Well, I did a little research and found that Jayna Davis did try to go public with the "prior warning" way back in May of 2001 on The O'Reilly Factor show. It seems that Bill O'Reilly didn't want to discuss it for some reason, or perhaps he failed to realized the significance of what Jayna was saying. Regardless of the reasoning behind it, it's evident that Jayna got cut off and was not allowed to finish. The transcript of that very public television show is posted word-for-word below.
I'm not expecting any replies on this. It just needed to be on the record to show that, like most things in life, there are two sides to this issue.
Not for commercial use. Solely to be used for the educational purposes of research and open discussion.
Fox News Network
The O'Reilly Factor
May 14, 2001, Monday
Unresolved Problem: Has the FBI Ignored Information About the OKCBombing?
GUESTS: Jayna Davis
BYLINE: Bill O'Reilly
O'REILLY: In the "Unresolved Problem" segment tonight, investigative reporter Jayna Davis told us a few weeks ago that she tried to deliver information to the FBI about others involved in the Oklahoma City bombing but was rebuffed. Ms. Davis joins us now for an update from Oklahoma City.
Well, we finally got the FBI to tell us why they didn't take your stuff, Jayna, and they said they didn't want to have it on file so that they would have to turn it over to McVeigh and Nichols' attorneys in discovery because they couldn't check out what you said, and that seemed to make sense to me. Does it make sense to you?JAYNA DAVIS, FORMER KFOR INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER: Absolutely not. This was turned over initially in June of 1995 and I made several attempts in the following months, in the spring and summer of '95, to share this information with the FBI and they were very interested initially and I was talking to an FBI agent regularly in May and June of 1995. So I don't understand why it's...
O'REILLY: Yeah, but they came to the conclusion if we take information from this woman and we haven't checked it out and McVeigh and Nichols' attorneys want it, we have to turn it over to them and that's going to hurt our prosecution.
DAVIS: Yes, but they lost interest, Bill. In September and -- I'm sorry, in the spring and summer of '95. I went back to them in September of '97 to turn it over. But they had plenty of time between the spring and summer of '95 and September of '97 when I returned.
O'REILLY: To check your story out.
DAVIS: Yes, they did.
O'REILLY: Right. Well, they didn't want to do that, obviously. All right, now, you believe that there's a Middle Eastern connection here to McVeigh and Nichols. You also believe that Osama bin Laden's money may have been involved here. Briefly, tell the audience what you think happened.
DAVIS: I believe that a Arab terrorist cell operating in the heart of Oklahoma City funded and operated and backed by Osama bin Laden acted in collusion with Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols and I have 24 sworn witness affidavits to back that up from witnesses who saw Arab men in the presence of these two prime suspects, and now the bombing convicts, at various stages of the bombing plot.
O'REILLY: All right, now, your own station has kind of turned on you and, you know, discredited you. Why did they do that? You used to work for KFOR TV in Oklahoma City. Why did that station turn on you?
DAVIS: They actually didn't turn on me.
O'REILLY: Well, they're suing you, I think, aren't they?
DAVIS: No, they are not. No. The station was sold...
O'REILLY: The lawsuit was eventually thrown out by the judge. OK.
DAVIS: Yes, it was. Yes, it was.
O'REILLY: Right. And so they did but they don't like you, Jayna, you know that.
DAVIS: Well, to better explain it, when I left the station in the fall of 1997 I took with me all the confidential witness statements and informed station management that I had it in my possession. The "New York Times" purchased KFOR Television some time in the summer of '96 and when I left in the winter of '97, I informed them that I took my confidential witness statements. They sued me for those statements.
O'REILLY: Why? Why did they do that?
DAVIS: I don't understand. They were interested in the material and they said I needed to turn it over. However, I just wanted from them a signed release that they wouldn't publish those statements without the express written consent of the witnesses and the judge upheld my first...
O'REILLY: So you wanted to protect your sources is what you wanted to do?
DAVIS: Yes, I did. I wanted to protect my sources.
O'REILLY: OK, so you...
DAVIS: As I had promised.
O'REILLY: I asked you this question the first time around. We have a minute left so I'm going to ask you again. Do you have any idea why the FBI wouldn't want full disclosure, if your theory is correct, of Middle Eastern involvement?
DAVIS: I cannot speculate. I cannot get into the mind of the FBI. I, as I told you before, that is a question for the former attorney general and for the people in the Department of Justice that were in a position to make the decision whether or not they would take this evidence and thoroughly investigate it.
O'REILLY: All right, do you think, are you going to take this any further? You got anything else down the road that you can put pressure on them?
