a fan favorite among avowed neo-Nazis – who saw him as their most effective vehicle to normalize their violent hate.” More

    • 263 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Tucker Carlson has lost his job – but the far right has won the battle for the mainstream | Owen Jones

      by

      It is difficult to begrudge anyone for celebrating the downfall of far-right provocateur Tucker Carlson, ignominiously ejected from Fox News. Slack-jawed, spitting rage, his tirades were calculated at stirring the resentment of angry white America: from declaring that immigrants made the US dirtier and poorer to embracing the “great replacement theory”, which spreads the noxious lie that the authorities were deliberately “undermining democracy” by replacing US-born Americans with immigrants.Fox staff were reportedly jubilant at his departure. Perhaps this quote from a Fox reporter, in which they celebrate seeing the back of the network’s premier conspiracy theorist, will give you pause: “It’s a great day for America, and for the real journalists who work hard every day to deliver the news at Fox.”Oh, really? Were they the journalists who prompted a potential lawsuit from the city of Paris after falsely claiming the French capital had “no-go zones” for non-Muslims? Or aired many negative and sceptical statements about Covid vaccines at a critical point in the pandemic? Or indeed aired the false claims that voting machines had been rigged to steal the 2020 presidential contest, leading to Fox News’ $787m settlement with Dominion Voting Systems? With journalistic standards like these, Carlson will no doubt be replaced by another demagogue committed to stoking the same fear and rage. The focus on specific bogeymen such as him stops us from understanding the real problem.Carlson is merely one figurehead of a misinformation industry that has dramatically reshaped rightwing politics across the world. Defined by conspiratorial thinking, often crude racism and bigotry, and calculated deception, it has succeeded in destroying whatever barrier existed between the traditional centre right and what lies beyond. Carlson – or indeed the modern godfather of this movement, Donald Trump – are easy to single out on account of their vulgarity and open repudiation of respectability. This allows the mainstream right that originally courted and enabled this extremism to evade responsibility.Consider the case study of Liz Cheney, the three-term representative for Wyoming, celebrated as a principled leader of the besieged moderate Republicans for her opposition to Trump. This was the same Cheney who, when offered the opportunity to eschew the conspiracy that Barack Obama was foreign-born, responded: “People are uncomfortable with a president who is reluctant to defend the nation overseas.” Here was a climate denier who almost always voted with the Trump administration. Difficult, then, not to conclude that it was the style, rather than substance, of Trumpism that the likes of Cheney found so objectionable. Cheney was crushed in her Republican primary at the hands of a Trump-backed candidate – consumed by a monster she helped create.It was the “moderate” Republican pinup John McCain who selected Sarah Palin as his running mate. It was the former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney who suggested wiretapping mosques and placing foreign students under surveillance. It was the presidential candidate Ted Cruz who called on law enforcement to “patrol and secure Muslim neighbourhoods”. And a previous generation of rightwing zealot pundits walked so Carlson could run: like the late Rush Limbaugh who identified the “four corners of deceit”: government, academia, science and the media.It was, in sum, a collective effort on the US right to promote bigoted and conspiratorial modes of thinking that radicalised the base of the Republicans and transformed a rightwing capitalist party into a more conventionally far-right movement that increasingly rejects democratic norms. It’s why Trump’s main Republican rival is Florida governor Ron DeSantis, a rightwing authoritarian who has suggested the Federal Reserve will seek to prevent Americans buying guns and fuel, and who has shared a platform with people who appear to echo QAnon and other conspiracy theories.This is a tendency long ago identified by the US historian Richard Hofstadter, who unpacked the “paranoid style in American politics” in a 1964 article. This was a mechanism, he believed, for remoulding society: that by identifying a menace to society – be it Muslims, trans people, or anti-fascists – you could marshal support for radical right causes.It is a phenomenon well beyond the United States. It was the Vote Leave faction that took over the Tories who spread the deception about Turkey joining the EU; Michael Gove who denounced “experts”; and Boris Johnson’s ugly rhetoric around surrender, betrayal and traitors that attracted the support of far-right extremists. It was Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro who synthesised bigotry towards Brazilian minorities and disinformation about Covid and stolen elections. And it is Hungary’s far-right regime that spreads antisemitic conspiracy theories about Jewish businessman George Soros, and implies that outside forces will force children to have gender-affirming surgery.Indeed, Hungary itself is a striking case study about what has happened to the modern right globally. The ruling party, Fidesz, was long considered a conventional centre-right party until it radicalised in power, hollowing out the substance of Hungarian democracy. Misinformation, bigotry and conspiracism acted as battering rams, radically reshaping rightwing politics.Carlson may well have been booted from Fox News, but what victory does it represent? The brand of conspiratorial demagoguery he belongs to has succeeded in drastically reshaping rightwing politics. The “paranoid style” that was once identified as a dangerous trend in conservatism is now its main operating system. The consequence? Democracy as we understand it is imperilled in the US and beyond. The likes of Carlson played their role, but this political catastrophe would never have happened without those who retained ill-deserved reputations for moderation while throwing open the door for the most radical extremism.
      Owen Jones is a Guardian columnist More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Wow’ and ‘OMG’: shock after Fox News announces Tucker Carlson departure

