[Photo: Emily Morter via Unsplash]

Oddly-Timed Story: White House Counsel McGahn’s Call to FCC’s Ajit Pai

/22 Comments/in , , /by

[NB: Check the byline — it’s Rayne and some of this post is speculative.]

Maybe it’s something; maybe it’s nothing. But with White House Counsel Don McGahn under so much scrutiny this week, the timing of the story about McGahn’s call to the Federal Communications Commission seems odd.

You may recall I wrote recently (item 2) about the proposed merger of Sinclair Broadcast Group and Tribune Media, a deal which would have created a behemoth reaching at least 72% of U.S. households via local broadcast TV stations. FCC chair Ajit Pai revealed in testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday this past week that McGahn had called him about the Sinclair Broadcast Group-Tribune Media merger.

Let’s look at the timeline of events related to this deal:

22-JAN-2017 — Ajit Pai named FCC chair on Trump’s second full day in office.
7-MAR-2017 — Trump nominates Ajit Pai to a second five-year term with the FCC as its chair.

Trump and Pai met at the White House on Monday for a meeting that was closed to the press, although an FCC official said that no pending business before the agency was discussed.

17-MAR-2017 — Rumors surfaced about a Sinclair-Tribune merger.
8-MAY-2017 — Sinclair announced it would buy Tribune; assets would include WGN (Chicago) and WMIL (Milwaukee) radio stations. Tribune newspapers were not included in the deal.
2-OCT-2017 — Senate confirms Pai as FCC chair.
24-OCT-2017 — FCC killed a rule requiring broadcasters to have physical offices in their primary local coverage area. The move was seen as beneficial to Sinclair’s merger as they would not have to change office locations.

16-JUL-2018 — Pai expressed concerns about the merger deal, drafting a Hearing Designated Order (HDO) to place the merger before an administrative judge.
17-JUL-2018 — McGahn called Pai for an update on the Sinclair-Tribune merger.
18-JUL-2018 — FCC signs and issues the HDO.
18-JUL-2018 — House Subcommittee on Communications and Technology announced an FCC oversight hearing for 25-JUL-2018.
24-JUL-2018 — Trump tweets about his disappointment with FCC about the Sinclair-Tribune deal:

So sad and unfair that the FCC wouldn’t approve the Sinclair Broadcast merger with Tribune. This would have been a great and much needed Conservative voice for and of the People. Liberal Fake News NBC and Comcast gets approved, much bigger, but not Sinclair. Disgraceful!

25-JUL-2018 — During House Energy and Commerce Committee FCC oversight hearing, Chairman Frank Pallone asked Pai, “If the President or anyone in the White House discusses or has discussed the Sinclair-Tribune merger with you or anyone at the FCC, will you commit to disclosing that in the public docket? Yes or no?” Pai responded, “Yes, except, Congressman, we have ex parte rules, because this is now a restricted proceeding. We are limited in what information we can receive and what we can put on the record. But consistent with our restricted ex parte rules, we would be happy to accommodate to the extent we can.” (video excerpt)
02-AUG-2018 — Pai did not mention the call from McGahn during an FCC press conference.
09-AUG-2018 — Tribune, not Sinclair, terminated the deal.
16-AUG-2018 — Pai appears before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, disclosing McGahn’s call.
18-AUG-2018 — NYT publishes the first of two pieces on McGahn.
19-AUG-2018 — NYT publishes the second of two pieces on McGahn.
20-AUG-2018 — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Pallone Jr. said McGahn’s call to Pai should have been disclosed the previous week during a hearing before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee hearing the previous week. Pallone wants answers about that call.

A couple things stand out immediately. First, Pai parsed responses to the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Senate Commerce Committee. He was already on thin ice because of his claim a DDoS swamped public comments related to net neutrality but the FCC’s inspector general found Pai to be less than honest about the DDoS.

Second, the story about McGahn calling Pai was published on Thursday afternoon, approaching an advanced news dump zone during August. Why did NYT run not one but two stories about McGahn over the weekend? Why didn’t they wait until Monday? It’s as if somebody realized they needed to get a story out in spite of late summer weekend doldrums.

In this past weekend’s hullabaloo about McGahn’s “cooperation” with Special Counsel’s Office, there was a concerted effort to portray McGahn as serving and protecting the presidency, not Trump. As White House Counsel this is McGahn’s job but the obvious effort to distance McGahn from Trump should be noted.

Which makes me wonder: why did McGahn as White House Counsel, responsible for protecting the presidency, need an update from the chair of the independent FCC on a media merger? Why wouldn’t Commerce Department address this if Trump was curious? Or why wouldn’t Trump act like an ass and bumble a demand for information directly over Twitter as he has before with companies like Boeing?

