'Mission Was to Bring Down Bill O'Reilly'

[GURPS]

WashPost Reveals the Left's Goal: The 'Mission Was to Bring Down Bill O'Reilly'


The front page of Saturday’s Washington Post told the tale about the war on Fox News. It wasn’t about accusers getting a payout. It was about damaging the network by taking down its top star. The Post headline was “’Mission was to bring down Bill O’Reilly’.”

The Post betrayed the liberal media’s contempt for the channel and its role in American politics. Reporters Manuel Roig-Franzia and Ben Terris called Fox “a lucrative channel that has played an outsize role in shaping the U.S. political landscape over the past two decades.”

Who decides its influence is “outsize”? Can we detect some media jealousy as the Republicans control the White House and Congress? It’s “outsize” because liberals are on the outside?

 

[tommyjo]

So here is the actual WaPo article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...cd6118e1409_story.html?utm_term=.ea614f810834

If you bother to open that up you will note the title is in quotations...if you bother to read the article...as opposed to someone else telling you what it say, you would note that is attempts to be an historical accounting of the fall of Mr. O'Reilly...not a political commentary. Here is the passage that was used as the headline:

But Perquita Burgess was afraid, her attorney Lisa Bloom said. Afraid of Twitter trolls and other haters. Afraid that a powerful man would ruin her life for daring to cross him. So, Bloom invoked civil rights history to say the words that finally persuaded Burgess, a former Fox temp worker who is African American.

“Do you think Rosa Parks decided she was not going to do what she needed to do because people were going to say nasty things to her?” Bloom said, citing the heroine of the Montgomery bus boycott. “This is your time.”

She also explained to her client in stark terms what she hoped to accomplish: “The mission was to bring down Bill O’Reilly.”

So for those who can't read or understand English, the title of the article is a quote from an attorney...not the "liberal media". It is the typical BS of lawyers...every opponent is going down, every accusation is unfounded, no claim will ever be settled and everyone from every side is anxious to have their day in court.

BTW...this line quoted in GURPS' propaganda:

Reporters Manuel Roig-Franzia and Ben Terris called Fox “a lucrative channel that has played an outsize role in shaping the U.S. political landscape over the past two decades.”

is no where to be found in the actual WaPo article. In fact the only real comments regarding the standing of Fox News was this:

At a moment when the conservative juggernaut might have been strutting with Republicans in the White House and firmly in control of Congress, the network is instead operating in an almost continuous cycle of bad publicity and damage control.

The WaPo article was posted online on Friday April 21 at 6:05pm. It notes no corrections or updates.

Nice piece of fake news there GURPS...

 

[vraiblonde]

A couple of things:

If there were absolutely no truth to the accusations, I'm positive O'Reilly would have wanted to clear his name. As it stands, BillO made a few half-hearted denials without being specific or really addressing the issue.

Second, I fully believe Left entities want to dismantle Fox News. It's what they do: destroy opposition and eradicate alternate thought. FOX News is down the chain of corporate entity - they are owned by Fox Entertainment, which is owned by 21st Century Fox - so I get it, that the news channel is small potatoes in the grand scheme of money making. And I get it that the Murdochs are all Hollywood lefties - not by ideology, but as a business image - and are absolutely part of the problem with America.

Third, rumor has it that Sean Hannity is next, so watch for women to start coming out of the woodwork to accuse him of sexual harassment.

There's a lot going on with this situation. The big complaint against O'Reilly seem to be that he called a black female bubble head "hot chocolate". Under other less lucrative and less politically charged circumstances, that would be considered a compliment. The other is that he made "animal noises" to her. What does that even mean? He meowed at her? He oinked?

Anyway, there you go. That's that and there's nothing We the People can do about it. Sure, we can stop watching FOX, but the moneymen just fired their top draw so I doubt they care. We can write letters and boycott and complain, but they will not give a damn. I'm dying to know the real story - which is NOT that BillO and everyone else the Left hates is a rapist predator, that is absolutely NOT the real story - but it's unlikely it will ever come out. Or if it does, it will be buried and given zero coverage, so we'll never hear about it.

Look what Brietbart just did to Milo Y. It's unlikely that Brietbart caved under Left pressure, so clearly they were complicit. These entities that we think are "conservative" or a non-progressive voice - Aren't you cute?

 

[vraiblonde]

Nice piece of fake news there GURPS...

Real question:

How much money do you make trolling around the internet furthering the Leftist agenda? Straight, you're not very good at it and have zero charisma or powers of persuasion, so I can't believe it's terribly lucrative for you.

