Quantcast
Connect with us

Why Hope Hicks’ new job with Rupert Murdoch makes her more likely to testify against Trump

Published

on

Congressional Democrats have issued a subpoena to former White House communications director Hope Hicks, and panelists on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” agreed her future depends on her compliance.

The White House has directed other former officials to ignore the legally binding orders to testify, but the 30-year-old Hicks had her pick of jobs before landing at New Fox as executive vice president and chief communications officer — and ignoring a subpoena could kill her career.

ADVERTISEMENT

“She now works for a public company, listed on the stock exchange,” said MSNBC analyst Mike Barnicle. “Prior to accepting this job, she interviewed with several other public companies. She was well-liked in the interview process, people thought highly of her, but each of the public companies that she interviewed with were afraid of the Trump taint. What happens to her going forward with that in the background?”

Vanity Fair reporter Emily Jane Fox, who’s covered Hicks for years, agreed the media company’s ultimate responsibility to shareholders does put the former White House official and Trump confidante into a precarious position.

“She took this new job at New Fox, which is a (Rupert) Murdoch-owned company,” Fox said. “Someone who I spoke to for the story explained to me, it is sort of Trump light, right? She’s not totally out of the Trump universe — this is a company that would accept someone who worked in the Trump administration. It’s not like going to a new company that had its reservations and hesitations about someone who worked in the Trump administration.”

But ultimately, her career fate could be decided by business, and not just politics.

ADVERTISEMENT

“At the end of the day, they have shareholders,” Fox said. “Someone who is in a big, prominent position within the company, being dragged back and forth for months on end over a legal battle, is not good for the company, it’s not good for investors.”

“I think that the idea of her getting this out of the way and ripping the Band-Aid and stopping the bleeding really fast is definitely better for the company,” Fox added. “What is best for Hope Hicks personally, in her own personal calculation, may not be the same. I think that’s where we’re going to see the tension play out here.”

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Facebook

The term ‘evangelical’ has crumbled into meaninglessness in the era of Trump: professor

Published

on

As the evangelical Christian movement began to rise in politics before the 1980 election, there was a fork in the road that forced the self-described "Moral Majority" to make a decision in regards to which candidate they supported: the devout Christian Jimmy Carter, or the divorced Hollywood actor Ronald Reagan.

Writing for the Atlantic, Baylor University professor of humanities Alan Jacobs says it was the Moral Majority's decision to go with Reagan that "inaugurated the affiliation of white American evangelicals with the Republican Party that has lasted to this day."

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trump complains at the UN: ‘I would get a Nobel Prize for a lot of things if they gave them out fairly’

Published

on

Continue Reading
 

Facebook

Fox legal analyst: Ukraine scandal is ‘far more serious’ than what Mueller dug up on Trump

Published

on

Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano on Monday told Fox Business host David Asman that President Donald Trump's now-infamous phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is a serious case of corruption that cannot be ignored.

Although Asman tried to make the story about the actions of former Vice President Joe Biden's son, Napolitano said that what Trump has done appears far worse than anything the former vice president did.

"This is the most serious charge against the president, far more serious than what Bob Mueller dug or dragged up against him," Napolitano said. "If there was a quid pro quo -- it does appear as though a quarter of a billion dollars in defensive weaponry was held back for a period of time while these... conversations were going on between the presidents."

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Investigate and Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image