It doesnt say they got it from fox, but the paragraph after they explain the info the did get, is this:
During the interview, Hagmann and McLeod—who never mentioned a particular network by name—alluded to e-mails and other evidence in their possession, copies of which, they said, were secreted in several locations. But they did tantalize listeners with descriptions of meeting with “sources” outside of St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City, a high-placed contact looking nervously over his shoulder, references to directives and warnings given by “those at the top,” and the undisguised threat of one executive to his underlings: “This is serious, and so will the consequences be if anyone chooses not to be a team player with this.”
This comes as no surprise to Fox watchers who have noticed that the Stalinist-style censorship of the Obama regime is already here. This couldn’t possibly be because of the healthy shares of stock the Saudis bought in Fox, could it? If so, why would the Saudis care so much about quashing potentially damning revelations about Obama? Have they also bought shares in Obama?
You do realize that Hagmann is a plagiarist and that McLeod wrote an article on the mob being behind 9/11.
The whole article is a crock. The only thing that has any semblance of truth is the FCC thing I already alluded to.
When people like Hagmann and McLeod don’t name names, and talk about information being “secreted” and have a history such as they have, you best not rely on their material.