As Marcy has pointed out, McGahn has extensive background in campaign finance; he was the Trump campaign’s counsel during the 2016 election season. Coincidentally he was counsel when David Smith, CEO of Sinclair Broadcasting Group, told Trump, “We are here to deliver your message.”

Sounds like an offer of an unreported in-kind campaign donation to me since there are no reports that Smith or anyone at Sinclair made a similar offer to any other GOP primary candidate or to Hillary Clinton. Sinclair vigorously denied they hadn’t offered equal time when Sinclair’s offer to Trump was reported:

. . .there was a flap when Trump advisor Jared Kushner told a private business luncheon in December that Sinclair executives worked with the campaign to spread pro-Trump messages in Sinclair newscasts, which reach 81 markets in key heartland regions that supported Trump. Sinclair vehemently denied the claim, asserting that it offered equal amounts of air time for in-depth interviews to Trump and his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, and that Clinton declined the invitation.

Did McGahn know about and approve this offer?

Pai’s squirrelly behavior about Sinclair-Tribune as well as McGahn’s sudden distancing from Trump cast a different light on David Smith’s so-helpful offer and Sinclair’s mandatory group-wide airing of former White House communications aide Boris Epshteyn’s program — the same Epshteyn who has a history of pro-Russian sentiment. Add these couple line items to the timeline:

25-MAR-2017 — Epshteyn left his role as Special Assistant to The President and Assistant Communications Director for Surrogate Operations, having previously served in Trump campaign communications and as director of communications for Trump inauguration committee.
17-APR-2017 — Sinclair announced Epshteyn joined them as a political analyst.

Conveniently after the rumors emerged about the Sinclair-Tribune merger but before it was formally announced — what a coincidence.

It doesn’t appear Epshteyn was replaced in the White House. Was Epshteyn placed with Sinclair at Trump’s request — not because of Epshteyn’s rumored confrontational approach to Fox News — after having been parked with the White House for two months post-inauguration for the purposes of resume padding?

Is Epshteyn really an independent political analyst or is he still shilling for Trump as an under-cover communications aide on Sinclair’s dime — gaslighting America for Trump’s benefit — given David Smith’s eagerness to deliver Trump’s message? Is Epshteyn really doing advance work for Trump 2020 campaign?

Is this the reason why Sinclair issued a diktat to all its 173 stations that they must read on air a statement about other media outlets’ “fake news,” in order to elevate their content, including Epshteyn’s by contrast, engaging in what NPR’s David Folkenflik called “negative campaigning”?

Is this the reason why Ajit Pai didn’t disclose the call from McGahn and attempted to obstruct access to information about the call behind an HDO that McGahn called not on behalf of the president but on behalf of the Trump 2020 campaign?

Did McGahn help push the two back-to-back NYT articles this weekend to wallpaper over what may have been a Hatch Act violation — using his role as White House Counsel to reach Ajit Pai and press for approval of the Sinclair-Tribune merger to benefit Trump 2020?

Reaching at least 72% of American households from now until Election Day 2020, to push anti-Democratic Party content while collecting data on viewers and shaping voter turnout, might have been adequate motivation to do so if one were working for the Trump campaign — not to mention  McGahn’s legal exposure.

It’d be nice if one of the Congressional committees conducting oversight of the FCC asked Pai more pointed questions about that phone call.

It’d be nice, too, if somebody asked any of the 2016 GOP primary candidates or Hillary Clinton’s campaign team if they received the same offer from Sinclair’s Smith extended to Trump or his proxies (hello, Jared).

And there’s more than one David helming a media empire who needs to answer some questions about their friend Trump.

image_print
22 replies
  1. SteveB says:

    “s Epshteyn really an independent political analyst or is he still shilling for Trump as an under-cover communications aide on Sinclair’s dime — gaslighting America for Trump’s benefit — given David Smith’s eagerness to deliver Trump’s message? Is Epshteyn really doing advance work for Trump 2020 campaign?

    Is this the reason why Sinclair issued a diktat to all its 173 stations that they must read on air a statement about other media outlets’ “fake news,” in order to elevate their content, including Epshteyn’s by contrast, engaging in what NPR’s David Folkenflik called “negative campaigning”

    I’m not sure I have grasped properly the point you make:
    Epshteyn joined Sinclair -April 17 2018
    Anchors deliver fake news script -April 2 2018.

    Are you saying that you think that Epshteyn influenced the delivery of this remarkable script prior to the formal acknowledgement of his role at Sinclair?

    • jayedcoins says:

      Steve, it just looks like Rayne typo’d the date in the timeline indent. If you click-through to the linked report, it shows that Epshteyn joined Sinclair in April 2017 — not 2018 — just a stone’s throw after he left the WH.