      by

      Shocked reactions are pouring in across social media on the abrupt departure of Tucker Carlson from Fox News, with the network announcing that the prominent far-right television host is leaving the channel.Many were surprised by the announcement given the popularity that Carlson enjoyed at Fox as well as the highest-rated host on cable television.“Wow,” tweeted the New York Democratic congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who accused Carlson and other Fox pundits of inciting violence during an MSNBC interview that aired on Sunday.Some remained skeptical that Carlson’s departure from Fox would be the end of his career despite critics who called out his show as racist and inaccurate.“I’d like to think Tucker Carlson’s departure is the end of an era, but I’m quite certain it’s the beginning of his political career,” the founder of gun control advocacy group Moms Demand Action, Shannon Watts, tweeted.Several conservative pundits took to social media to express their displeasure at the announcement.“I STAND WITH TUCKER CARLSON!”,” the far-right Colorado congresswoman Lauren Boebert tweeted.Donald Trump Jr, the son of former president Donald Trump, tweeted his reaction to Carlson’s departure news. The tweet read, “Confirmed: Tucker Carlson out at Fox News. OMG.”Carlson’s departure from Fox has already been acknowledged on air by the network.Shortly after the news broke, the Fox anchor Harris Faulkner shared the channel’s statement, adding: “We want to thank Tucker Carlson for his service to the network as a host, and prior to that, as a long-term contributor.”In a statement published early on Monday, Fox News announced that Carlson and the network agreed to part ways and that his last show was last Friday.“Fox News Media and Tucker Carlson have agreed to part ways,” Fox’s statement said. “We thank him for his service to the network as a host and prior to that as a contributor.”It appears that many at Fox – including Carlson himself – had no inclination that Friday would be his last show.Fox was still previewing Carlson’s show Monday morning, with the network teasing an interview between the departed host and Vivek Ramaswamy, an entrepreneur and 2024 US presidential candidate.For what will be his last show with Fox, Carlson hosted Tyler Morrell from Cocco’s Pizza in Pennsylvania for his show last Friday. Morrell went viral after doorbell camera video showed him helping police catch a suspected car thief while on a delivery.While chowing down on pizza pies delivered to him by Morrell, Carlson wished viewers a happy weekend before signing off.“We’ll be back on Monday,” Carlson said. More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Fox paid $787.5m for its 2020 lies. But will that restore confidence in elections?

