Bill O'Reilly: sexual harassment claims

[alfaniner]

If only this had happened a year ago. We would be living in a very different political world today.

[Babbylonian]

Originally Posted by alfaniner

If only this had happened a year ago. We would be living in a very different political world today.

Extremely doubtful. Even here in this thread there's been expression of at least some tacit approval of O'Reilly's behavior, and he's just a TV talking head who's not running for anything [yet].

There will be no raising of consciousness from this. Those who would have found excuses for O'Reilly a month ago will find similar excuses for someone else a year from now.

[blutoski]

Originally Posted by Babbylonian

Extremely doubtful. Even here in this thread there's been expression of at least some tacit approval of O'Reilly's behavior, and he's just a TV talking head who's not running for anything [yet].

There will be no raising of consciousness from this. Those who would have found excuses for O'Reilly a month ago will find similar excuses for someone else a year from now.

Oh, absolutely. He's a victim of Feminazism, y'see. A badge of honour, this is.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

But rather the lenient end of fuelair's full range of desired punishments for people he disagrees with. Taken in that light it seems more reasonable.

Generally and in all fairness, it is not people I disagree with (stop). It is people who I feel are actively working to harm others - particularly others who are not doing them harm (especially children and moreso small children). There are many people I like just fine though I disagree with them on any number of things.

But, between the bible (and several related ) and the actual Bros. Grimm stories I liked the ideas of fast painful and life changing punishment for the bad
people - those who wished to cause pain and death for innocents because they enjoyed doing such. I see it as earned revenge when it goes the direction I support.

[Trebuchet]

Originally Posted by fuelair

Sleeping with the fish mean gang style execution : wearing concrete overshoes and sleeping with the fish are two names for that - there are more!!!!!

They'll need to get him out beyond the low tide line. It goes in and out, you know.

[Mumbles]

Originally Posted by Marcus

I'm sad. It's not that I agreed with his views, I usually didn't. It's that his show was so entertaining. He's a horndog, presumably getting too old to practice, the girls are now millionaires, that should be enough.

No way I will waste my time watching Tucker Carlson.

I seem to remember liking, though rarely agreeing with, him most of the time back before he became the screaming pro-Iraq War guy and the general complete meltdown of the GOP's ideas. He at knew *how* to host a show, and was pretty intelligent. Probably would have given up when he told Marc Lamont Hill that he looked like a crack dealer, though.

But at this point, the place has been dimwits, frat boys, and Shep Smith for a while now.

[William Parcher]

Hot Chocolate reveals herself. She says he also once said, "Looking good there, girl".

http://a.abcnews.com/images/Business..._12x5_1600.jpg

[marplots]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

Hot Chocolate reveals herself. She says he also once said, "Looking good there, girl".

http://a.abcnews.com/images/Business..._12x5_1600.jpg

What's with all the outing of transsexuals? Didn't someone do that on Survivor too?

[newyorkguy]

Originally Posted by marplots

Did they publish the hotline number? The other night I had his show on and bent over to retrieve the remote. I think he peeked at my butt!!

If you're female you may actually have a case!

[Marcus]

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

Could you expand on the highlighted? I'm genuinely curious what you mean here.

He harassed some girls, which as far as I can tell seemed to consist of lewd comments and suggestions. In return, they are multi millionaires, set for life, it seems like more than fair compensation, it's not like he raped them a la Bill Cosby. It's all moot now of course, it seems the 400 million a year he was bringing in was not enough to buy any loyalty from Fox.

[Marcus]

Originally Posted by Mumbles

I seem to remember liking, though rarely agreeing with, him most of the time back before he became the screaming pro-Iraq War guy and the general complete meltdown of the GOP's ideas. He at knew *how* to host a show, and was pretty intelligent. Probably would have given up when he told Marc Lamont Hill that he looked like a crack dealer, though.

But at this point, the place has been dimwits, frat boys, and Shep Smith for a while now.