      Rayne, your point that this is in fact speculation is well-taken, but thanks for the post, it certainly gives us something to think about. And it does dovetail nicely with Marcy’s pointing out that what McGahn did this past week could well be to protect his own legal exposure.

      • SteveB says:

        Ah yes the typo. Clarity descends! Thanks.

        It’s actually my fault too – I followed the link and read what I expected to see rather than properly and thought the date was as per typo.

        These scandals generate so many time lines, I have lost count of the number of times I have confused myself by making a slip of the mind on the relevant year.

        Good job the comrades here weigh in to keep things straight.

        • Rayne says:

          Thanks much, jayedcoins. Yes, it was a typo; I’d been picking at this piece since Monday, finishing it during a bout of insomnia overnight. Not advisable working bleary-eyed and sleep deprived between three versions in three screens.

          SteveB — The nonstop dumpster fire makes it really difficult to stay on top of key dates let alone which scandal. Some of them overlap, which (if my suspicions are correct) happens at the intersection of FCC/White House/telecom-oligarchs/Russian bots.

  2. orionATL says:

    “maybe it’s something; maybe it’s nothing.”

    no. i’m here to say with you, rayne, it’s something, and it’s something big. this type of operation is the meat-and-potatoes of the republican party.

    you know this when you read that ajit pai, paid for what was likely a a 2-yr sinecure as verizon asssoc counsel, was appointed chair of the fcc the 2nd day trump was in office, then promptly reappointed to fcc for a 5-yr term. the only real question is exactly what was the covert deal behind this?

    my rule of thumb is that almost every appointment or major presidential act “trump” has taken since jan 21  ’17 has been to pay off major supporters of his inaugural committee (coal barons $300k for inaugural), or supporters of his campaign for president, or just pals (i have friends who can’ t get loans). 

    of course trump does none of this republican/corporation scheming-then-doing himself. he is too politically ignorant. trump is the useful figurehead :) who mesmerizes the media (and encourages easy-lazy  tweet reporting) and  voters, and thereby draws attention away from what the republican fixers’ magician hands are really doiing. 

    • Phil Perspective says:

      you know this when you read that ajit pai, paid for what was likely a a 2-yr sinecure as verizon asssoc counsel, was appointed chair of the fcc the 2nd day trump was in office, then promptly reappointed to fcc for a 5-yr term. the only real question is exactly what was the covert deal behind this?

      Pai is a GOP flunkie.  He’d be doing the same crap if Cruz or Rubio had won.

      • Rayne says:

        Would he? I agree Pai’d likely continue to represent his corporate patrons had Cruz or Rubio the opportunity to name Pai as chair of the FCC.

        But assuming I’m right and Sinclair had worked hand-in-glove with Trump campaigns plural, I don’t think Cruz or Rubio would do this. They’re not capable of criminal thinking at this scale or they’d have had a better shot at the presidency on the GOP ticket.

  3. Thomasa says:

    I agree that it is not nothing. One only has to review the “Powell Memo” of five decades ago and recall the role of media in that conservative plan to understand the stakes in controlling the FCC. Pai is only the latest conservative shill to sit in that chair. This is high-stakes poker.

    • Rayne says:

      Yes, exactly — the Powell Memo, which former GE CEO “Neutron Jack” Welch must have thought of when he decided to buy NBC with prodding from Karl Rove. How else best to pitch favorable corporate tax policy but by owning media to do so?

      I’d like to know what was in this for Sinclair apart from approval for a near monopoly of US broadcast TV market. I think I know what Tribune wanted — the millions in cash on its books had been filched, just needed to jettison the body.

  4. Allison Holland says:

    i would call my senator and ask him about it but i am from texas and so have no voice.  i would call my representative but i live in lubbock county and so have no voice. but i live in america and though i will kneel if asked in front of my american flag i will not bend like a tree in the wind.  and i will not bow to the liars and the traitors and the cowards and the greedy.  so i call my senators and my representatives and ask them all the time to be a patriot if only for a day.  its gets easier i tell them, to tell the truth and give a damn. i know they never will. they would rather work for sinclair money than against it. they would rather cage children than feed them. it is odd to be an american and despise the very ones we are told to call honorable senators and congresspersons.  when the reckoning comes, like king alfred, i say, “no mercy” .  do not let them off the hook for their complicitness.  i would like them all to be deposed and dethroned.

  6. readerOfTeaLeaves says:

    to @Rayne @ 11:24 and also 12:02:
    @Rayne wrote: Some of them overlap, which (if my suspicions are correct) happens at the intersection of FCC/White House/telecom-oligarchs/Russian bots.

    wow…. just wow…
    Hammer, meet nail.

