In testimony that was vaguely reminiscent of President Reagan's questioning at the Iran-Contra hearings, former News Of The World Editor and now CNN talkshow Host Piers Morgan offered up economy-sized heaps of bafflement during his testimony today.

As was highlighted on todays episode of the BBC 4 Radio Program PM, Morgan was asked many times and in many different ways what he knew and when did he know it. Almost all questions were answered with "I don't know" or "I don't recall" or "I won't name names". At one point he almost contradicted himself and his braggadocio claims via his book that phone hacking was "common knowledge" instead backing off as if to imply he really didn't mean what he wrote and he was actually naive and ignorant to the ways of the Murdoch style.

Which sums up the notion that, like most of the people testifying at the inquiry, they are either sociopaths or incompetents. It will be interesting to see what Morgan has to say on his show about his experience.

And the beat goes on.

Here is the BBC Radio 4 PM segment as aired earlier today.

While the Criminal investigation and the Leveson Inquiry continues over allegations of phone hacking at News of The World and its implications to Rupert Murdoch and his publishing empire, I ran across this interview done earlier today via the BBC World Service Hardtalk program which features attorney Mark Lewis, who is handling several of the phone-hacking victims cases as well as being on the receiving end of harsh reprisals and threats from his former colleagues as well as those in the Murdoch Organization.

Lewis, himself a victim of the debilitating disease MS, has been taking on the herculean task of these cases and is considered by some, not only in the press, but in the legal profession, as something of a crusader.

Whether or not that's true doesn't diminish the fact that he's bearing the brunt of a lot of intimidation from many sides. But the bottom line is he's actively engaged in doing the right thing. And one gets the impression that those throwing the biggest stones are the ones living in the largest glass houses.

It's a great interview on a story that is anything but over, and which will be having far-reaching implications in the weeks and months to come. Stay tuned.

With news breaking only a few hours ago via the New York Times and The BBC, it was learned that James Murdoch had in fact received e-mails regarding widespread phone hacking at News Of The World long before he admitted being aware of it.

In an e-mail dated June 2008, Murdoch was sent an e-mail from News Of The World Editor Colin Myler regarding the lawsuit brought about by British Soccer Union boss Gordon Taylor. In it were additional e-mails from editors and involved parties expressing concern that phone hacking was indeed a problem and spiraling out of control.

This goes against the flat-out denial during the Parliamentary Inquiry a few weeks back that James Murdoch knew nothing about any of the goings on with reference to phone hacking and that he had denied having any sort of conversation or communication with Myler regarding the Taylor incident.

Here is the news report via BBC-Radio 4's PM Program, recorded at 9:00 am (PST).

Stay tuned.

With news today of the abrupt resignation of James Murdoch from his position at Newscorp, it comes as something of a postscript to the continuing Leveson Hearings on Phone Hacking in the Media.

With a seemingly endless list of victims, the latest to be questioned were Kate and Gerry McCann, whose missing daughter while on vacation conjured up probably the worst the tabloid press was capable of.

Although the Murdoch papers are implicated, it was also learned that the method of phone hacking was not the exclusive property of Newscorp or News International. As suspected, it became something of the norm to utilize phone hacking techniques in order to "get a leg up" on the competition for salacious details. The McCann's testimony offered horrifying proof that the press, at least in the UK, had sunk to its lowest level since the turn of the previous century, and in doing so offered some proof that journalism and morals were seldom on speaking terms of late.

Here, by way of the extraordinary daily program PM from BBC Radio 4 are the highlights of todays testimony and reports from the hearing room.

Oh, the Fourth Estate . . . .

While the press is generally offering up a Post-Mortem to the proceedings of the day before, there are stories bubbling under the radar which are sure to gather steam in the coming hours/days.

One of course is the FBI involvement in possible phone-hacking of victims of 9/11. The other is a request for further scrutiny at previous trials involving Newscorp going back to 2003. The latest is that the testimony James Murdoch gave at the inquiry has been questioned by none other than the former editor of News Of The World and a member of the Legal staff over some statements the younger Murdoch gave to be patently false, There is rumor of proof and it will no doubt come to light shortly.

Here are two audio reports via The Guardian website. The first one is Politics Weekly, a wrapup of the week and speculation over the coming week as filed earlier today (before the latest batch of allegations were made). The second is a special edition of Media Talk which was aired yesterday and features a panel of Guardian columnists (Matt Wells, Alan Rusbridge, Nick Davies, Jonathan Freeland, Jane Martinson) and a special report by Vanity Fair U.S. columnist Sarah Ellison on U.S. reaction to the scandal in general and the hearings specifically.

Everyone is in agreement this whole scandal is gathering steam. How it will play out in the U.S. may be much worse for the Murdochs than even the current UK scandal, particularly if the phone hacking question surfaces with regards to the 9/11 victims. That may prove to end the Murdoch dynasty (as it seems to be doing now but in a much more devastating and universal way).

