Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
What Happened on Fox When Gingrich Mentioned Soros?
Something odd happened on Fox when former Speaker Newt Gingrich, a guest on the show Outnumbered, mentioned George Soros as one of the people funding the radical segments of our society, including BLM, the riots, etc. He was cut off by two of the panel, and an awkward pause ensued. Then they cut him off and proceeded to talk about another story.
Soros has been accused of buying the media and fueling government disruptions across the globe for decades. A critical election is seven weeks out and much of the media is biased toward the liberal agenda and beyond. Fox remains one of the few forums that offer alternative thought, including news stories that many will not touch. So what happened when Newt used the “S” word on their show? You be the judge:
Harris Faulker, who hosts the show was caught off guard and had something to say about it.
“So, we had a little incident on the show yesterday that was not smooth,” she said. “While I was leading that segment, we had interruptions, and I sat silently while all of that played out. Also not ideal. Our guest, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who is beloved and needed to be allowed to speak with the openness and respect that the show was all about, was interrupted. Do we debate with fire here? Yes. But we must also give each other the space to express ourselves.”
Published in General
Marie Harf is a leftie, and she would probably say Newt’s comment was anti Semitic; I think there’s more going on there, however. But Melissa works for Fox Business, so I don’t know what that was about. It does sound strange.
I haven’t seen anything like that since I watched a Harry Potter movie.
That was weird to watch. Two years ago the Left leaning LA Times reported that Soros and other liberal groups were putting big money into DA races. Now we are supposed to pretend that there were no consequences to that? And they still call Fox “right wing”?
I saw this frozen moment live. Soros is not the only one backing the new Woke prosecutors. There are “giving” clearing houses for donors that wish to remain anonymous. They take a percentage of a donation and use it for their own pet causes.
Faulkner’s apology was well worded. I don’t blame her for being caught off guard.
But it really wasn’t that strange. Democrats are always trying to control the scope and direction of conversations in the media. This is just an extension of their usual strategy to dismiss Soros funds as crazy rightwing conspiracy theory.
Soros is certainly a force for evil. But I’m not sure he stands out much from various other leftist billionaires whose “charity” donations fund destructive organizations. Gates and Bezos probably do as much harm.
Wealth, fame, and power are not evil in themselves But they amplify one’s choices for greater consequences. Sadly, it seems the most influential people these days are mostly misguided or willfully wicked leftists.
Harf’s phrasing is a little odd, or at least blunt.
I think in part the awkwardness is due to the distance–difficult to read the room if one talks out of turn–should one continue?
I do think that Soros has become a boogeyman much in the same way the Kochs have been for the left. That is, invoking his name isn’t so much evidence as it is a statement. Its not something where you can simply retort “no he doesnt” because sure, he puts alot of money into our politics. Does it have much effect? Maybe. Does Koch money have its desired effect? Eh. Not really. The reality is that these progressive pols are funded by many sources–how many people donated to bail out rioters? I know a few personally who don’t have the money to burn and did so anyway. Is Soros pulling the strings or just helping them to live lavishly doing the things liberals would be helping them do anyway?
This is all to say that Newt spoke for nearly a minute and appeared to bring his thought to a conclusion uninterrupted. Maybe he had more to say, but the awkward turn out of turn by Harf isn’t exactly unusual for her. And with so many things that could be said about how progressive finances work getting into a yea or nay on Soros with a few seconds left is a tough ask.
The only thing I can say with certainty, Harris, with the advantage of in person chemistry, such awkwardness would have been resolved more appropriately.
Ace of Spades:
The Koch Brothers are more Libertarian than conservative. Their interests may be more in the line of providing cheap labor for their farming interests. They are all over the map, for instance they are big donors to the ACLU.
The reluctance to criticize George Soros may be based upon the fear to appear anti-Semitic. George Soros is hardly an observant Jew. He’s not much different than Joe Biden, or Nancy Pelosi who are Catholic in name only.
