Fox, Tucker, Dan, Hannity, and Devine(!)

Breitbart has an essay on the Tucker/Bongino/Fox imbroglio which is, we think, definitive.  It's not stupid, like the O'Reilly/Dan O'Donnell theory, and it's not wild-haired like some others.  It's basically 'management re-asserts control.'  

But there's a well-deserved, nasty dig at Hannity here, too; read between the lines:

...Another Fox News source confirmed this sentiment, noting that even though Carlson is not to blame for the issues that led to the settlement—they said others were, mostly, responsible for it—the message is clear. “At the core of that is hosts doing what they want without much oversight,” this source said. “That sort of happened in the post-Ailes area. People forget that Fox used to be much more centrist because it used to be top-down.”

“This change at Fox makes it more fundamentally top-down driven,” this person added. “Only recently did Fox try and reflect grassroots conservatism more. I think we’re going to see a reversion to the Fox of the past, where it’s fewer segments attacking Mitch McConnell and generally dumbed down.”...

Hannity's been 'dumbed down' for the last several years, and he's getting dumber by the day.  That fits.

Fun to speculate:  the Murdochs also own the New York Post.  How long will they tolerate Miranda Devine's expose of the REAL January 6th?