      by

      Election officials across the US have faced an unprecedented amount of threats and harassment since the 2020 election. Now they say that Dominion Voting Systems’ decision to settle its landmark defamation lawsuit with Fox for $787.5m last week may not do enough to stop conspiracy theories about the company’s machines leading into the 2024 election.While election officials in states and localities that use Dominion machines agree the settlement is a win for the integrity of elections, they lamented that election misinformation will continue, especially given that Fox News personalities and executives didn’t have to testify about whether they knowingly spread false claims about the voting machines, or offer a public apology.The Maricopa county recorder, Stephen Richer, who was asked by Dominion to sit for testimony in the litigation in September, said he expects the misinformation about Dominion machines, which is one of the most prevalent types he hears about regularly, to continue.“This is not a panacea, especially at the grassroots level,” he said about the settlement. “I don’t think that a bunch of people are going to now say, ‘Oh it seems that tabulation equipment was actually OK.’”Richer runs elections in the largest county in Arizona, a critical swing state that has been a hotbed of election misinformation, threats and harassment.“We still, every single day, hear questions about vote switching, connectivity to the internet, and it doesn’t matter how many studies, how many reports, how many outside audits, how many election technology companies come in and look at this, those haven’t been able to go away,” he added.Public pressure about Dominion’s machines has made the Maricopa county board of supervisors, which selects the county’s vendors for voting machines, consider whether or not to renew its contract with Dominion for vote tabulators, Richer said. In a court filing, he said: “I have concerns over my own personal security if we re-enlist Dominion.”But other officials are calling Tuesday’s settlement a victory for elections. Georgia’s secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, said it “fully vindicates Georgia’s voting system”.“It vindicates how we recorded the election results in 2020,” he said, adding: “We have shown, without a doubt, that we have safe and secure elections.”The settlement might not stop some who hold extremist views from believing elections are rigged, but there is little that can be done to change those people’s opinions, Raffensperger said, and even a trial would not have done anything.“Anyone who wants to educate themselves on the issue and be fully informed will have the information and they just have to come to grips with the reality that the machines accurately recorded the votes in 2020. The machines did not flip the votes,” he said. “People that really want to lean into these false narratives, the misinformation and disinformation, perhaps there’s nothing you can do to convince them.”New Mexico’s secretary of state, Maggie Toulouse Oliver, told a local reporter that the settlement was a victory for voter confidence and democracy.“Hopefully the settlement of this lawsuit helps to further discredit the people and organizations that push election lies in our state and across the nation,” she said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTammy Patrick, chief executive for programs at the National Association of Election Officials and a former Maricopa county elections official, said litigation and sanctions are all steps in the right direction to hold people accountable for misinformation, but the public has to know these things are occurring.“It will only be with the same effort of amplification of these penalties that we can hope to convince the public of the truth: that their votes were accurately counted,” she said. If that happens, “then election officials might be able to get back to the tasks at hand of conducting elections without simultaneously dealing with death threats and distracting conspiracy theories”.Experts on misinformation say they don’t expect Fox News to change its behaviour, as election disinformation is now entrenched throughout the Republican party. In its statement after the settlement, Fox acknowledged that the court found some of its statements about Dominion to be false, but said its settlement “reflects Fox’s continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards”.And even if Fox News tamps down on some of the claims it spreads, other further-right networks will continue to air extreme claims.Still, Richer said he’s hopeful the settlement could mean that false claims will be less widespread moving forward.“Will claims like these have less oxygen because some of the main platforms that gave oxygen to them will be reticent to air them?” he asked. “Maybe it’ll have more of a helpful impact for the ‘24[-hour news] cycle’.” More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      AOC: ‘Better for country’ if Dominion had secured Fox News apology

      by

      Dominion Voting Systems would have better served the US public had it refused to settle its $1.6bn defamation suit against Fox News until the network agreed to apologise on air for spreading Donald Trump’s lie about voter fraud in the 2020 election, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said.“What would have been best for the country, would have been to demand that and to not settle until we got that,” the New York congresswoman said.Dominion and Fox this week reached a $787.5m settlement, shortly before trial was scheduled to begin in a Delaware court.Legal filings laid out how in the aftermath of Joe Biden’s election win and the run-up to the January 6 attack on Congress, Fox News hosts repeated claims they knew to be untrue, as executives feared viewers would desert the network for rightwing competitors One America News and Newsmax.Rupert Murdoch, the 92-year-old media mogul and Fox News owner, was among witnesses due to testify.Fox faces other legal challenges but its avoidance of an apology to Dominion caused widespread comment, with some late-night hosts moved to construct their own on-air mea culpas.Ocasio-Cortez, popularly known as AOC, acknowledged Dominion was not beholden to public opinion.“This was a corporation suing another corporation for material damages,” she told the former White House press secretary Jen Psaki, now an MSNBC host, on Sunday. “Their job is to go in and get the most money that they can. And I think that they did that. They are not lawyers for the American public.”The congresswoman continued: “I think what is best for the country, what would have been best for the country, would have been to demand that and to not settle until we got that. But that is not their role.“And so for us, I think this really raises much larger questions. Very often, I believe that we leave to the courts to solve issues that politics is really supposed to solve, that our legislating is supposed to solve.“We have very real issues with what is permissible on air. And we saw that with January 6. And we saw that in the lead-up to January 6, and how we navigate questions not just of freedom of speech but also accountability for incitement of violence.”Nine deaths have been linked to the January 6 Capitol attack, including law enforcement suicides. More than a thousand arrests have been made and hundreds of convictions secured. Trump was impeached a second time for inciting the attack. Acquitted by Senate Republicans, he is the leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination.Asked if media platforms should be held accountable for incitement, Ocasio-Cortez said: “When it comes to broadcast television, like Fox News, these are subject to federal law, federal regulation, in terms of what’s allowed on air and what isn’t.“And when you look at what [the primetime host] Tucker Carlson and some of these other folks on Fox do, it is very, very clearly incitement of violence. And that is the line that I think we have to be willing to contend with.” More