I gave your comment a like. I did that because I also believe that with so much of the interviewing and having panels hold forth is for whatever reason no longer done in studio, and it results in so much more awkwardness.
However Soros is known here in California to be the money behind all the many “Women’s Marches” that went on between Feb and April 2017. He is also behind the money needed to keep Amy Goodman’s “Democracy Now” radio/internet show up and running. (Which fully explains why there are so many topics Ms Goodman just never gets around to mentioning – like the electronic vote counting that allows the Dems their victories in California.)
When the “Women’s Marches” petered out, he then began financing the next exhaustive 18 months of caravans of immigrants coming to California. Somehow these folks traipsed through 800 miles of hot dusty terrain, and arrived at the border wearing immaculate clothing, with not so much as a speck of dust or a wrinkle, and carrying brand new iPhones.
Many people talk about a “financial re-set” coming about due to the COVID emergency. Anyone who has looked into Soros’ past history knows how extremely skilled he is from benefiting from currency re-arrangements affecting entire nations.
I also suspect like so many power brokers before him, that he knows exactly where the skeletons are buried as far as each and every politician of both parties. That knowledge allows the power broker to gain more influence than mere money can bring such a person.
The interesting thing here, though, is Fox daytime was in essence calling out Fox’s prime-time lineup, where none of the show hosts AFAIK have turned Soros’ name into Voldemort.
Fox has always differentiated its day part shows from its prime time shows — the latter has leaned right from Day 1, while the pre-prime shows (other than Fox & Friends and The Five), have made their name based on the Fair & Balances slogan. You have seen dust-ups in recent years between daypart hosts like Shepherd Smith and the prime-time shows, or the Neil Cavuto-Donald Trump kerfuffle, but until now you haven’t seen an effort to censor during daytime something that would be permissible at night. It’s definitely something worth watching, and at the very least a sign that there are at least some people at Fox News who are not happy with its image (but may not get that they don’t keep their ratings if they turn Fox into CNN-lite).
Soros’ money and lever pulling has been at the center of so many “spontaneous revolutions” – Glenn Beck has been talking about Soros for decades, even going back to his days on Fox News. Soros’ fingers stir unrest in Europe. Our concerns include Europe right now, but the “color” revolution is underway, and Newt was trying to talk about it, and was shut down. This is worth watching:
https://www.glennbeck.com/theblaze-tv/civil-war-the-way-america-could-end-in-2020
Archbishop Carlo Vigano has also pinpointed Soros – they are trying to shout it from the roof tops. Shame on Fox for that hiccup.
I’m never sure how much to trust the excitable Glenn Beck. But I’ve recently followed his channel on YouTube and he claimed the other day that he was expressly forbidden from discussing Soros at Fox News.
Soros funds a wide range of left wing organizations, but there’s no evidence that he directs what they do. So some of these organizations might fund candidates for prosecution offices, but he’s not directly involved, or at least no one has come up with any evidence that he is. There are lots of other charitable organizations that contribute to these left wing outfits — everything from the Ford Foundation to the Gates Foundation. Soros is a bête noire for conservatives, and he’s a great one for generating irritating quotes, but there’s no justification for focusing on him as the source of these problems.
Entertainment people might be especially sensitive to the charge that going after Soros is antisemitic.
I agree that he is excitable (and funny) but I’ve followed his material for years, and my trust comes from two things – 1. What he talks about comes to fruition and 2. He has many, many qualified sources and verifies, but also asks his audience to do their own homework and not just take his word as gospel. I’ve done that. Years ago, he did that live segment in Greece, when the anarchists were burning Athens, they passed kids shooting up in broad daylight, homeless, open defecation on the streets. They were protesting, tearing up bricks and hurling them at police – it was a movement, and he said it’s only a matter of time before it comes here. I thought – no way.
