The Bill O'Reilly complaint

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Read it and weep!

Pretty sick fella. Likes to use "toys" while "on the phone". The irony that he and his network were so hard on Clinton for getting a hummer in the Oval Office, and they really tried to destroy him, and now similar bahavour looks to comeback to roost where he lives.

:biglaff:

[Lanny_MacDonald]

They had to do some minor renovations to get it in there, but with double doors it managed to fit. The nice thing about the renovations is that they proved indispensible after Bush was elected and allowed for his ears to get into the office as well.

[Cowperson]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald@Oct 25 2004, 08:56 PM
Read it and weep!

Pretty sick fella. Likes to use "toys" while "on the phone". The irony that he and his network were so hard on Clinton for getting a hummer in the Oval Office, and they really tried to destroy him, and now similar bahavour looks to comeback to roost where he lives.

:biglaff:

They're apparently close to a negotiated settlement.

If the tapes exist, you may never hear them.

Cowperson

[Lanny_MacDonald]

How disappointing. I was really hoping she would win big and O'Reilly would take in the ass. Oh wait, based on the complaint that might not be considered a punishment to O'Reilly!

[dangler22]

She had better watch out O reilly has connections that go to the very top. Someday there will be a knock on her door and life as she knows it will change forever.

[dangler22]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald@Oct 25 2004, 09:18 PM
How disappointing. I was really hoping she would win big and O'Reilly would take in the ass. Oh wait, based on the complaint that might not be considered a punishment to O'Reilly!

lol true dat.

[Bertuzzied]

Breaking news! Bush has finally found the weapons of mass destruction!
They are in O'Reilly's suitcase and in the shoebox on the top shelf of his closet!

hahahaha what an ass.

[Mike F]

When I linked to the Kobe Bryant transcript, that thread seemed to go MIA after a couple of hours.

If you want a discussion thread about this to stick around, my friendly advice would be to link to a story about this that doesn't have mature rated content.

The higher-ups seem squirrely about that.

[Cowperson]

Just as an analysis it might be said the stunningly violent reaction of O'Reilly/FOX, with assistance from the muckraking of the New York Post, might get the price reduced considerably from $60 million to something a lot less.

The other sensational, bodice-ripping tabloid in New York, the New York Daily News, was also gleefully in on the caper although, to be fair, that newspaper is an equal opportunity insulter. Any victim will do.

The woman is apparently deeply in debt.

FOX was pressing the court to have tapes produced for their examination PDQ. If they exist. One wonders if they do considering her overtures to settle. Or maybe she's just so shell-shocked by the vicious attacks that she's caving in a bit.

Looks like they might get this out of the media spotlight pretty quickly, although people aren't going to forget.

Cowperson

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by Cowperson@Oct 25 2004, 09:35 PM
FOX was pressing the court to have tapes produced for their examination PDQ. If they exist. One wonders if they do considering her overtures to settle. Or maybe she's just so shell-shocked by the vicious attacks that she's caving in a bit.

Tape or no tape, if O'Reilly didn't do anything inappropriate, why would he settle? Clearing one's name has to be the most important thing when they are blamed for something they didn't do.

[Claeren]

Originally posted by FlamesAddiction+Oct 25 2004, 03:49 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamesAddiction @ Oct 25 2004, 03:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Oct 25 2004, 09:35 PM
FOX was pressing the court to have tapes produced for their examination PDQ. If they exist. One wonders if they do considering her overtures to settle. Or maybe she's just so shell-shocked by the vicious attacks that she's caving in a bit.

Tape or no tape, if O'Reilly didn't do anything inappropriate, why would he settle? Clearing one's name has to be the most important thing when they are blamed for something they didn't do. [/b][/quote]
Exactly, he DEFINITELY did enough that he doesn't want it out there.

Claeren.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by FlamesAddiction+Oct 25 2004, 03:49 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamesAddiction @ Oct 25 2004, 03:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Oct 25 2004, 09:35 PM
FOX was pressing the court to have tapes produced for their examination PDQ. If they exist. One wonders if they do considering her overtures to settle. Or maybe she's just so shell-shocked by the vicious attacks that she's caving in a bit.

Tape or no tape, if O'Reilly didn't do anything inappropriate, why would he settle? [/b][/quote]
So he can get back to the business of saving America.

That or something like it if he settles. He'll have some indignant stance going on about "I didn't care to have my name and my family dragged through the mud so I got out of it, I threw some money at the problem and it went away, I'm not proud of it but that's America today, the lawyers run the country bla bla bla".

