Fox Denies That Laura Ingraham Is Set To Take 10 pm Slot, Moving Hannity To Face Off Against Rachel Maddow

170911155007-laura-ingraham-fox-news-780x439.jpg

CNN reports that Fox News commentator, radio host and Trump loyalist Laura Ingraham is set to replace Sean Hannity in the 10 pm time slot at Fox. Unidentified sources tell CNN that Hannity will move to the 9 pm hour, putting him head-to-head with Rachel Maddow at MSNBC. 

"The Five" will return to its original time slot, now that Eric Bolling has left the Fox News, after a month-long investigation into claims that Bolling sent male genitalia texts with saucy comments to other female staffers at Fox. 

Fox News denies the rumour, saying there is "no deal in place with Ingraham, who has her own charges of sexual harassment against her partner Peter Anthony at LifeZette, reports The Daily Beast.  Ingraham has also indicated an interest in the 2018 Senate race against Democratic incumbent and former Hillary Clinton running mate Tim Kaine, according to the Washington Post. A Fox gig would seemingly close that door -- now seriously complicated by charges against her business partner. 

Byron Martinez, LifeZette’s former broadcast engineer and IT administrator, recalled Peter Anthony, the site’s chief executive “talking about other women’s boobs, butts… how he would desire sexual activities with [female colleagues] and stuff like that… All kinds of inappropriate talk about women in the office," writes The Daily Beast. 

Ingraham is a veteran of the Independent Women's Forum, a nonprofit that emerged during the sexual harassment claims by Anita Hill against Clarence Thomas in his Supreme Court hearings. Writing for The Daily Beast, Christina Cauterucci says that since the Thomas hearings, "the IWF has taken a vocal anti-feminist stance on almost every social and fiscal issue—and Ingraham, as a member and one-time spokeswoman, has amplified the group’s message.

The IWF worldview holds that women who allege harassment, sexual assault, sex discrimination, and domestic violence are often exaggerating and making themselves into victims when they should be taking responsibility for their own roles in the harm that’s come to them. University efforts to combat campus rape are causing boys to die by suicide, IWF worries. Efforts to prevent wage discrimination are unfair to men who are just plain better than women at their jobs. Sexual harassment training is “harmful” because it leads to “people assuming the worst of each other and forcing everyone to walk on eggshells lest they offend someone else,” the IWF contended in 2016, arguing that women encourage a double standard—they love sexual advances from hot guys, but cry harassment when the advances come from less desirable men. The IWF has called National Pay Inequity Awareness Day a “hoax…designed to brainwash girls and young women into believing they are victims.” The IWF’s Elizabeth Larson has written extensively on the supposedly trumped-up nature of sexual harassment charges, claiming that women now think “a wink or a leer can be money in the bank” and, inspired by Anita Hill, find it more profitable to litigate than to work.”

Ingraham herself was vocally opposed to the Violence Against Women Act, a bill she called “pork” with a “tear-jerker” of a title. In a 1996 op-ed, buoyed by her IWF membership, she encouraged then–presidential candidate Bob Dole to “point out what domestic abuse advocates often ignore: that women who are married are safer than women who are not. Seventy-two percent of domestic abuse fatalities occur at the hands of boyfriends, not husbands.”

The inference is, writes Cauterucci that women could avoid domestic abuse if they’d only make honest men out of their partners. That didn't work in my own case, or that of my ex-husband's brother either.