Fox’s Roger Ailes to Sit Down with Donald Trump to Discuss Coverage

Mediaite ^ | September 24th, 2015 | Alex Griswold

[monkapotamus]

Only a day after Donald Trump announced that he was boycotting Fox News— and after Fox News announced they had cancelled him first– the network has announced that they will enter talks with Trump to discuss his concerns.

Below is the full statement, provided to Mediaite by a Fox News spokesperson:

Fox News Chairman & CEO Roger Ailes and Donald Trump spoke this morning and plan to have a meeting next week to discuss their differences of opinion regarding Fox’s coverage of Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign. Ailes will be joined by senior Fox editorial executives. Mr. Trump believes he has been treated unfairly in certain instances. FOX News has held every candidate in this race to the highest journalistic standards throughout our coverage. We believe a candid meeting about our differences is required and that any misunderstandings can be handled without compromising those standards.

[stephenjohnbanker]

I hereby yield all design functions to you!

[GilGil]

Trump is an amazing man full of accomplishments and courage second to none.

Trump defends himself . They do not get under their skin. He gets under their skin. Big difference. Period.

With respect to the persona thing I understood exactly what he meant. When you look at Fiorina’s face you see a sour puss, angry, bitter, hostile. A lot like Hillary.

And when he said she was “beautiful” he wasn’t kissing her butt. He was putting her down by saying that. She was raising a fuss about that so he called her beautiful to make her look small. Notice the double standard. Southpark has a rape scene of Trump not a peep from anyone. Fiorina is not condemning this, nor is Hillary, nor the conservative or liberal media. Do you think is there were a rape scene of Fiorina that the world would not come to a screeching halt?

Trump is playing this masterfully on his way to 40% approvals.

[RoosterRedux]

and he even tucked his balls up into his thighs when he told her she was beautiful.

He was strategically defusing her argument in an effort to make her retort look mean.

It may or may not have worked on a conscious level, but you can bet that it sank into the subconscious minds of the viewers.

As a transaction, he was basically saying "I'm sorry--or I was wrong" (however much insincere) knowing full-well that she was about to give him hell...and in doing so damage her own image.

This is what he does and there is no better.

[Norm Lenhart]

Thanks for the advice. Consider it ignored.

[Norm Lenhart]

I got this cool idea for an art museum too...

[stephenjohnbanker]

Carly looked like a petty woman, who was NOT capable of being CIC

I give Trump an A+ on this move.

[JLAGRAYFOX]

Of course, Roger Ailes blinked first!!! Trump is the bread basket for “all” TV stations. Trump should demand that Fox News Channel, fire Megyn Kelly, Rich Lowry, George Will & Charles Krathammer!!! End of story!!!

[DoughtyOne]

Trump, on the subject of health/Obamacare said flatly ‘Sorry Conservatives...”.

Yes he did say that.  He said it when referencing the 45 million uncovered individuals.

Norm, I am also sorry Conservatives, but there is something we have to come to terms with.  WE HAVE ALWAYS COVERED THE UNINSURED!

If someone showed up at an Emergency Room, they received care.  They were admitted if they had to be.

Isn't it a good idea to reduce the government exposure to these sorts of outlays?

My statement is true. It does not matter one inch if we get to Obamacarelike healthcare with Barry or Donald.

Norm, you may actually think that, but if you consider this, I think you'll see enough to make you rethink that perception.

We have 320 million U. S. Citizens.  We're talking about 45 million uninsured.  That means that 275 million are insured, or have some form of coverage.  Reduce those on Medicare, and you have the number of people privately insured.  (There may be anohter segment or perhaps a few I've missed), but this is roughly the big picture of insured people.

If 75 to 80% (roughly) of our populace is insured, isn't it a plus if they remain covered under a private sector environment?  Obamacare was moving this 75 to 80% onto a single payer system, the federal government.