He was a guest at the Vatican when Pope Benedict was installing the new band of Cardinals. He spoke to some of them – there was a language barrier, but they understood certain words. They knew the words replacement theology and held their hands up, saying no, and they knew the word Soros. Both segments were on you tube, now hard to find. His chalkboard talks where he draws links to people, to groups, to money prove to be right. He did it with the Arab Spring. Soros was the pot stirrer behind the scenes. It’s been fascinating to watch.
I question the antisemitism link – and don’t believe it. Soros is not a friend to the Jews.
But isn’t “hating” a “self-hating” Jew still – technically – anti-semitism?
First of all, we don’t actually know if he’s a self-hating Jew. I was asked if I was a self-hating Jew when I practiced Zen Buddhism for a period of time. One’s leaving a religion or not practicing it doesn’t make one self-hating. Also, I can technically hate a Jew for other than their being Jewish. Soros is hated because he backs evil activities.
One reason I put “hating” and “self-hating” in quotes was to emphasize the point that even if Soros is still ethnically – but not religiously – a Jew, if he himself doesn’t respect that characteristic, why should anyone else?
I guess I should have found a way to express it better.
No, you did fine. We are both clear now!
I’m a Fox shareholder, and just sent an inquiry on this to Fox Investor Relations. Doubt if I’ll get anything back other than PR-speak, but we’ll see….
I would expect something like when courts decide that police – or cities in general – have no (legally enforceable) obligation to protect any particular person, or property.
Oh for Pete’s sake, is it not possible that the stigma of being called an anti-semite has worn off after all these years? No one attacking him is attacking his religion or ethnicity – it is his diabolical financial activities that first earned him enmity.
Currently people are going after Bill Gates as well. Most of us do so without knowing what religion he happens to be. Gates is being charged in India for the haphazard method of his org having been behind testing vaccines on young women and girls in that country. Should those charges be dropped if he is Jewish or else he is found to be 168th Native American?
Must we avoid examining the actions of people on the world stage based on the fact that they are from an oppressed group? If that is the case, we Scots deserve total absolution, as we endured the Highland Clearances, and the Irish put up with the 150 years of oppressive British rule, resulting in the Irish “potato famine.”
I have wondered for several years about his motives. He certainly profited from his attack on the British Pound some years ago. Perhaps he just wants chaos.
https://theeconreview.com/2018/10/16/how-soros-broke-the-british-pound/
Well, and one is also dead.
The other . . . no friend to the Trump administration.
Hey I’ve got some Irish background, if that gets me a get-out-of-jail-free card, I’ll take it!
But of course it wouldn’t apply to ME, and I would probably be considered racist for suggesting it.
BTW, with so many separate interests protecting Soros, it is easy to subscribe to the idea that anyone saying anything bad about Soros is either an anti-semite, or a conspiracy theorist. If you google his name right now, rather flattering videos and interviews come up before any that took place long enough ago that the interviews were not quite as slanted.
Here is a look into Soros that came about before the various shell company foundations were able to use their monetary assets to protect the guy behind the foundations. At the 6:42 mark, the full discussion of Soros and his participation in liquidating assets of Jews who were being disappeared comes about. Notice the lack of regret.
So if anyone has acted in a way suggesting their being an anti-semite, Soros himself qualifies:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiqHiQYuoOs
But that still doesn’t “protect you” from being called anti-semitic yourself, for criticizing Soros. Which was my point earlier.
The interesting thing is I don’t begrudge the Bill Gates, and the Warren Buffets their fortunes. They can purchase their own private island, I don’t care. They know that their fortunes are not enough to finance their social virtue dreams. They know in their own way that it will be the middle class that will have to empty their wallets to fulfill their dream of some amorphous utopia.
Pope Leo XIII said it best in his encyclical Rerum Novarum in 1891:
Interestingly, much of the left, including some countries around the world, and especially the radical left, support the boycotting of Jewish goods and services, and have not supported Trump’s peace process, and have even made anti-Semitic remarks in public, but they have no problem taking Soros’ money. Soros is not even popular in his own country of Hungary.
Isn’t it more accurate to say “Soros is loathed in his home country of Hungary”?