O'Reilly Hit With Sexual Harassment Suit
 

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...3mackris1.html

www.rawstory.com

And he sued her back. ;)

"Look at Al Franken, one day he's going to get a knock on his door and life as he know's it will change forever. That day will happen, trust me. Al Franken's finished, and he's going to be sorry he ever took on FOX NEWS CHANNEL."

:laugh:

And the Thailand sex show parts are hysterical.

It's hilarious! :lol:

I suggest page 9, that's the BEST one.

"You've got big boobs."

:laugh:

I read the whole thing. It makes my skin crawl.

Hehehehe...
 

"Look at Stuart Smalley, one day he's going to get a knock on his door and life as he know's it will change forever. That day will happen, trust me. Stuart Smalley's finished, and he's going to be sorry he ever took on FAUX NEWS CHANNEL."

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Poor O'Really, Gonna get beat by a fictional character named...Hopefully Stuart Smalley (aka the REAL Al Franken) smokes his uppity ass.

Brian j.

ps-Btw, Who were the people who believed a recent O'Really online poll where 50+% of his viewers said he leans more to the independent side than to the Con-Slob-ertive side???? If he's an independent I am the biggest William "Kahnnnnnn" Shatner fan alive!

Anyone can sue - let's see if these have merit - which they may :shrug: In any event, it will be an interesting discovery period :laugh:

Wait, you don't like William Shatner?

In a word...
 

No!!! Cant stand him...What a egomanical asshole!!!

Brian j.

Wait, do you know him personally? What are you talking about? Besides, he is an Aries, he's supposed to be like that. I guess you know a lot more about William Shatner than i do... :wavey:
Amber

Hmmm... let's see...
 

"Can we hurry up...I have other things to do besides sit here signing autographs for people"-William Shatner-Starbase 21's Comic/Sci-Fi sponsored convention in Tulsa, OK 2001 (I guess the $10,000 appearance fee that he was paid wasnt enough for his stupid fat ass! He will never be invited back to any Starbase 21 sponsored event)

Even worse was hearing this from a person who was charging $20 per autograph...Sorry, I consider getting a large appearance fee then to only OPENLY insult his fans something only a egomanical asshole would pull! (Btw, My older brother had ticket #1 for the autograph session, he passed ****-ner for comic artist/legend Neal Adams)


Brian j.

ah, well that is wanky. But I saw James Spader on late night talking about Shatner, and apparently he is very busy. so then, he shouldn't have gone if he was gonna act like that...I don't know what Neal Adams comicked...

Neal Adams...
 

is known for his great work on the Marvel Comic character "The Silver Surfer" (Among others Batman for DC, XMen for Marvel)...The dude's artwork was so far ahead of it's time noone has even come close to duplicating it.

Check out his work at http://www.nealadams.com

I was a Shatner fan until that episode, now he can burn like a big pile of **** on the front porch at Halloween...****-ner indeed!

Brian j.

Whoa, that guy's rad!

She's got tapes. :nod:

Man, I hope so...
 

cause I read the whole 22 pages on Loadedgun and I just want to hear his voice saying what has been mentioned...Goodbye Faux, Hello unemployment line!!!

Brian "Oh my God, they killed O'Really...You bastards!" j.

It's amazing to me what an arrogant piece of **** O'Reilly is. Does he actually think that the truth of this stuff won't get out? What the hell was he thinking? Obviously, he thinks he's so powerful that he can do whatever the hell he wants. I really hope this whole thing skewers his skanky ass. Nothing would give me more pleasure than to see that f*cker go down (no pun intended).

Blleeeechhh!!!!!!!

Could you even imagine being that woman and having to listen to this slimy, splotchy, creepazoid??? Eeeewww!!!

{Insert puking emoticon here}

Nah--the repug thugs won't abandon their heros no matter how tarnished they become. Oxycotin Rush still has a job, after all. Why anyone would want to listen to the ramblings of a psychotic drug user are beyond me, but there you go--it's logical that incoherent ramblings of psychotic drug users appeal to the Bush base.

He's making it worse for himself and needs to shut that gaping hole of a mouth he has. I mean, going on Regis and Kelly to defend yourself against sexual harrassment charges AND to promote your childrens book? What a joke this guy is!

