The News Corp. CEO and Chairman is under investigation for allegations that the now-defunct British tabloid News of the World, hacked into the voicemail of a murdered British girl. (Murdoch has since offered a multi-million dollar settlement to the family of the young victim.) The controversy drew international scrutiny, and U.S. lawmakers have called on federal agencies to investigate allegations that others under his media empire hacked into the phones of 9/11 victims.

In July, at the height of the hacking controversy, Perry urged caution in judging the claims against Murdoch. The pause from Perry came after questions of whether or not he should return the $1.25 million News Corp. donated to the Republican Governors Association under Perry’s leadership last year.

“I think that to judge Mr. Murdoch at this particular point in time is rather premature,” said Perry, stressing there are contributions of “tens of millions of dollars made by a host of individuals” to the RGA. Perry said money has been given back, in some instances, after companies receive indictments.

Murdoch is the owner of a the world’s second-largest media conglomerate, including film, print, TV and online holdings — some of which have helped to fuel Perry’s rising star.

The op-ed pages of the Wall Street Journal misleadingly praised Texas’ job growth record under Perry, and defended the governor’s “treasonous” remark leveled at Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. “Everybody knows Mr. Perry meant no literal harm and was indulging the irrational exuberance that is one of his trademarks,” the Journal wrote. The paper has also been critical of Perry’s main GOP rival Mitt Romney.

Murdoch isn’t the only Fox-affiliated figure Perry has hung out with as of late, though. This weekend Perry also spent time with former Murdoch employee and controverisal Fox News show host Glenn Beck during a Lone Survivors Foundation Gala in Houston.

The substance of Karger’s complaint, filed under the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, is that Fox News did not allow him to participate in the network’s televised presidential debate on Aug. 11 in Ames, Iowa.

“I qualified for last month’s Fox News Channel Debate fair-and-square, and was fully expecting to be on that stage in Ames,” Karger said in a press statement Thursday. “For some reason, Fox News did not want me debating the other presidential candidates.”

Karger claims he met all of Fox’s requirements to participate in the debate, which included reaching an average of 1 percent in five national polls based on most recent polling leading up to the registration day. Karger met the mark: achieving    1 percent support in four polls leading up to the debate (including a Fox News poll from April) and 2 percent support in a Harris Interactive poll from early August, in which he tied with former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman and former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who is no longer in the race.

According to Karger’s campaign, after Karger met Fox’s requirement, the network “changed its criteria in order to exclude Karger.” Last month, Fox News Vice President of News Michael Clemente told The Des Moines Register that Karger did not qualify for the debate because the polls he cited were not good enough.

On Aug. 18, the day Karger filed his complaint with the FEC, Karger sent a letter (PDF) to Rupert Murdoch, president and CEO of News Corporation, which owns Fox; Fox News Channel President Roger Ailes; and Fox News Vice President of News Michael Clemente. In the letter, he explained why he filed the complaint and accused the executives of changing their “pre-established, objective criteria” as soon as he submitted his Aug. 5, 2011, letter proving he met the requirements for the Ames debate. Karger told the executives he had submitted another letter on Aug. 8 and tried to contact the network various times to learn why he had been turned away from the debate. But, he said, he received no response from Fox, and prompted a petition to let him into the debate.

From Karger’s letter to Fox:

Since I was not allowed to participate, the debate no longer appears exempt from federal campaign contribution laws. That could mean that Fox News Channel has made illegal in-kind corporate contributions to the eight debate participants of upwards of $100 million.

Two hours of free primetime television to an audience of 5.1 million viewers, weeks of media coverage before and after the debate, facilities rental, the construction of the debate stage, salaries, travel, insurance, equipment, the filing room, the spin room and so much more would all amount to in-kind contributions to the eight presidential candidates.

Karger said he requested an expedited investigation with the FEC because the next Fox News debate is on Sept. 22 in Orlando, Fla., and he hopes to participate.

Emanuel is going to need friends in Chicago as he explores a mayoral bid. What better place to start than those who you got into the White House? Some of Emanuel’s visitors are big Chicago businessmen, lobbyists and politicians.

These Chicago players include business leaders Sam Zell, The Tribune Company, John Rowe, Exelon, Leo Melamed, Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Thomas Lanctot, William Blair & Company, Howard Gottlieb and Patrick Cermak, Wight & Company.

Those in the political realm include Bill Daley, former Commerce Secretary and brother to current Mayor Richard Daley, John Cullerton, President of the Illinois State Senate, Sheila Gutman, major Democratic donor and Emanuel’s own former staffer John Borovicka, now with William & Blair.