  7. J R in WV says:

    Rayne,

    When you wrote “…It’s as if somebody realized they needed to get a story out in spite of late summer weekend doldrums.” I think you’ve stumbled across an old time line / new time line tripwire. While we were once desperate for any news in August, anything at all… that’s not really the case any more.

    The Mueller investigation just concluded a trial with mostly guilty results, and accepted guilty pleas to 8 felony counts on the same late August day. Two congressmen have been indicted for various felonies, along with family members. The Senate isn’t going to recess for the month, and they’re dealing with a Supreme Court nominee selected by an un-indicted co-conspirator. These are different times… sadly and vastly different times.

    Just observing… I could use some sleepy doldrums on August. I just might take a nap myself!

    • Rayne says:

      I think I’d buy that argument if you’d actually looked at the timeline of events this past 10 days and had some grasp of traffic trends.

      16-AUG a.m. — Pai in front of Senate Commerce

      16-AUG p.m. — McGahn phone call story

      17-AUG — … Friday doldrums …

      18-AUG — first NYT McGahn story

      19-AUG — second NYT McGahn story

      20-AUG — fallout from NYT McGahn stories

      21-AUG — Manafort verdict
      21-AUG — Cohen plea
      21-AUG — the Duncan Hunter dumpster fire

      Typically August is slow in news business; people go on vacation; Congress goes on break even if only for weekends; some members are campaigning at home during mid-terms whenever possible. Weekends are the very slowest for news site traffic with people leaving for their summer hideouts as early as Thursday evening through August. This is simply fact on the ground and it’s reflected in internet traffic volume as well. The Manafort verdict was anticipated but the timing was up in the air. Cohen’s indictment and plea were anticipated but timing was completely unknowable. Ditto the other trashfires. Manafort/Cohen/congressional dumpster burn wouldn’t happen during the weekend, though, only at some unpredictable time during the regular business week.

      Given all this, why did the two NYT McGahn stories publish during the weekend? To beat the unpredictable rush?

      Meh.

  8. orionATL says:

    ajit pai’s apppointment as fcc chair bothered me but so did a lot trump was doing at the time.

    this article forces me to focus and what i have been learning is the agit pai is the living, breathing embodiment of

    1) steve bannon’s proclamation that the trump presidency will “destroy the administrative state” and
    2) the old republican lie that less regulation will accelerate economic growth and create JOBS and
    3) a real, live, neo-liberal.

    contrary to what pai lives and believes, the truth and the reality is that the only society and economy that will work now and far into the future is a regulated society. free-market economies and centrally-controlled economies have been tried and have failed over the last 100 years. the only economy that works for the greatest number, if not for all, is the regulated economy of which the european union and the prc are the best examples to date (just to be clear, neither is to be deified). the american and the russian economies, as they have become today, are examples of economic pathology where citizens numbering in the many tens of millions are left behind and economic growth is stymied by – get this – inappropriate central government involvement in the form of a presidential bureaucracy and a congress, who, cf chairman agit pai, ease the way for corporate looting and exploitation of workers and customers.

    but i digress.

    go to this page in miss wiki and begin reading under “policy positions”. it is all enlightening, but pay special attention to the paragraphs on “inmate calling” and the “lifeline program” and that’s before you get to “net neutrality” :

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajit_Pai

    for those self-righteous democrats who love to throw the contemptuous phrase “neo-liberal” at other democrats, i got something for you – agit pai in the flesh. agit pai is what a real, true neo-liberal would look like if he were allowed to rampage free in government, heeding his master’s voice. agit pai has been thus empowered.

    • orionATL says:

      thanks, trip.

      i saw that article and was at first very skeptical of the claim. but as i read on, damned if the sons-of-bitches hadn’t done this before to the firefighters, and more than once. and the slowdown had been documented. i think they even able to gouge one county for more money.

      this just infuriates me. if i was a dem ad maker i would turn verizon, agit pai, mitch mcconnell (pai’s patron), and donald trump into today’s willie hortons.

    • Rayne says:

      Verizon is lucky no one is known to have died as a direct result of first responders’ inability to communicate due to their extortive throttling. They really screwed themselves by proving net neutrality’s essential nature.

  11. Maybe ryan says:

    I want to mention a website issue. In recent days my android tablet brings up the previous version of ew.net unless I refresh it never used to happen, doesn’t seem to happen with other sites, and doesn’t happen when reading on my laptop. If no one else has the issue, I’ll live with it, but thought I’d mention in case others have t0hesame issue. Was something changed in the caching settings for the site?

    • Doctor My Eyes says:

      For several days I could not refresh the EW site on my iPhone.  Even if I closed the browser and restarted the phone, the old site came up.  During this same time, my Mac worked without difficulty.  Every little thing like that instantly sets me off worrying about attacks on this ever-more-precious website.

Comments are closed.