Not to mention, he hasn't denied any of the charges. :shocked:

They do exist. :laugh:

http://nytimes.com/reuters/arts/ente...e-oreilly.html
O'Reilly Seeks Tapes in Extortion Case

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Lawyers for conservative Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly said on Tuesday they believe a fellow employee accusing him of sexual harassment has recordings of calls between them and they are seeking a court order to obtain them.

O'Reilly's accuser, Andrea Mackris, and her attorney have been ordered to appear for a hearing in New York state Supreme Court on Friday to divulge whether such tapes exist and ``show cause'' why they should not be opened to examination by lawyers for O'Reilly and Fox News Channel.

A copy of the Nassau County judge's order obtained by Reuters also bars Mackris and her lawyer, Benedict Morelli, from destroying any such tapes, should they exist.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's an admission of guilt if I've ever seen one.

I do not follow you here. BO ( :laugh: ) wants to have the tapes to prove he is innocent. Otherwise, he would move to supress them under some kind of twisted priviledge/rt to privacy/he didn't know he was being taped argument. That he wants them sounds to me like he is calling what he considers to be her bluff.

Also, if tapes exist, as I think the Plaintiff has alleged, BO certainly has a right to hear them :shrug:

It's obvious that tapes exist just from reading the court documents. There are full transcripts in part of those documents. By requesting the tapes, it's almost as if he's admitting that he's on them and says what is alleged in the documents. Of course, this is only in the eyes of the public. ;) No one but the most die-hard right-winger is going to look at this request and say "It doesn't look bad for him." Of course he wants the tapes, he wants to know how bad he sounds on them. :laugh:

Well, I think that presumes guilt or culpability. I never approach a case that way because that kind of prejudice will cause blinders in some if not most instances. So, I look at the facts, which BTW can NEVER EVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES be automatically assumed from a Plaintiff's Complaint because anyone can sue and almost all Complaints contain puff :shrug:

In any event, BO's lawyers are doing their job and looking to see what is on those tapes. If it is damning to BO, which it very well may be, they have to know that to work the case and BO has a right to hear the tapes. I think this Motion is run of the mill and is not a right or left wing thing. I mean, BO needs to know this information - wouldn't you want to know it :shrug: And - again, if BO thought those tapes were in any way damning, he would be moving to suppress them - wouldn't you?

From what I have seen (which granted is not everthing) - this woman has a strong case, esp. if those tapes contain what she has alluded they do. But her saying what they say is not the same as hearing them.

Note: I am not advocating anything for BO - I am just commenting on the proceedings. If BO did it, then like everyone in that situation, he needs to pay the price.

I think the plaintiff's lawyer has not released the tapes in the hopes that this case could still be settled. :shrug:

Perhaps - but if you were BO and let's just for a second accept that BO is not guilty and this case is a sham, wouldn't you demand to see the tapes :shrug: I certainly would :nod:

Again, if these tapes say what she says they say, BO is pretty much finished. That he is fighting it and demanding the tapes be released at least indicates to me BO thinks these tapes prove nothing and this woman is bluffing.

Only time will tell.

I can assure you if BO gets the tapes, which he will, and they are damning, this case will go away in about two seconds if all she is after is $$$$$$$$$$$. If she wants more than $$$$, BO will go down in flames.

Also, if these tapes were so damning, why didn't this woman release them to the media. She certainly had that right :shrug: AND is she had and they were all they said they were, what does she have to lose by releasing them :shrug: That way BO cannot slam her in the press, etc.

Something is not right here. Once we hear the tapes, we may have a better picture.

That's why they're calling her hand. :nod:

Lord knows it was a great day when he started writing more than theater reviews :cool:

__________________________________________________________

October 24, 2004
FRANK RICH
The O'Reilly Factor for Lesbians

"And guys, if you exploit a girl, it will come back to get you. That's called 'karma.' "
- Bill O'Reilly, "The O'Reilly Factor for Kids"

IN the annals of election year 2004, Oct. 13 will be remembered as the day it rained lesbians in red America. That was when we learned that Andrea Mackris, an associate producer on "The O'Reilly Factor," had filed her sexual harassment law suit, charging that her boss had an obsessive interest in vibrators, phone sex and, most persistently, erotic scenarios involving pairs of women. That night brought the final presidential debate, in which John Kerry's description of Mary Cheney as a lesbian so riled the Bush-Cheney campaign, not to mention the easily aghast Washington press corps, you'd have thought the vice president's daughter was accused of enlisting in a threesome with Bill O'Reilly.

