Civil War Erupts At ‘60 Minutes’ As Remaining Hosts Heroically Threaten To Quit Someday, Maybe

Reporters at CBS’s “60 Minutes” are reportedly locked in a brutal internal civil war after several top stars courageously announced they would continue cashing paychecks while issuing a strongly worded ultimatum against the network’s leadership.

Veteran correspondents Lesley Stahl, Bill Whitaker and Jon Wertheim confirmed they had considered leaving the program after a string of firings rocked the newsroom, but ultimately decided they “don’t want to see ‘60 Minutes’ die,” mostly because they still need somewhere to dramatically sigh on camera every Sunday night.

The trio released a fiery statement declaring that “newsrooms are not supposed to be run like dictatorships,” stunning viewers who had long assumed every newsroom was actually run by caffeine, panic and 14 producers yelling “we’re losing daylight.”

CBS executives reportedly fired longtime correspondent Scott Pelley after he detonated during a staff meeting and informed new executive producer Nick Bilton that his qualifications were “slender,” which insiders described as the most devastating insult ever delivered by a man wearing a $4,000 suit while seated in ergonomic outrage.

Bilton, who was brought in by CBS editor-in-chief Bari Weiss, allegedly received a chilly reception from Pelley, who accused Weiss of “murdering” the show, marking the first confirmed homicide committed entirely through editorial meetings and Slack messages.

According to Stahl, Whitaker and Wertheim, producers Tanya Simon and Draggan Mihailovich were removed without explanation.

“As far as we can tell, because no explanation has ever been offered, they were expelled because they fought for our ‘60 Minutes’ values and stood up to protect our independence and integrity,” the correspondents wrote, bravely defending the sacred journalistic tradition of angrily confronting billion-dollar corporations while remaining employed by them.

“We want to express how sorry we are that these principled, fair and honest journalists were treated so shabbily, with such indecency. Tanya deserves to be celebrated, not cruelly cast off. Draggan too. It’s been heartbreaking,” they added, before returning to the newsroom where everyone now reportedly communicates through passive-aggressive eye contact and carefully worded memos.

The group also praised former staffers Sharyn Alfonsi, Cecilia Vega and Scott Pelley.

“This goes for Sharyn, Cecilia and Scott as well, all at the top of the world of TV journalism who exemplified 60 Minutes’ ethos of tough questions and honest storytelling,” they wrote, moments before executives held another emergency meeting titled “Please Stop Calling Each Other Fascists In The Conference Room.”

Despite the turmoil, the correspondents insisted their decision to stay should not be interpreted as support for management.

They warned that remaining at CBS is “categorically not the case” when it comes to endorsing leadership, a distinction experts say is similar to remaining aboard the Titanic strictly to criticize iceberg navigation policies.

The journalists also cautioned they could still leave in the future if the show drifts further from independent journalism.

“If we can continue doing the work that made this show what it is, committing acts of independent, fearless journalism and storytelling, we’re here for it. If not, we leave.”

At press time, CBS denied accusations of political interference, insisting the network’s only interference involves the standard newsroom practice of executives quietly setting everything on fire while assuring reporters it’s completely normal.

Sex!  Now that I have your attention, I want to say thank you for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to simply check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

"60 Minutes" host asks freed hostage if Hamas starved him because they didn't have enough food: ripped a new one

"60 Minutes" host Lesley Stahl is definitely not the brightest light on the Chanukah bush. She appears to be sympathetic to Hamassholes after she showed her hand during a Sunday night interview with an Israeli who had been held hostage by the terror group.

Bottle-blonde Stahl asked Keith Siegel whether the Hamas terrorists starved him on purpose or whether they didn’t have enough food to give him. Evidently she missed the videos of Hamas stealing the food from the myriad trucks Israel sent to Gaza, keeping it for themselves and not allowing the Gazans to benefit from Israel's beneficence. 

Lesley Stahl is either an idiot or a pro-Hamas stooge, or both.

During the CBS News program, she spoke to several hostages who had recently been freed from the terror group's clutches and returned to their families. Stahl spoke to Siegel, along with Tal Shalom, and Yarden Bibas — the man whose wife and two young children were murdered while in captivity — learning details about their horrific experiences living in Hamas-controlled tunnels in Gaza.

While Siegel discussed how his captors treated him, he stated that after his wife, Aviva, was released from captivity, Hamas became "very mean and very cruel and violent."

Yeah, killing babies and their mom is cruel and violent if you ask most people other than Lesley Stahl.

"They were beating me and starving me," Siegel said. Stahl followed by asking idiotically, "Do you think they starved you because or they just didn’t have food?"

Siegel denied that his torturers didn’t have enough food, recounting, "No, I think they starved me, and they would often eat in front of me and not offer me food."

The former hostage and his wife were kidnapped from their kibbutz during Hamas’ terror attack in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Siegel spent 484 days in "unimaginable conditions" in Hamas captivity but don't tell that to Leslie Stahl. 

The ex-hostage also recounted how he was only allowed to bathe once a month by pouring a cup of water over his head into a bucket, and described witnessing Hamas members sexually assaulting female hostages.

Stahl’s question prompted backlash on social media platform X.

The U.S. organization "StopAntisemitism" wrote, "Ridiculous moment on @60Minutes: Lesley Stahl asks hostage Keith Siegel if Hamas starved him because they had no food. He shuts her down. Hamas not only starved him, they ate in front of him, mocked him, sexually humiliated him, and forced him to watch female hostages being tortured." 