Anyone who actually watched the show knows that he was anything but a rabid Republican. He criticized Republicans almost (but not quite) as much as Democrats. He certainly had some bad habits, like talking over and cutting short guests, but this also was not limited to Democrats.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Jim_MDP

I'd never been a watcher of Inside Edition so the clips I just saw on the Daily Show were pretty shocking.

This was '90 so Bill couldn't have been that big of a name (hell, Inside Edition... 'nuff said)... so it was ridiculous to see him do an F-bomb laden meltdown during an ad break. Then slip right back into pretentious blowhard when they came back on air.

What a freakin' Diva.

And if that temper was the norm in the office... how the hell was it tolerated this long?

Once you've seen, "We'll do it live!" you can't unsee it.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

Could you expand on the highlighted? I'm genuinely curious what you mean here.

Only a fraction of them even sued him. The attitude, accusations of sexual harassment must only be about the money, are prevalent among people who support the likes of O'Reilly and Trump.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

I just want to see Hot Chocolate.

She was on Lawrence O'Donnell tonight. I liked her, she was intelligent and clearly articulate though she didn't say much.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin

"Girls?"

Of course, you expected something else?

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by marplots

What's with all the outing of transsexuals? Didn't someone do that on Survivor too?

You got all that from one bad photo, did you?

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Marcus

He harassed some girls, which as far as I can tell seemed to consist of lewd comments and suggestions. In return, they are multi millionaires, set for life, it seems like more than fair compensation, it's not like he raped them a la Bill Cosby. It's all moot now of course, it seems the 400 million a year he was bringing in was not enough to buy any loyalty from Fox.

Do you guys even look at the facts in these cases before you imagine your stereotypical versions of reality?

At least some of the women who won lawsuits proved they had successful careers that were derailed by O'Reilly when he failed to get them in his bed as a payoff.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by Marcus

He harassed some girls, which as far as I can tell seemed to consist of lewd comments and suggestions. In return, they are multi millionaires, set for life, it seems like more than fair compensation, it's not like he raped them a la Bill Cosby. It's all moot now of course, it seems the 400 million a year he was bringing in was not enough to buy any loyalty from Fox.

Money always trumps (see what I did there)loyalty - and loss of advertising seems to also!!!

[marplots]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

You got all that from one bad photo, did you?

I'm pretty perceptive. Sometimes it's a burden.

[logger]

Originally Posted by Marcus

Anyone who actually watched the show knows that he was anything but a rabid Republican. He criticized Republicans almost (but not quite) as much as Democrats. He certainly had some bad habits, like talking over and cutting short guests, but this also was not limited to Democrats.

Agreed, but he did have the best show on cable, no one could even come close. That said he should be gone, he's a man without self control.

[Argumemnon]

Originally Posted by logger

Agreed, but he did have the best show on cable, no one could even come close.

And by "best", you mean "had better ratings", right?

[quadraginta]

Originally Posted by Marcus

He harassed some girls, which as far as I can tell seemed to consist of lewd comments and suggestions. In return, they are multi millionaires, set for life, it seems like more than fair compensation, it's not like he raped them a la Bill Cosby. It's all moot now of course, it seems the 400 million a year he was bringing in was not enough to buy any loyalty from Fox.

Are you expecting loyalty from a corporation?

A media corporation?

Owned by a conservative?

The advertisers were dropping off like fleas from a dying rat. That means no more bringing in millions. Whatever he brought in before was before. Ancient history.

He couldn't afford their loyalty anymore.

[Marcus]

Originally Posted by quadraginta

Are you expecting loyalty from a corporation?

A media corporation?

Owned by a conservative?

The advertisers were dropping off like fleas from a dying rat. That means no more bringing in millions. Whatever he brought in before was before. Ancient history.

He couldn't afford their loyalty anymore.

You're right, one shouldn't expect loyalty from a corporation. They might have gotten rich off the deal, but so did he.

[Marcus]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Do you guys even look at the facts in these cases before you imagine your stereotypical versions of reality?

At least some of the women who won lawsuits proved they had successful careers that were derailed by O'Reilly when he failed to get them in his bed as a payoff.

I believe you, but I would also appreciate links if you have some.