DAVIS: Well, I have direct knowledge of a prior warning that was issued on February 27th of 1995 that contained the language that there would be an Iran-sponsored Islamic attack and the first potential target was Washington, D.C., the White House and Congress and I don't believe that that information was turned over to the Nichols defense team or the McVeigh defense team. I know that for a fact.
O'REILLY: All right, Jayna, well, stay on the case and we appreciate the update. Thank you very much.
And we'll be right back with more of THE FACTOR in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
I always did hate TV commercials.
The prior warning notice Davis mentioned on OReilly (in the transcript Nita posted)was a notice on February 27,1995 which did not list the Murrah Building or OKC as a target and did not mention the "litly whites" the ME types planned to use.
But the relevant and most significant official prior notice from Bodansky to House members (COngressman James Saxon,Repub from New Jersey)and Federal law enforcement was issued on March 3, 1995 (it was not mentioned by Davis on O"Reilly but known to Davis in detail since at least early 1996) which listed the Murrah building as a specific target and which described the lily whites (McVeigh and Nichols?).
Bodansky and Davis deliberately and wrongly sat on the official prior warning notice from 1995 to 2001 and kept it from the trials, the courts, from the OKC county grand Jury and the public all while I , Charles Key ,William Jasper and some of Jaynas own attorneys had urged her FOR YEARS prior to OReilly and after Oreilly in May 2001 to release the specific details of the official prior warning. I spoke to her after the OReilly interview about the official prior warning notice of MArch 3, 1995 which she did not reveal on OReilly and I urged her again at that time to release the specific details even though she would not give me the details.
I repeat, Davis told me several times in 1996 and later that she deliberately kept the official prior warning notice from being known to Stephen Jones and to the McVeigh trial starting in 1996.
You need to listen carefully to the Scippers interview with Jim Quinn where Schippers calls Jayna and tells her on 9/11 that it is time then for her to finally release the details of the official prior warning notice for MArch 3, 1995.
I checked with William Jasper today and his recollection of my account with Jayna Davis handling of the prior warning notice is precisely as I have written it. Jasper found Davis handling of the notice and Davis deliberately driving our own ME witnesses from me, Jasper and Key as morally indefensible. Jasper also agrees that Davis also tried aggressively and improperly to discredit for years evidence of domestic John Does who were FBI informants in the case.
And I repeat, Jayna Davis told me for several years she worked for a US government official (I believe it was Bodansky) from at least 1997 if not earlier until sometime around 2000 while she kept the specific information of the notice from the Grand Jury and the public.
Davis called me many times from 1997 to 2001 to threaten me over publicly discussing the official prior warning notice and FBI agent misconduct even though she never gave me the details but told me it was highly significant for years. During that time she deliberately covered up the official prior warning notice of March 3, 1995 for Bodansky an official of the US government.
In 1999 I arranged for Bodasnky to be interviewed by Jerry Bohnen of KTOK radio in OKC . I was able to get Bohnen to ask Bodansky about prior warning notices on the OKC bombing which Bodansky refused to answer. Davis knew in advance about the Bodansky interview and spoke to me soon afterwards and gleefully told me that her government official Bodasnky was not allowed to discuss official US business especially prior warning notices. She also let me know that my going around her to find out the details of the official prior warning by going to Bodansky via the Bohnen interview would not Succeed. This is another sterling example where Davis was in cover up mode with and for her US government official , Bodansky in 1999 over the official prior warning notice. Davis own attorney (the one close to Inhofe) told me in 1999 that the story would come out in due time but was being delayed for the “right time” due to political considerations of Inhofe and others in Congress. I found this to be disgusting.
I know my side of the story first hand and I am telling the truth. The truth will win out in the end even if it should get confused or improperly revised for a thousand years!
Schippers has let it be known that he is now available for me to call him after he has had my phone number and messages for over two years and deliberately did not return my calls. I suspect he now wants to speak to me about my complaints about Jayna Davis. He can call me and regardless of what he says or tries to do I am not backing off my story one inch. Davis also deliberately and improperly denigrated me to Schippers according to a mutual friend who has known both me and Schippers for years.
In my informed and first hand opinion, Davis improperly and badly handled and blocked the key evidence from the courts and the public and the OK County Grand Jury in the OKC bombing for at over five years while she worked for a US government official at his request because it was too politically "hot to handle" (not only Democrats but Republican Congressmen like James Saxon and Senators like James Inhofe would be in trouble for their knowledge).
I applaud Davis efforts to get part of the story out since May 2001 but I do not applaud her efforts to block the notice info before then and to still continue to attempt to block info about the domestic John Does, culpable FBI agents she knows and to denigrate many other investigators and General Partin who obtained evidence of multiple devices, the ME connections and the domestic John DOes and FBI informants.