Do you get paid by the post or do you have to show results?

 

[Gilligan]

From everything I've read, it appears that it's the Murdoch son's that are running the show now and they are apparently quite liberal-leaning and wanting to do a complete "makeover" of Fox....which means that a good number of Fox people will have to go; they are just going after the low-lying fruit first.

 

[Gilligan]

Nice piece of fake news there GURPS...

From the local Queen of Fake News herself. Nice bit or irony there, saggy drawers.

 

[Bann]

A couple of things:

If there were absolutely no truth to the accusations, I'm positive O'Reilly would have wanted to clear his name. As it stands, BillO made a few half-hearted denials without being specific or really addressing the issue.

Second, I fully believe Left entities want to dismantle Fox News. It's what they do: destroy opposition and eradicate alternate thought. FOX News is down the chain of corporate entity - they are owned by Fox Entertainment, which is owned by 21st Century Fox - so I get it, that the news channel is small potatoes in the grand scheme of money making. And I get it that the Murdochs are all Hollywood lefties - not by ideology, but as a business image - and are absolutely part of the problem with America.

Third, rumor has it that Sean Hannity is next, so watch for women to start coming out of the woodwork to accuse him of sexual harassment.

There's a lot going on with this situation. The big complaint against O'Reilly seem to be that he called a black female bubble head "hot chocolate". Under other less lucrative and less politically charged circumstances, that would be considered a compliment. The other is that he made "animal noises" to her. What does that even mean? He meowed at her? He oinked?

Anyway, there you go. That's that and there's nothing We the People can do about it. Sure, we can stop watching FOX, but the moneymen just fired their top draw so I doubt they care. We can write letters and boycott and complain, but they will not give a damn. I'm dying to know the real story - which is NOT that BillO and everyone else the Left hates is a rapist predator, that is absolutely NOT the real story - but it's unlikely it will ever come out. Or if it does, it will be buried and given zero coverage, so we'll never hear about it.

Look what Brietbart just did to Milo Y. It's unlikely that Brietbart caved under Left pressure, so clearly they were complicit. These entities that we think are "conservative" or a non-progressive voice - Aren't you cute?

I just read that O'Reilly will have his own Podcasts starting tomorrow. I was wondering when they'd be going after Sean Hannity.

From everything I've read, it appears that it's the Murdoch son's that are running the show now and they are apparently quite liberal-leaning and wanting to do a complete "makeover" of Fox....which means that a good number of Fox people will have to go; they are just going after the low-lying fruit first.

I've been reading the same.

 

[Hijinx]

I just read that O'Reilly will have his own Podcasts starting tomorrow. I was wondering when they'd be going after Sean Hannity.



I've been reading the same.

Too bad. Turning Fox into just another liberal station should just about runit it.
Might be expensive to lose the base they have now.
Of course with their money they don't care.

 

[GURPS]

A couple of things:

If there were absolutely no truth to the accusations, I'm positive O'Reilly would have wanted to clear his name. As it stands, BillO made a few half-hearted denials without being specific or really addressing the issue.

I get that .... I read a long fairly detailed article

Bill works with a woman as a 'on air consultant' a few times
[alleged propositions her - she refuses]
Promotes her book
gets her a visit on The View to promotes her book

continues to have her on his show as a consultant

hardly seems Bill is being vindictive ....

SHE hasn't gotten the position she wanted at FOX so Bill is blocking her advancement - by not promoting her more ...


Fox Management has changed ....
what better way to clean house and start fresh ....
cave to frivolous lawsuits ....

 

[Monello]

O'Reilly accuser has false accusation history

These allegations need some extreme vetting.

Newsmax has obtained two documents that cast doubt on Burgess's credibility.A Detroit Police report dated Feb. 11, 2015, documents Burgess's arrest on charges of making a false report and obstructing a court order.
According to the police document, Burgess called authorities and alleged her boyfriend had struck her in the face with a gun. Police said when they arrived at the scene Burgess "appeared intoxicated."
The arresting officer stated: "I asked Ms. Burgess where the gun was that she was struck with in the face, she replied there is no gun. I again asked her where the gun was, and if she had been assaulted. Ms. Burgess stated there was no gun, and he didn’t assault me!"

not so hot chocolate

 

[Hijinx]

These allegations need some extreme vetting.



not so hot chocolate

Sounds like Bill and Justice Thomas have a thing in common. A problem with Mulatto women making up stories on them.