What's followed ever since is an orgy of schadenfreude and hypocrisy almost entertaining enough to take your mind off Iraq (as the Bush-Cheney campaign hopes it will). It's the kind of three-ring circus that makes me love this country. Only in America could Mr. O'Reilly appear on "Live With Regis and Kelly" to plug his new moralistic children's advice book (sample dictum: "Healthy sex is a combination of sensible behavior and sincere affection") just as old and young alike were going online to search thesmokinggun.com for the lewd monologues attributed to him in Ms. Mackris's 22-page complaint. Everyone is now so busy matching Mr. O'Reilly's alleged after-hours oratory - none of which he or his lawyer immediately denied - with his past condemnations of Janet Jackson, Ludacris, wet T-shirt contests, Joycelyn Elders and the televised Madonna-Britney smooch that the findings could fill another Starr report. My own favorite example, hands down, is Mr. O'Reilly's reverie about hooking up with "hot" Italian women during a visit to the Vatican while his pregnant wife was marooned at home in Plandome, Long Island.

The bad news for Fox is not only that its most bankable cable star could end up in the third-tier broadcasting oblivion of William Bennett but also that Fox News, handed the kind of story it lives for, could not (or, more precisely, would not) turn it into a mediathon, complete with legal analysis from Greta, Gloria Allred and Jeanine Pirro. So the network made do instead with the parallel soap opera of Mary Cheney. The Focus on the Family politico James Dobson quickly set the tone on "Hannity & Colmes" by accusing Mr. Kerry of "outing" the vice president's daughter - a charge duly echoed by others on the right, led, inevitably, by The Wall Street Journal editorial page.

To try to prop up its fictional headline "Outing Mary Cheney," The Journal argued that "Mr. and Mrs. Cheney have not kept their daughter's lesbianism a secret but neither have they shouted it to the sky." Huh? Though Dick Cheney doesn't shout anything, he described his daughter as gay on camera at an Iowa campaign appearance this summer. But whatever Mr. and Mrs. Cheney may have to say about it, The Journal never entertained the thought that Mary Cheney herself has a voice in this matter. She has been openly gay for years. Before the 2000 campaign, she held a job that literally announced her homosexuality: gay and lesbian liaison for Coors, a public marketing assignment that even required her to travel the country with the winner of the 1999 International Mr. Leather competition. She later joined the Republican Unity Coalition, a gay-rights advocacy group formed as an alternative to the similarly inclined Log Cabin Republicans.

From all the outcry over Mr. Kerry's invocation of Ms. Cheney, with the attendant rhetoric about the evil of exploiting a candidate's "child" in a campaign, you might never guess that the child in question is not Chelsea Clinton at age 12 but a 35-year-old woman (two years older than Andrea Mackris). Or that she lives openly with her partner, Heather Poe, whom she brought onstage after the vice presidential debate. Or that she is the paid director of vice presidential operations for the Bush campaign, and that her mother is the author of a notorious potboiler ("Sisters," 1981) that drools over the prospect of lesbian coupling with O'Reilly-like glee. (For choice excerpts from Mrs. Cheney's fiction, go to whitehouse.org/administration/sisters.asp ).

So you have to wonder what motivated the Bush-Cheney brigade to go ballistic over Mr. Kerry's "outing" of Mary Cheney after it had ignored not just John Edwards's previous "outing" but also the earlier "outings" by Bush campaign allies like the Concerned Women for America and the Republican senatorial candidate Alan Keyes. Unlike the Democrats, who spoke respectfully of gay sexual orientation, these right-wing activists trashed the vice president's daughter for sowing anti-family values. But as Andrew Sullivan has pointed out, even when Mr. Keyes attacked Mary Cheney in August for practicing "selfish hedonism," the same Mrs. Cheney, who, "speaking as a mom," called Mr. Kerry "not a good man," spoke not at all.

To understand what strange game is playing out here, you must go back to the equally close 2000 election. In the campaign postmortems, Karl Rove famously attributed his candidate's shortfall in the popular vote to four million "fundamentalists and evangelicals" in the Republican base who didn't turn up on Election Day. A common theory among Bush operatives had it that these no-shows had been alienated by the pre-election revelation of Mr. Bush's arrest for drunk driving years earlier.

The current Bush-Cheney campaign clearly believes that for these voters, Mary Cheney's sexuality could be a last-minute turnoff equivalent to Mr. Bush's D.U.I. history. When Rich Lowry of National Review said on Fox that "millions and millions of people" were not aware that Mary Cheney was gay until Mr. Kerry brought it up, it was clear just which four million he was talking about. Mr. Kerry, his critics all speculate, was deliberately seeking to depress voter turnout among Mr. Rove's M.I.A. religious conservatives by broadcasting Mary Cheney's sexuality to them for the first time.

To buy this theory you have to believe that by this late date a large group of potential voters obsessed with homosexuality didn't yet know that Ms. Cheney is gay. I find that preposterous, but only Mr. Kerry knows if he thought so and if his intentions were so smarmily Machiavellian. Even if they were, there's no ambiguity about what the Bush campaign is up to. Mr. Rove can out-Machiavelli Mr. Kerry anytime. Though the president pays "compassionate conservative" lip service to "tolerance" of homosexuality to appease suburban swing voters, his campaign has pushed a gratuitous constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, one opposed by Mary Cheney's own father, to stir up as much fear and ugly rage as it can.

When Mrs. Cheney hyperbolically implies that even using the word lesbian in 2004 is a slur out of the McCarthy era - "a cheap and tawdry political trick," she said - she is playing a similar game. She is positioning lesbian as a term comparable to child molester. But as Dave Cullen writes in Salon: "It is not an insult to call a proudly public lesbian a lesbian. It's an insult to gasp when someone calls her a lesbian." Mrs. Cheney and her surrogates are in effect doing exactly what Elizabeth Edwards had the guts to say they were doing: they are sending the message to Mr. Rove's four million that they are ashamed of Mary Cheney. They are disowning her under the guise of "defending" her. They are exploiting her for the sake of political expediency even as they level that charge at Democrats.

The deployment of homosexuality as a nasty campaign weapon has long been second nature to Mr. Rove. In the must-read article "Karl Rove in a Corner" in the November issue of The Atlantic, the journalist Joshua Green exhaustively researches the tightest campaigns of Mr. Rove's career and exhumes the pattern. As Mr. Green reminds us, George W. Bush's 1994 gubernatorial race against Ann Richards "featured a rumor" that Governor Richards was a lesbian. Gay whispers have also swirled around Rove adversaries like a rival Republican campaign consultant in the 1980's and a 1994 Alabama judicial candidate who was branded a "homosexual pedophile."

None of these rumors were, in fact, true, but Mary Cheney is unambiguously and unapologetically gay. For a campaign that wants to pander to the fringe, that makes her presence in the Bush-Cheney family a problem - just how big a problem can be seen by its disingenuously hysterical reaction to Mr. Kerry's use of the L word. But Mary Cheney isn't the only problem for Mr. Rove as he plays this game. The Republican establishment is rife with gay people - just ask anyone in proximity to its convention in New York - and the campaign doesn't want the four million to know about them, either. But in this election season, actual outing has begun to creep onto the Internet, where the names of closeted Republican congressmen and aides who support anti-gay policies are a Google search away. Some named so far - one of whom dropped out of his re-election campaign in August - hail from districts where some of those four million live.

Sooner or later this untenable level of hypocrisy is going to lead to a civil war within the Republican party. But this hypocrisy is not just about homosexuality - it's about all sexuality, as befits a party that calls for the elimination of Roe v. Wade and the suppression of candid sex education that might prevent teenage pregnancy and AIDS alike. Should Bill O'Reilly-Andrea Mackris tapes exist, as many believe they do, we will learn graphically where the right's most popular cultural defender of G-rated values stands not only on lesbianism but also on extramarital sex, sexual tourism in Asia and masturbation -which all figure in the complainant's detailed description of her alleged conversations with her boss. But anyone who fears that Mr. O'Reilly has completely abandoned his political faith need not worry. According to Ms. Mackris's account, the one time this would-be Lothario succeeded in luring her to his hotel room alone it was not by offering to show her his etchings, or even Spectravision, but a televised news conference by President Bush.

from www. nytimes.com