Despite the revelations a few hours ago, it is doubtful James Murdoch will be in any position of power within the Newscorp/News International camp. The bigger question has been, how is this impacting on the David Cameron government. There have already been some calls from the Right Wing British Blogosphere for Cameron to step down. That his error in judgment in hiring Andy Coulson signaled some weakness in his leadership ability. I expressed that hunch some days ago, but in light of all the circumstances and fast moving developments, any hunch or speculation on my part is completely pulling something out of the air.

It's gone past the point of being believable. So I'm not even trying.

The top player is the Politics Weekly Podcast from The Guardian and the bottom player is the one-hour audience participation special on the Media Talk program.

All in all, a very busy week with no letup in sight.

As it was reported less than an hour ago (at 9:00 am PDT), both James and Rupert Murdoch will be appearing before the Home Affairs Select Committee regarding the scandal, the fallout and the firestorm.

While momentum has been building and speculation increasing over what possible or probable repercussions are to be had here in the U.S. still remain to be seen, news and events surrounding this scandal are not going away in the UK anytime soon.

If anything, the Hearings, starting with Rebekah Brooks next Tuesday, should be interesting. Whether they will shed any light on what has been a long-running method of operation and a style of doing business is still a big question mark.

Here is the latest news as reported on the BBC 4 program PM, including an extended interview with Vince Cable, another figure who entanglements with Newscorp/News International cost him considerably.

The day ain't over and anything can still happen. And true to form, it just may.

Stay tuned.

Staying with Rupertgate for at least a little while, here is a recap via BBC Radio 4's excellent program PM Magazine. Today it was the Home Affairs Select Committee to hold investigations over alleged wrongdoing within the offices of The Sunday Times, the now-defunct News Of The World. Current and Former members of the Metropolitan Police Commission which turned into something of a free-for-all.

Midway through the broadcast it was revealed Rupert and James Murdoch, along with Rebekah Brooks will be testifying before the Select Committee this coming Tuesday. Shortly after the story was backtracked and it was then revealed there was no concrete commitment to show up for the inquiry.

Current Deputy Assistant Sue Akers went on to explain that, of the 4,000 + phones hacked, less that 170 were actually invstigated.

In short, it's going to be a very long summer. One which will mostly likely go in to Fall and Winter without too much problem.

Here is PM as broadcast by BBC Radio 4

("Hello suckers!")

On July 28, 1995, the FCC voted by unanimous decision to relax the restrictions that prevented a foreign company or individual from owning a broadcasting outlet.

And take a wild guess who was the recipient of that little bon mot?

James Quello (FCC Commissioner): “Rupert Murdoch, an American citizen is in de facto and in de jure control of Fox and therefore the likelihood of undue foreign influence is virtually nonexistent. I’ve said it before and I believe that the determining factor should be control by an American citizen, not the amount of foreign stock investment.

Ironically, Murdoch applied for and got citizenship while the hearings were underway, so it made everything seem legit.

The bottom line was/is, the FCC has done its level best to destroy any vestige of integrity in broadcasting in this country and it has effectively done so for way too many years.

It's also ironic that the initial complaint came from NBC. Funny how the animosity between Fox and NBC has a history attached to it.

But the shame of the FCC appears limitless.

(House Un-American Activities Hearings - no, they weren't trials . . much)

As the hysteria over Communist infiltration of everything American reached its fevered pitch, questions started to arise over just what was legal and what was an abuse of our Constitutional rights as people in the midst of all this "fact finding".

The day after this broadcast of American Forum Of The Air aired (August 14, 1955) the House Un-American Activities Committee set up shop in New York to stage an inquiry over Communist activities in the Theatrical profession.

Debating the question were Representative Francis E. Walter (D-Penn) and James A. Wechsler, Editor of the New York Post.

Wechsler was no stranger to allegations of communist sympathies. He was a member of the Young Communist movement from 1934-1937 when he became disenfranchised over the Nazi-Soviet pact and renounced his membership. Still, he was the outspoken editor of The New York Post which was at the time one of the leading Liberal papers in the country (obviously pre-Murdoch).

Walter was a staunch anti-communist and chaired many of the HUAC hearings in the late 1940s to mid-1950s.

James A. Wechsler (Editor, New York Post): “What is the scope . . do you believe that your committee at this moment has the right to call anyone in the United States w ho is alleged to have been in any way, at any time in the past, linked with the Communist movement?”

Rep. Francis E. Walter (D-Penn.): “Yes, I’ll go even farther than that. I am sure that the Congress imposed upon us the obligation to call anybody which. . . who, in our judgment can throw some light on this international conspiracy insofar as it affects the security of the United States.”

It's interesting to see how many times throughout history the question of abuse of our Constitution been made and how each time the fear card is played over and over.