It added, "Meanwhile, @CBS pushes Hamas casualty numbers and falsely claims Israel ended the ceasefire. Hamas ended it."

Jewish journalist Ari Hoffman savaged Stahl over the question, stating, "She should ask the Nazis if they meant to starve the Jews in the Holocaust or didn't have enough aid."

Pro-Israel account "Jews Fight Back" posted, "Lesley Stahl looked a Jewish hostage in the face—after being starved, tortured, beaten, and dragged through hell—and asked if maybe Hamas didn’t mean to starve him. Maybe they just didn’t have food. Are you f--- kidding me? Shame on 60 Minutes. Shame on CBS. And shame on every apologist who still can’t admit that Hamas is pure evil."

A Jewish activist account, "Vivid," declared, "I can't believe my eyes. Lesley Stahl had the audacity to ask a Jewish hostage, who was tortured and starved by Hamas, if Hamas really meant to starve him or if they just didn't have enough food. Is this a joke? How the hell can she even ask him that?"

Answer: She is able to ask that because a) she is an idiot; or b) she is a pro-Hamas sympathizer; or c) she is a pro-Hamas sympathizing idiot.

Am Yisrael Chai!

"I pour my heart into these posts, and if they’ve sparked something for you, I’d be thrilled if you’d treat me to a coffee over at Buy Me a Coffee – totally optional, of course!"

Tweet

Trump says of Mattis: 'He's sort of a Democrat' and might leave administration

In a "60 Minutes" interview host Lesley Stahl asked President Trump whether Secretary of Defense James Mattis might leave his administration just a few weeks since journalist Bob Woodward wrote in his book "Fear" that Mattis compared the POTUS to a "fifth-or-sixth-grader."

Trump responded, "Well, I don't know. He hasn't told me that."

"I have a very good relationship with him," Trump continued. "I had lunch with him two days ago. ...It could be that he is. I think he's sort of a Democrat, if you want to know the truth. But General Mattis is a good guy. We get along very well. He may leave. I mean, at some point, everybody leaves. Everybody. People leave. That's Washington."

Leave, leave, leave--everybody. They leave.

Regarding reports that the White House is in chaos, Trump called the claim "so false" and "fake news," adding, "I have people now on standby that will be phenomenal. They'll come into the administration.

"Yeah, other people will go, sure. We have a great Cabinet. There are some people I'm not happy with. I have some people that I'm not thrilled with. And I have other people that I'm beyond thrilled with."

He has people he's not happy with, nor thrilled with, but he has others that he's beyond thrilled with, which brings to mind many questions.

President Trump's repetitive comments came soon after U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley abruptly announced her resignation, to take effect at year's end. The left-leaning media  claimed the departure indicated an extraordinarily high number of high-level departures from the Trump administration, but after looking at the numbers, the nonprofit Brookings Institution found that previous administrations lost a similar number of top officials.

After chinless Syrian dictator Bashar Assad launched a chemical attack on Syrians in April of last year, Woodward's book claimed that Trump demanded Mattis launch an assassination attempt.

"Let's f**king kill him! Let's go in. Let's kill the f**king lot of them," Trump allegedly said. According to Woodward, Mattis told an aide, "We're not going  to do any of that. We're going to be much more measured."

Mattis, according to the book, was also caught by surprise while on vacation when Trump proposed a ban on transgender troops. Mattis, who opposed the policy, has since unveiled a policy much more aligned with Trump's requests, but several lawsuits have temporarily put a hold on enforcing it.

Mattis said in a statement that "the contemptuous words about the president attributed to me in Woodward's book were never uttered by me or in my presence."

Woodward is known to document "facts" that are uncorroborated. Kind of sounds like the Kavanaugh debacle. Trump openly wondered if Woodward is a "Dem operative." He also posted on Twitter in September calling his book a "con on the public."

Mattis worked as head of the U.S. Central Command under former President Barack Hussein Obama, replacing David Petraeus. Mattis openly disagreed with Trump on several issues, favoring the preservation of certain aspects of the Obama Iran nuclear deal. Trump had called that deal a "horrible, one-sided" giveaway, basically the worst deal any human being has ever made in the history of the world, and maybe even the universe. Mattis believed the deal included "robust" measures and overall, it helped our interests [like not dying in a blinding nuclear blast].

Mattis views NATO as an alliance that's key to maintaining international order, while Trump criticized member nations for not paying their fair share of their GDP for national defense.

Secretary Mattis was able to change Trump's mind in certain areas. He convinced POTUS to abandon his stated desire to torture terror detainees and also got him to send more troops to Afghanistan.

There are no overt indications that Mattis has been withdrawing from his normal duties, and he will be heading to Vietnam on Tuesday, where he will visit Ho Chi Minh City [aka: Saigon] as the administration is attempting to counter China's military assertiveness.

Some see the arrival of Deputy National Security Adviser Mira Ricardel to the White House in May, as a sign Trump is planning to fire Mattis after the midterms next month. Ricardel and Mattis have often sparred in the past.

Also, Trump's hiring of U.N. ambassador John Bolton as national security adviser is a sign Trump's shift to a more hardline stance than Mattis supports, shows that the president is looking to change tactics and may want Mattis to go.

"I heard you're actually the Devil incarnate and I wanted to meet you," Mattis told Bolton in an open mic exchange when they met at the Pentagon earlier in the year.

In September, Mattis downplayed reports that he'd be leaving the Defense Department.

But we shall see.


Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page because it helps the economy and me.



Tweet