Posted on 10/16/2004 4:00:26 PM PDT by familyop
What I dont understand is if he was really harrassing her, then why did she go back to work for him? No one in the media has mentioned that point to my knowledge.
Could be that this lady was writing some of his talking points and skewing his inteview list.
What I dont understand is if he was really harrassing her, then why did she go back to work for him? The media hasnt mentioned this point to my knowledge.
Because her boss at CNN was terminated for sexual harrassement and she missed the dirty talk.
Actually, Fox should send her off to the Arctic to do a special on the mating habits of peguins. It should take about 12 years to do the story in depth.
Problem solved without having to do much of anything else.
But they can still run Bill's ass off.
What is it about Bill some of you dont like? I think he is a straight shooter although there are some things I dont agree with him on.
Most states have laws against surreptitiously tape recording someone. Anyone know the law in New York?
Taken from Ann Coulter's article: "Admitted war criminal cries foul"
August 26, 2004
There are several methods of evaluating the claims of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, 254 of whom have signed a letter saying John Kerry is not fit to be commander in chief. There is the Bill O'Reilly method, which is to abandon independent thinking and simply come out in the middle, irrespective of where the two sides are. In response to Newt Gingrich's remark that the Swift Boat Veterans' independent ads were "the conservative movement's answer to Michael Moore," O'Reilly said, "I don't want either of them." In Nazi Germany, O'Reilly would have condemned both Hitler's death camps and the Warsaw ghetto uprising. In Bill O'Reilly's world, King Solomon would have actually cut the disputed baby in half. The O'Reilly method of analysis works well about once a century. The last time was when Hitler invaded Russia in 1941.
Link:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/printac20040826.shtml
In O'Reilly's world: "To decide who to vote for, first determine which candidate the terrorists want for our president, then vote for the other".
I wonder if the lady had been feeding O some bad data?
I'm with you, too, really. Mr. O' is a dirty dog. I'm just stirring the pot!
As long as the mainstream Democrat media want to put the O'Reilly business on their front pages, that's alright. ...could be a lot worse, you know. Meanwhile,...
I agree.
His badgering of the Swift Boat Vets, his defense of Dan Rather, his trying to be so damn PC, ect, ect, ect.
He is beginning to look as if he no longer believes in anything but his own opinions.
Back before he was popular, he was able to speak from conviction of his roots.
Now he seems to be trying to sell books.
Maybe the tapes show she encouraged him or led him on. If she brought things up in conversation his only crime may have been to go along with it all thinking he was talking to a 'friend'. While I'm no longer a BOR fan, this whole thing has a Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill smear smell about it. My guess is she either has or will try to edit the tapes to leave things out. I wonder if we'll get the entire conversation from ring to dial tone (although creative editing can make up any kind of conversation).
I smelled a rat in O'Reilly's song and dance routine a long time ago...but I still watched him here and there. But I turned him off after his treatment of the Swifties and his whitewash of Dan Blather. I can't even look at O'Reilly's face on TV with the sound turned down. The guy makes my skin crawl.
Fire them both. And hire Laura.
Read the suit filing on smokinggun.com. He gegged her to come back, at a much higher salary, and she made him promise to stop the harassment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.