He's shining up the tap-shoes right now if he's going to settle. Too bad because I was quite looking forward to hearing those tapes if they do indeed exist.

[calf]

Originally posted by FlamesAddiction+Oct 25 2004, 03:49 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamesAddiction @ Oct 25 2004, 03:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Oct 25 2004, 09:35 PM
FOX was pressing the court to have tapes produced for their examination PDQ. If they exist. One wonders if they do considering her overtures to settle. Or maybe she's just so shell-shocked by the vicious attacks that she's caving in a bit.

Tape or no tape, if O'Reilly didn't do anything inappropriate, why would he settle? Clearing one's name has to be the most important thing when they are blamed for something they didn't do. [/b][/quote]
Probably because writing a cheque and getting everything done and over with quickly is a heck of a lot faster and easier than having an ongoing suit against him. The longer the issue goes on, the more O'Reily has that dark cloud hanging over his head, innocent or not.

[Bingo]

I think in all fairness ... we don't know.

I have a tendency to think that any issue like this is never 100% for either side, but likely somewhere in the middle.

O'Reilly and his lawyers have been lobbying for the release of the tapes saying they fear nothing. That's pretty ballsy if they do get released and then because of that end up in public consumption.

Clearly I'm just surmising, but that suggests to me that part of her case is bluff, and part of it is somewhat proven, and the truth will fall somewhere in the middle. Likely, O'Reilly is a bit of a pig, but not to the extent that she is alleging. I guess we'll see.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

I agree Bingo. I think O'Reilly is a biased jerk (making him a moderate on FoxNews) but I don't think he's as bad as he's made out to be in that complaint. If she had said he bullied her or intimidated her I would have been 100% behind her. But what she's saying just doesn't make sense. I would still like to see O'Reilly take a good hard kick in the nuts. It might wake him up a bit.

[Bingo]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald@Oct 26 2004, 10:21 AM
I agree Bingo. I think O'Reilly is a biased jerk (making him a moderate on FoxNews) but I don't think he's as bad as he's made out to be in that complaint. If she had said he bullied her or intimidated her I would have been 100% behind her. But what she's saying just doesn't make sense. I would still like to see O'Reilly take a good hard kick in the nuts. It might wake him up a bit.

harrassment and such is a very dangerous situation in office politics. I work with a guy that could easily be sued, yet I'm 100% behind him if he challenged it saying it was always only a joke. Chances are he'd be hooped anyway.

Remember that guy in the US that lost his job (this could be an urban legend, I don't know) for rehashing the plot of that Seinfeld episode (woman's name rhymes with a female body part) to his secretary.

What one person thinks is good fun can easily get you fired if you're not stupid enough to take that risk.

(for the record, I'm not saying O'Reilly falls into this case, I have no idea. I will agree that if it is more than that he's a tool for pushing the family value button repeatedly on his program over the years)

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by calf+Oct 26 2004, 01:45 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (calf @ Oct 26 2004, 01:45 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Tape or no tape, if O'Reilly didn't do anything inappropriate, why would he settle? Clearing one's name has to be the most important thing when they are blamed for something they didn't do.

Probably because writing a cheque and getting everything done and over with quickly is a heck of a lot faster and easier than having an ongoing suit against him. The longer the issue goes on, the more O'Reily has that dark cloud hanging over his head, innocent or not. [/b][/quote]
That just doesn't seem like a good strategy to me. He has to think about the long run. If he just settles, people will always wonder about his guilt. Not to mention that he sets himself up for being extorted again and again. People will assume he'll just settle to avoid the spotlight. It would possibly be cheaper, and better for his rep to fight this thing if he is innocent. He is a wealthy man with lawyers. It's not as if he couldn't clear his name.

[troutman]

O'Reilly Smears L.A. Times on Sex Abuse Story

http://www.fair.org/activism/oreilly-latimes.html

In his continuing criticism of the Los Angeles Times for printing stories about Arnold Schwarzenegger's alleged record of groping and sexual assault, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly (10/8/03) pointed to what he saw as a double standard: "Do you think the L.A. Times sent a squad of reporters to Arkansas to investigate Bill Clinton's problems with women? No, it did not."

[In fact, the L.A. Times did investigate Clinton sex stories in Arkansas]

Such attacks helped Schwarzenegger supporters dismiss detailed and consistent accounts from women who said that they had been abused by the film star as mere partisan mudslinging.