Fox News takes pro-war position as MAGA media feuds over Israel-Iran conflict
President Trump is 'probably watching' this show, Travis said to Fox host Sean Hannity as both men urged the president to eliminate Iran's nuclear program.
'We have to do it,' Travis said, adding, 'We can't go halfway here.'
The president's television habits once again have serious foreign policy implications as the Trump administration weighs further US involvement in Iran.
The Israel-Iran conflict has exacerbated a deep rift in MAGA media over how the US conducts itself abroad, especially when it comes to Israel. Republican hawks are clashing with MAGA isolationists, and many of the arguments are happening on social media sites like X, as well as podcasts like Steve Bannon's 'War Room.'
Get Reliable Sources newsletter
Sign up here to receive Reliable Sources with Brian Stelter in your inbox. But Trump's favorite network, Fox News, isn't making as much room for debate. Guest after guest on Fox has played to Trump's ego — simultaneously praising the president and pushing for US intervention through his television screen. (At one point, Fox host Kayleigh McEnany, a former Trump aide, waxed poetic about him being a Churchillian 'man of action.')
On Hannity's show Tuesday night, weekend host Mark Levin literally screamed on-air as he depicted a battle of 'good versus evil' and doubted the patriotism of the isolationist camp.
Levin's view is dominant on Fox's air. While some guests on Fox have warned against escalation, they've been few and far between, and not nearly as loud or omnipresent as Levin.
Tucker Carlson's absence is palpable. After he was fired from Fox in 2023, Carlson built himself a digital media platform with a big megaphone on X, as he proved again Tuesday night by teasing a contentious interview with Sen. Ted Cruz.
But Carlson and his isolationist views are no longer as visible to Trump, who has an old-school, cable-centric mentality about the media.
Levin and Carlson embody the right's competing forces on foreign policy. Levin wants regime change in Iran; Carlson wants the US to stay out of it. Both men say they are representing the 'America first' MAGA movement.
Their weeks-long feud turned especially ugly last week, after Israel launched airstrikes in Iran, which in turn pulled out of scheduled nuclear talks with the US and retaliated with a series of missile strikes.
Carlson called on Trump to 'drop Israel' and 'let them fight their own wars.' He branded Levin, Hannity, and Fox patriarch Rupert Murdoch as 'warmongers' pushing the president to join the conflict.
Levin responded by calling Carlson an antisemite and a 'maggot.' He dredged up Carlson's past criticism of Trump and questioned the former Fox star's allegiance to the MAGA movement.
Facing backlash from Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson among others for his foreign policy decisions amidst the backdrop of the conflict between Israel and Iran, Trump says he came up with the term "America First" and that he decides what that means. While Levin's name-calling has been petty, the back-and-forth has serious impacts. Two weeks ago, when Trump and Levin dined together at the White House, Carlson caught wind of the meeting and immediately tweeted a denunciation of Levin 'hyperventilating' about Iran's nuclear program.
Levin's lunch with Trump is a testament to the bombastic radio and TV host's wide influence on the right.
Contrary to Carlson's recent claim that 'nobody watched' Levin's weekend TV show, Levin is actually one of the most popular figures on Fox's weekend lineup and is a regular presence on Hannity's weekday show as well.
Hannity threw shade at Carlson on Tuesday night, though not by name, when he said Iran is 'the biggest existential threat to the entire western world,' and 'people that can't seem to understand that kind of puzzle me.'
Wednesday morning's 'Fox & Friends,' another one of the president's cherished shows, also promoted an interventionist point of view. To 'people who say it's not our fight,' host Brian Kilmeade said, 'you could say that, but you're not paying attention. Since the 1980s, they have been killing Americans.'
Then, Kilmeade threw to a video clip of Levin's pro-war arguments from the night before.
'I'm not one that wants to get involved in things. I'm not. But we have no choice! They are our enemy!' co-host Lawrence Jones said.