As far as "you guys" , you lumped me in with the Republicans in the Hillary threads too, you seem immune to correction.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by Marcus

Anyone who actually watched the show knows that he was anything but a rabid Republican. He criticized Republicans almost (but not quite) as much as Democrats. He certainly had some bad habits, like talking over and cutting short guests, but this also was not limited to Democrats.

In that, he was quite similar to one of the characters I do not like on MSNBC who constantly talks over or breaks into his guests during his show. I think his name is Ed - 6 or 7 o'clock Eastern.

I hate that - even if he is talking to a republicker. Figure if he is talking to one, let them talk and trip over what they are saying!!! (It is harder to remember to keep lies straight than the truth).

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Has everyone forgotten the [paraphrasing] "I want to grab your tits in the shower" recorded phone call?

Bill O'Reilly Falafel Lawsuit Turns TenLinks in the link.

The reference to 'better than O'Reilly's book' is in reference to a cheesy porn novel he wrote that contained a lot of the same fantasies he discussed in the recorded phone calls.

What the hell are "masturbation lessons" anyway? Doesn't everybody already know how to do that?

[marplots]

Originally Posted by Polaris

What the hell are "masturbation lessons" anyway? Doesn't everybody already know how to do that?

Variety is the spice of life.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Marcus

I believe you, but I would also appreciate links if you have some.

As far as "you guys" , you lumped me in with the Republicans in the Hillary threads too, you seem immune to correction.

I only go by what is in the post in front of me. There are more than a few people in the USA politics forums who claim they are not pro-Trump (not you) all the while spewing a constant stream of anti-Clinton trash. And there are a few Libertarians who play little games about who they support rather than just saying who it is.

Add that to my aging brain and I honestly don't know who a fair number of people support. So if I've put you in the wrong political category, it wasn't anything malicious.

That aside, let's get back to the sexist comment you made and the reply I posted:

Quote:

He harassed some girls, which as far as I can tell seemed to consist of lewd comments and suggestions. In return, they are multi millionaires, set for life,

That is just not what happened which is why I said, "you imagine your stereotypical versions of reality".

It's appalling to me when people dismiss these sexist aggression in the workplace as no more than a few lewd comments.

That's like saying, why should that black man make a big deal of being called, 'boy'.

You don't get a million dollar settlement in court because someone made a lewd comment to you at work.

And what, I should provide links to refute your false assertions? No, you should provide links supporting your assertion these women made millions off of minor trespasses against them.

[Skeptic Ginger]

For those of you unfamiliar with phone sex O'Reilly, let's review:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Also, note the phone sex echoed his fictional novel.
Bill O’Reilly Wrote & Narrated A Book With “Numerous Sex Scenes” – And John Oliver Found It For Us


This guy has been a creepy sexual deviant for years.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[Marcus]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I only go by what is in the post in front of me. There are more than a few people in the USA politics forums who claim they are not pro-Trump (not you) all the while spewing a constant stream of anti-Clinton trash. And there are a few Libertarians who play little games about who they support rather than just saying who it is.

Add that to my aging brain and I honestly don't know who a fair number of people support. So if I've put you in the wrong political category, it wasn't anything malicious.

That aside, let's get back to the sexist comment you made and the reply I posted:
That is just not what happened which is why I said, "you imagine your stereotypical versions of reality".

It's appalling to me when people dismiss these sexist aggression in the workplace as no more than a few lewd comments.

That's like saying, why should that black man make a big deal of being called, 'boy'.

You don't get a million dollar settlement in court because someone made a lewd comment to you at work.

And what, I should provide links to refute your false assertions? No, you should provide links supporting your assertion these women made millions off of minor trespasses against them.

The "made millions" part isn't in doubt, I believe it was $13 million for 5 women. In the most recent case, he was accused of asking a woman to show more cleavage. Ms. Greene also said that one time he said that rather than "break his bank" with her choice of restaurant (he lost a bet to her) he would rather she "break his back". Then there is the phone sex, and the case with Ms. Huddy where he kissed her on the lips. She claimed he tried to damage her career by doing things like surpising her on the air with questions they hadn't talked about, replacing her in one segment and cancelling another.