You don't think a private sector plan is better?  Seriously?  You know it is, so it's simply not true that health care under Obama and Trump are the same.  It matters very much, which way we go there.  You know that.

Trump did not propose anything near a free market system.

For the currently insured, he did.  Norm, we have to be honest with ourselves.  For the curretnly insured, he only offered up a private sector plan.  That's the vast majority of our populace.

He said EVERYONE MUST...MUST be taken care of.

Yes, I agree with you here.  He did say that.

Norm, everyone has always been taken care of.  I don't intend to imply everyone could go in and have elective work done.  None the less, the bare essentials were being taken care of.

What do we do about this?  Should we still allow the 45 million to simply show up at an E. R. and receive sub-par coverage overall that the taxpayers pay for anyway, or should we look for a way to recuce the cost of coverage for these people while expanding what services they can recieve?

If a $10 or $15,000 dollar deductable policy were put in place for these people, would they have very low premiums?  Yes.  Would they overuse services?  No, because they would have to pay from the deductable portion of thier policy.

What does the deducatible actually accomplish?

1. it provides a minimal policy that would make sure an individual was not left uncovered, for major illness
2. they would have coverage and options not previously available to them
3. it would at the very least cap government exposure to costs related to these people's health care at $10 to $15,000 per year
4. in some instance the insured could pay their own premiums
5. in other instances the government would pick up those premiums  (this would still wind up costing less than what it costs today because of capped expenses to the government)  THAT'S BETTER, LESS COST TO THE PUBLIC
6. unlike the past, the government's exposure to costs would be limited to the $10 to $15,000 yearly deductable
7. private insurance companies would cover the in excess of the deductable costs

Is this perfection?  No.  Did we have perfection?  No.  Could it actually wind up costing the taxpayer less and prividing better service.  Quite possibly.  Is that a more Conservative approach?  Yes

Perhaps when the players come together and devise a plan, they can actually come up with something far superior to this, taxpayer exposure and increased benefits available to the currently uninsured.

We shouldn't go kneejerk until we see what they come up with.  With the adults in charge, we could easily wind up quite happy with the results.

[stephenjohnbanker]

We could tear down Lincoln Center to build it. Great location too!

[sanjuanbob]

The future ain’t what it used to be.
Yogi Berra

[DoughtyOne]

Thank you.

= :^)

[RoosterRedux]

And Trump is right, her face tells us plenty about her personality.

[DoughtyOne]

Nice try anyway. Mailbox full...

They may be getting blistered by the negative comments.

[BlackFemaleArmyColonel]

Thanks!:)

[Norm Lenhart]

Let me save you a lot of typing. I am intimately familiar with the ins and outs of the Obamacare/govt regulation system because not 6 months ago I was almost killed by it’s labrynth of bullshit.

Killed. as in crash cart on the side of the bed.

I understand Trumps position. I looked at it. It ends up too close to where we are by a different road.

No. Deal killer.

[BlackFemaleArmyColonel]

Thanks!

[exit82]

Trump has done more to get real issues front and center than the other 15 candidates combined.

And everyone has already forgotten about Carly’s looks.

Mrs. Balok will survive.

[Enterprise]

I doubted that Trump should have reacted so quickly to FOX but it worked, so to that I give him credit. But I also think he should try to think tactically and hold his fire for a better moment.

In the next interview on FOX, Trump should have made the following point:

FOX has a double standard with him and Fiorina. FOX didn't hesitate to use a verbal depiction of violence and sexual mutilation to illustrate their opinion of how Fiorina won the debate against him personally. Why weren't all the crybaby FOX females outraged at the comment when it was about him? He should ask what would have been the reaction if someone had said that Trump won the debate against Fiorina, and that he kicked her so hard in the vagina that her ovaries went up to her neck and formed an adams apple and she won't be able to pee for a month. I'm sure he would draw a lame response at best.

[BlackFemaleArmyColonel]

TRUE. We’ll see.

[dforest]

I have already forgotten about Snarly!