This foreign policy feud has torn apart other pockets of MAGA media. Far-right podcaster Candace Owens exited The Daily Wire last year after she called Israel's war in Gaza a 'genocide' and openly embraced antisemitic conspiracies. The conservative media empire's co-founder Ben Shapiro, who is adamantly pro-Israel, called Owens' comments 'disgraceful,' kicking off a battle that has since rippled throughout the extremely online right.
Some Fox shows have acknowledged the divides. 'On the right we have a big difference of opinion here, but unlike the left, we are not afraid to show it,' Greg Gutfeld said Tuesday afternoon on 'The Five.' However, that segment was the only direct mention of Carlson on Fox in recent days, according to a closed captioning search of the network's coverage.
Fox is clearly more comfortable in a different mode: Ridiculing the left. 'MIDEAST CONFLICT DIVIDES DEMS' read one banner on 'The Ingraham Angle' Tuesday night.
Carlson has seemed bemused by Fox's handling of the unfolding conflict, telling Bannon that his former employer is 'doing what they always do — turning up the propaganda hose to full blast and trying to knock elderly Fox viewers off their feet and make them submit to a new war.'
Carlson could have been alluding to the 79-year-old president, whose Fox fixation is so well-established that CEOs and foreign leaders jockey for airtime with the hopes that Trump will see their segment.
On Monday, when a reporter asked Trump about Carlson's comment that the president was 'complicit' in Israel's strikes on Iran, the president said he didn't know what Carlson was saying online.
'Let him go get a television network and say it so that people listen,' Trump said — a barb reflecting Carlson's post-cable existence largely out of the president's view.
Trump followed up later in the day, writing on Truth Social, 'Somebody please explain to kooky Tucker Carlson that 'IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON!''
'I'm a little kooky. I'll concede that,' Carlson told The Free Press in response.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Does Jaylen Brown's future lie away from the Boston Celtics?
Every summer, Jaylen Brown's name is floated in trade talks. The 2024 NBA Finals MVP is often viewed as a dispensable member of the Boston Celtics' rotation, despite being one of the top forwards in the NBA and a key player in Joe Mazzulla's rotation. This summer has been no different, despite the fact that Brown is set to embrace a leading role on the Celtics roster due to Jayson Tatum's injury-induced absence. Recently, Brown sat down for an interview with Noa Dalzell of Celtics Blog. During the discussion, he noted how he hasn't always felt capable of being his true self around the city, noting politics as a potential reason. 'It's been a long journey here in Boston,' Brown said. 'I've had to deal with a lot. I feel like I haven't been able to be myself in certain capacities — because of the politics, and because maybe people feel uncomfortable with who I am.' Those comments were quickly used to create a new wave of potential trade talk surrounding Brown. In a recent episode of "WEEI Afternoons," the concept of Brown potentially being traded, either this season or next, was a primary discussion point among the two hosts. You can watch the full discussion by clicking on the embedded video above. Watch the "Taylor Talks Celtics" podcast on: YouTube: Website: This article originally appeared on Celtics Wire: Does Jaylen Brown's future lie away from the Celtics?