Certainly he is guilty of harassment, but the big settlements were more about preventing a scandal like this one rather than compensating for some Bill Cosby type rape events. As far as I know. I'm open to correction, which is why I asked you for examples of the career damaging. I did google up this last example, but I'm not interested enough to spend a lot of time looking into it.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by Polaris

What the hell are "masturbation lessons" anyway? Doesn't everybody already know how to do that?

Bill O appears to be an expert at it. With little opportunity otherwise except groping!!!!!But then perhaps he enjoys groping himself even more than groping others - but wants to keep his hand in!!!!!!!

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by fuelair

Bill O appears to be an expert at it. With little opportunity otherwise except groping!!!!!But then perhaps he enjoys groping himself even more than groping others - but wants to keep his hand in!!!!!!!

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Marcus

The "made millions" part isn't in doubt, I believe it was $13 million for 5 women. In the most recent case, he was accused of asking a woman to show more cleavage. Ms. Greene also said that one time he said that rather than "break his bank" with her choice of restaurant (he lost a bet to her) he would rather she "break his back". Then there is the phone sex, and the case with Ms. Huddy where he kissed her on the lips. She claimed he tried to damage her career by doing things like surpising her on the air with questions they hadn't talked about, replacing her in one segment and cancelling another.

Certainly he is guilty of harassment, but the big settlements were more about preventing a scandal like this one rather than compensating for some Bill Cosby type rape events. As far as I know. I'm open to correction, which is why I asked you for examples of the career damaging. I did google up this last example, but I'm not interested enough to spend a lot of time looking into it.

This was the part of the sentence I expected you to address: "off of minor trespasses against them."

And you didn't address that, except to dismiss without evidence career damage.

You also buy the assertion the payouts were to protect O'Reilly from scandal. According to Lisa Bloom, you don't see million dollar payouts to make trivial scandals go away. You might see a couple hundred thousand, but not in the millions unless the defendants (Fox and O'Reilly) know there are serious allegations that are likely to be proved.

As for damaged careers not being worth much, O'Reilly just got a 25 million dollar severance payout. You think the women in question were just little peons not also earning big bucks?


You might want to reconsider your personal view that sexual harassment is trivial, exaggerated, a snowflake issue, and consider that just maybe million dollar payouts are made for actual cause. Your confirmation bias is leading you to make assumptions not supported by the facts.


Just out of curiosity, do you think it was trivial that Trump admitted walking into the Miss Universe dressing rooms anytime he wanted to because he owned the organization?

[Skeptic Ginger]

Predictably, O'Reilly (his attorney) is blaming a vast left wing conspiracy for his downfall.

O’Reilly attorney blames Fox News personality’s woes on vast left-wing conspiracy

[Marcus]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

This was the part of the sentence I expected you to address: "off of minor trespasses against them."

And you didn't address that, except to dismiss without evidence career damage.

You also buy the assertion the payouts were to protect O'Reilly from scandal. According to Lisa Bloom, you don't see million dollar payouts to make trivial scandals go away. You might see a couple hundred thousand, but not in the millions unless the defendants (Fox and O'Reilly) know there are serious allegations that are likely to be proved.

As for damaged careers not being worth much, O'Reilly just got a 25 million dollar severance payout. You think the women in question were just little peons not also earning big bucks?


You might want to reconsider your personal view that sexual harassment is trivial, exaggerated, a snowflake issue, and consider that just maybe million dollar payouts are made for actual cause. Your confirmation bias is leading you to make assumptions not supported by the facts.


Just out of curiosity, do you think it was trivial that Trump admitted walking into the Miss Universe dressing rooms anytime he wanted to because he owned the organization?

Millions were paid (13 million evidently) to protect O'reily from scandal which would endanger $400 million per year in ad revenue for Fox.

As for the women, the $13 million was not commiserate with their value, sorry.

Every sexual harassment case is not equivalent.

Men in dressing rooms in events like the Miss Universe or Miss America pageants is actually common, the nudity taboo is more of an American thing.