How these contacts play out practically, if at all, remains to be determined. In light of earlier reports about News Corp.’s million dollar donation to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, however, it’s also worth noting a rather unlikely White House visit Blumenthal uncovered from one “Keith R. Murdoch”:

One meeting that appears in the White House visitor logs that may seem unexpected is a June 9, 2010 meeting with one Keith R. Murdoch. Does the “R” stand for Rupert? In his book The Promise Jonathan Alter revealed that Emanuel kept a back channel open to NewsCorp owner Rupert Murdoch, who’s real name is Keith Rupert Murdoch. I have not yet confirmed whether this is actually Rupert Murdoch, but I will let you know when I do.

Just one more reason for the liberal wing of the Democratic party to be thrilled by Rahm’s departure.

Smith’s latest scoop will only feed such flames, as the Chamber is currently engaged in what it hopes will be a $75 million spending campaign almost entirely on behalf of Republican candidates during the upcoming election cycle. The Chamber’s nearly $8 million in ad spending thus far makes it the biggest spender of any interest group.

Smith notes that, in the past, News Corp. had — like ABC parent company Disney and NBC parent company GE — spread its donations more evenly across both political parties:

Murdoch’s political leanings were considered to be pragmatic rather than strictly ideological. Although known as a conservative, he turned his right-leaning British papers behind Labor Prime Minister Tony Blair and flirted with support for Senator Hillary Clinton when she was a Democratic presidential candidate. But his political giving have been sharply aligned with the Republican Party this year.

Think Progress points out this exchange between Murdoch and Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), who said “it does not appear that what you are talking and the way you are discussing it is the way it is discussed on Fox.”

Here’s Murdoch’s defense:

We are home to all views on Fox. [...] We don’t censor that or take any particular line at all. We are not anti-immigrant on Fox News. [...] We certainly employ a lot of immigrants at Fox. In all arms of Fox. We have many immigrants there and we do not take a consistent anti-immigrant line.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) responded by saying most people see Fox News as “the most fair.”

Still, Murdoch argued for reform in his testimony. “America’s future prosperity depends on getting immigration policy right — and doing it quickly,” he says.

Bloomberg also advocated swift action on immigration reform. “Our broken system of immigration is undermining our economy, slowing our recovery and hurting millions of Americans,” he said. “We have to fix it.”

The company’s media outlets play politics more openly than most, but the huge contribution to a party committee is a new step toward an open identification between Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. and the GOP. The company’s highest-ranking Democratic executive, Peter Chernin, recently departed. [...]

UPDATE: News Corp. Spokesman Jack Horner emails, “News Corporation believes in the power of free markets, and the RGA’s pro-business agenda supports our priorities at this most critical time for our economy.”

Think Progress jumped into the fray this afternoon, too, arguing that News Corp.’s donation might violate its own “Standards of Business Conduct” for dealing with government officials. The language they cite is pretty basic stuff prohibiting gifts or any sort of quid pro quo arrangements between employees and public officials, however, so the charge doesn’t really hold much water. The Supreme Court has set the bar pretty high for instances in which corporate spending on behalf of candidates might be considered to foster corruption or the appearance of corruption, and this certainly isn’t one of them. As for how the contribution reflects on Rupert Murdoch’s claim that his news outlets are fair and unbiased, well, that’s another story.

While most news channels focused on Sen. John McCain’s big night on Thursday, it was a battle of the B.O.s on Fox News.

Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, made a much-hyped appearance on “The O’Reilly Factor” to tangle with Bill O’Reilly. The talk-show host had been pushing so hard for an Obama visit, of course, his unrequited desire was a big topic at the secret meeting between Obama, NewsCorp head Rupert Murdoch and Fox News chief Roger Ailes.

Ever the showman, O’Reilly turned his new tape into a mini-series — only “Part 1″ aired Thursday (below) — and turned us commentators into previews for the remaining segments. But it was still good television.

Part 1 is about national security, with O’Reilly gingerly mugging as a salt-of-the-earth armchair general. He may pull down $9 million a year, but O’Reilly talks with the cadence and umbrage of any regular guy holding court at the bar — scrunching his face, interrupting, waving his hands and wondering whether Obama is tough enough to take on Iran.

He looked permanently perturbed with Obama’s answers. But he also offered his guest a few compliments. So Obama was correct to oppose the Iraq war as the “wrong battlefield,” O’Reilly observed, but wrong to oppose the surge. (Don’t even bother trying to square that.) Obama gave a good speech in Denver, O’Reilly conceded, but he still “bloviated” about Pakistan.

Obama was cool and cogent throughout, but O’Reilly’s audience presents demographic kryptonite to his political superpowers. Fox News viewers went for Bush by 9:1 last cycle, and prime-time shows — like The Factor — offer an even more conservative spin than daytime programming. Meanwhile, the average age of an O’Reilly viewer is 71. Obama has trouble with older Americans in general, but older Americans who voted for President George W. Bush and tune into O’Reilly? Even they may not be moved by this solid performance: