[GoLightly]

I already knew that, cuz I've heard the ad.

Here's an odd twist. Swiftboat Vets now have an actionable cause against FOX, as FOX's press release charged the SBV of doing something they didn't do.

[ml1954]

Here's an odd twist. Swiftboat Vets now have an actionable cause against FOX, as FOX's press release charged the SBV of doing something they didn't do.

Almost makes you think that Fox MUST have a legal liability argument for refusing. It doesn't make much sense to arbitrarily refuse.

[Grampa Dave]

You just read my old mind.

John O'Neil should challenge this VP to have both of them on Fox and run the ad.

Then, John should say to this VP were did that ad say or mention treason?

Then, John can threaten to sue Fox unless they run the ad for free every 30 minutes until the next commercial comes out.

[Cboldt]

Swiftboat Vets now have an actionable cause against FOX, as FOX's press release charged the SBV of doing something they didn't do.

O'Neill was asked directly, by Alan Colmes, if the ad was accusing Kerry of treason. O'Neill said that he was not going to get into legal parsing (which is necessary to reach the conclusion of "treason"), which makes it clear that the SBVfT are not accusing Kerry of treason. They are putting out uncontested historical facts to remind the viewer of Kerry's past.