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ford Foundation's outgoing president joins the board of Obama Foundation
Darren Walker's post-Ford Foundation future is starting to take shape, as the outgoing president is now set to join The Obama Foundation's board of directors. The Obama Foundation, the Chicago-based nonprofit of former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama focused on encouraging active involvement in democracy through initiatives like the My Brother's Keeper Alliance and the Obama Youth Jobs Corps, announced Monday that Walker would join the board on Nov. 1. 'Darren Walker is an outstanding example of what it means to lead with purpose in philanthropy,' President Obama said in a statement. 'Darren's work to challenge long-held assumptions, stand up to injustice, and build unlikely partnerships aligns perfectly with the mission of the Obama Foundation. His experience and insight will sharpen our thinking and deepen our impact as we help the next generation of leaders change their world for the better.' Walker, 65, who has led the Ford Foundation since 2013 and oversaw major investments in gender equity and disability rights, is one of philanthropy's best-known leaders. He has been one of Rolling Stone's '25 People Shaping the Future' and Time's '100 Most Influential People.' 'Joining The Obama Foundation Board feels like coming home to everything I believe about leadership and change,' Walker said in a statement. 'I believe deeply in the power of individuals to change the world, and I'm honored to work with President and Mrs. Obama to help empower and support the next generation of changemakers.' In addition to his new role at the Obama Foundation, Walker has already been named president of the National Gallery of Art. In September, 'The Idea of America: Reflections on Inequality, Democracy, and the Values We Share,' a collection of his essays, will be published. The Ford Foundation has selected Yale Law School Dean Heather Gerken, a leading expert on constitutional law and democracy, to succeed Darren Walker as its president. Marty Nesbitt, chairman of the Obama Foundation's board of directors, said Walker will help the nonprofit stick to its mission. 'Darren brings a rare combination of visionary thinking and practical know-how that will strengthen our governance and sharpen our impact,' he said. 'His deep experience leading through complexity and bringing diverse voices to the table will be an invaluable asset as we guide the foundation into its next chapter and open the Obama Presidential Center next year.' _____ Associated Press coverage of philanthropy and nonprofits receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content. For all of AP's philanthropy coverage, visit Glenn Gamboa, The Associated Press
Politico
7 minutes ago
- Politico
Republican tax law leaves experts searching for words
At the same time, it remains to be seen whether Republicans' decision to dub their new savings accounts for children 'Trump accounts' will prove a marketing misstep that will blunt its appeal to the 75 million Americans who voted for Kamala Harris. The overall legislation was christened by Trump, but the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' was scrubbed from the legislation once it got to the Senate, after Democratic leader Chuck Schumer had it struck as a violation of the chamber's internal rules — the latest shot in a long-running feud in which the two parties take turns deleting the names of each other's reconciliation bills. 'I just forced Republicans to delete their ridiculous bill name,' Schumer wrote shortly thereafter on X. 'Nothing about this bill is beautiful.' Technically the legislation is now called 'An act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II of H. Con. Res. 14.' Of course, that isn't stopping many from still using the now-unofficial name. 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' was the winner in a recent EY survey of 10,000 tax pros asking how they referred to the tax law. 'OB3" came in a close second. A similar survey by Grant Thornton also had those names going one-two. Over at the Tax Policy Center, senior fellow Howard Gleckman prefers the colloquial '2025 budget act' or, simply, 'the big budget bill.' The studiously nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, meanwhile, uses the extremely neutral 'H.R. 1.' Some of the individual provisions have been renamed to reflect substantive changes made by the legislation. 'GILTI' was made obsolete by Senate Republicans' revisions to how multinationals will be taxed. The original tax was intended to target profits from things like patents that businesses squirreled away in tax havens. Republicans had trouble coming up with a way of legally defining those earnings, so in the 2017 law they essentially said GILTI was everything except profits resulting from tangible assets like factories. The idea was to distinguish between the money companies made from their actual operations abroad from things that were just accounting maneuvers. Naturally, the tangible stuff got its own acronym — QBAI, or Qualified Business Asset Investment. But the new law dumps QBAI, and so the distinction made by GILTI no longer matters, leaving the tax world with 'Net CFC Tested Income.' Something similar is happening with FDII, or Foreign Derived Intangible Income, another provision that originated in 2017. It's a deduction for companies with overseas profits from intellectual property held in the U.S. — although it's probably best known for inspiring a years-long dispute about whether it should be called 'Fiddy' or 'F-D-I-I.' QBAI was part of the calculations that went into FDII, so, with QBAI now going away, FDII is also renamed in the new law, as the Foreign Derived Deduction Eligible Income, or FDDEI. But if anything, it's even less clear how to shorthand that. Warren Payne, a former Republican tax aide now at the firm Mayer Brown, says he's heard it called 'Fa-Day' — though he's not going there. 'I haven't figured out how to pronounce it,' he said. 'I just spell it out.'