In Trumps case, he has the American prudish attitude, he bragged about being special so he could look at the nude girls, he is an idiot horndog, no argument there.

[Ampulla of Vater]

Originally Posted by fuelair

Originally Posted by fuelair

Bill O appears to be an expert at it. With little opportunity otherwise except groping!!!!!But then perhaps he enjoys groping himself even more than groping others - but wants to keep his hand in!!!!!!!

How do you know how good at masturbation Bill O'Reilly is? And why would you write that comment and then "thumbs up" your own post?

Geez.

I do think once you make big bucks you become a target. That said, once you are a target you need to be extra cautious with what you say and do, because you have a bulls eye on your back. This many complaints over this long of a time period are not solely because he is a wealthy target. Clearly he has a problem. Bill is obviously quite stupid when all is said and done.

Tucker Carlson is unwatchable though.

[Marcus]

Originally Posted by Ampulla of Vater

How do you know how good at masturbation Bill O'Reilly is? And why would you write that comment and then "thumbs up" your own post?

Geez.

I do think once you make big bucks you become a target. That said, once you are a target you need to be extra cautious with what you say and do, because you have a bulls eye on your back. This many complaints over this long of a time period are not solely because he is a wealthy target. Clearly he has a problem. Bill is obviously quite stupid when all is said and done.

Tucker Carlson is unwatchable though.

Nor stupid, but clearly sexist by today's standards. He is 67, so it shouldn't be a surprise that his attitudes are a bit anachronistic.

I'm amazed that ad revenues and ratings have not suffered so far, personally I have no interest in watching Tucker Carlson.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Marcus

...
As for the women, the $13 million was not commiserate with their value, sorry.

Where is your evidence for this unsupported assertion?

[sidetrack]

Originally Posted by Marcus

...Men in dressing rooms in events like the Miss Universe or Miss America pageants is actually common, the nudity taboo is more of an American thing.

Bull ******

It was also at the Miss Teen USA contest.

A Fifth Teen Beauty Queen Says Trump Visited Dressing Room

Quote:

Trump owned the Miss Teen USA pageant along with Miss USA and Miss Universe from 1996 until last year. In a recording from The Howard Stern Show that was released Saturday by CNN, Trump publicly bragged about going backstage to see contestants while “everyone’s getting dressed.”

“No men are anywhere, and I’m allowed to go in, because I’m the owner of the pageant and therefore I’m inspecting it,” Trump said in 2005. “‘Is everyone OK?’ You know, they’re standing there with no clothes. ‘Is everybody OK?’ And you see these incredible-looking women, and so I sort of get away with things like that.”

But he appeared to be talking about adult contestants. Until BuzzFeed News’ report Wednesday morning, it had never been alleged that he did this with teenage contestants.

I don't care what cultural norms are wherever you are from. This was not normal or common or acceptable.

Quote:

Another woman, former Miss Vermont Teen USA Mariah Billado, told BuzzFeed News that when Trump walked in, she recalled “putting on my dress really quick because I was like, ‘Oh my god, there’s a man in here.’” According to Billado, Trump said something like, “Don’t worry, ladies, I’ve seen it all before.”

A Timeline of Donald Trump's Creepiness While He Owned Miss Universe [/sidetrack]

[Marcus]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Where is your evidence for this unsupported assertion?

[sidetrack]Bull ******

It was also at the Miss Teen USA contest.

A Fifth Teen Beauty Queen Says Trump Visited Dressing Room

I don't care what cultural norms are wherever you are from. This was not normal or common or acceptable.


A Timeline of Donald Trump's Creepiness While He Owned Miss Universe [/sidetrack]

$13 million is too much for the offenses involved. The reason the numbers were so high is because Fox was trying to protect $400 million a year in ad revenue by keeping everyone quiet. They were all settlements, the idea was to keep the cases out of court . This is my opinion, I don't think it's anything that can be proved, at least not by me.

[Skeptic Ginger]

So all you have is your unsupported opinion, just as I said earlier. I'll bet you don't know more than headlines as to what happened to those women.