Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Thu 10/14/2004 View Wed 10/13/2004 View Tue 10/12/2004 View Mon 10/11/2004 View Sun 10/10/2004 View Sat 10/09/2004 View Fri 10/08/2004
1
2004-10-14 Home Front: Politix
O'REILLY CLAIMS EXTORTION. (A set up by the Left?)
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Mark Espinola 2004-10-14 03:15|| || Front Page|| [11135 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 *snicker* I bet they were shocked when O'Reily went to the feds. They should have known he would come out swinging. They probably hoped he would pay her off and they would get the money and then expose the coverup.

That said, I think O'Reilly is in deep do-do if she has tapes of him telling lurid fantasies. That's the problem of being a conservative - people hold you to a higher standard. If O'Reilly was a dem - she'd be a Jesabel, Judas, greedy, grubbing whore. But he's a conservative so - despite the fact that she said, "thank you sir, may I have another" - she will still be portrayed as the little shattered teacup - forced to endure the long sex talks so that she apparently could capture her humiliation on tape for the lawyers.
Posted by 2b 2004-10-14 8:36:57 AM||   2004-10-14 8:36:57 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 The No Spin Zone appears to be jinxing all over the place.
Posted by Douglas De Bono  2004-10-14 9:34:04 AM|| [http://www.douglasdebono.com]  2004-10-14 9:34:04 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 I read the report in Drudge yesterday and there was a lot more to it. Yhis woman never went to anyone with her charges before she and her lawyer tried to extort 60 million dollars from Fox and O'Reilly. This smells worse than a Bulgarian buss driver's two week old odereaters.
Posted by Deacon Blues  2004-10-14 10:05:30 AM||   2004-10-14 10:05:30 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 In NYS, as I recall, you must tell the other party, either by a distinctive tone or verbally, that you are recording them. The tapes may not even be admissible.
Posted by Chuck Simmins  2004-10-14 10:06:22 AM|| [http://blog.simmins.org]  2004-10-14 10:06:22 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 Key quote:

It is apparent that Defendants’ outrageous monetary demand is motivated by their greed and also by Morelli’s political connections. Morelli, his firm, and his wife, Arlene, are known supporters of and contributors to the Democratic Party, contributing to the campaigns of U.S. Senators John Kerry, John Edwards, Tom Daschle, and Charles Schumer, among others. He perceives Fox and O’Reilly as politically conservative and supporters of the Republican Party. If he does not receive his share of $60 million, he would like nothing more than to embarrass and tarnish the reputations of Fox and O’Reilly.

The extortion attempt is timed to cause the maximum disruption and damage to Fox and O’Reilly. Fox News coverage and O’Reilly’s program in particular have consistently drawn higher ratings during election periods, and the upcoming, tightly-contested Presidential election between Senator John Kerry and President George W. Bush has been drawing record-setting ratings for The O’Reilly Factor and Fox News Channel programming. In fact, Fox News Channel is the most highly rated cable news network in the United States and has continued to increase its lead over CNN in recent years. Its expectation has been that viewership, and thus revenues, will continue to increase, particularly as the electorate becomes even more involved with the presidential race.

By sending the September 29, 2004 demand letter and threatening to bring suit within “five business days” over alleged harassment that allegedly commenced more than two years earlier in May 2002, Mackris and Morelli have sought to extract maximum leverage against Fox and O’Reilly right before the presidential election.

Defendants have not acted in good faith. Instead, they have sought to extort “blood money” by threatening to destroy O’Reilly, his family and his career, and to embarrass and severely injure Fox’s reputation and financial interests. Accordingly, judicial intervention is required.


It does look fishy ....
Posted by rkb 2004-10-14 10:23:24 AM||   2004-10-14 10:23:24 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Read the indictment. It talks about ‘morals’ and ‘conservative values’ and also mentions President Bush. I don’t have to know anything else about the case to see that this is politically motivated. Also the Lawyer (sic) said he wanted to “Take down O’Rielly and Fox News Channel.” Plus the woman was doing the morning show tour? Sounds like she wanted to be first to ‘tell’ the story and make everything else seem like spin. All this two weeks before the election? I smell a conspiracy here and I aint had my morning kool aid yet.
Posted by Cyber Sarge  2004-10-14 10:44:08 AM||   2004-10-14 10:44:08 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 of course it's politcally motivated! No doubt the LL will just say it's a "personal matter".
Posted by 2b 2004-10-14 11:06:00 AM||   2004-10-14 11:06:00 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 I was frightened by the part about the "falafel".
Posted by Angie Schultz 2004-10-14 11:42:02 AM|| [http://darkblogules.blogspot.com]  2004-10-14 11:42:02 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 A plague on all their houses.

O'Reilly is smug and disingenuous.
The lawyer Morelli, is a Kerry shill.
And Mackris should have stayed at CNN if O'Reilly behaviour was so bad.

This "treat me nice" BS statement in the indictment at thesmokinggun.com shows she does not understand the male sexual drive. O'Reilly's predelictions, though not dangerous like a child molestor, is just as persistent in his head, and this Mackris woman should have been aware of this.

I don't excuse O'Reilly's behaviour, if this is true, I just know, being a male, that Mackris' assumptions that O'Reilly could cease was naive, because he lacked the ability, apparently, to have any self-control.
Posted by BigEd 2004-10-14 11:55:56 AM||   2004-10-14 11:55:56 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 This is not PC, but i sure didn't like the looks or sound of the lawyer on TV this morning. Shyster?
Posted by borgboy 2004-10-14 12:59:51 PM||   2004-10-14 12:59:51 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 The thing that strikes me as odd is that this kind of behavior flies directly in the face of the kinds of things O'Reilly says in his book about how to conduct yourself, specifically how to protect yourself. It doesn't make sense. Is he that big of a hypocrite? Could be, but I would guess behavior as blatant as being claimed here would not be new. Allegations like this would have surfaced previously as O'Reilly's career was on the rise. One thing it may do is crowd Skerry off the air. The president has to be covered, the opposing candidate does not.
Posted by remote man 2004-10-14 1:10:56 PM||   2004-10-14 1:10:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Don't watch OReilly much anymore but I have seen complaints that he has been too "soft" on Kerry and Rather recently.

I can't help but wonder if his doing that (in Rather's) case was in anticipation of getting the same easy treatment when this story came out.

Just wild speculation on my part, but what the heck.
Posted by Laurence of the Rats  2004-10-14 1:36:50 PM|| [http://www.punictreachery.com/]  2004-10-14 1:36:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 After reading the Smoking Gun material, I can't take the women seriously for one simple reason. She has been successful in a a shark eat shark industry, based in NYC, pushing and shoving for stories and content against other sharks... and she suffers from "embarrassment" due to alledged "provocotive" conversations? And she is trying to portray herself as some innocent little journalism major, just off the farm from Iowa?
Sorry, doesn't pass the smell test. I have never worked with a New York business person who could be "offended" in the way she is describing.
It looks to me like it can not be argued the Bill wasn't "Looking out for her" if you look at her career track. If Bill was saying all of the alleged comments, well I think he will take responsibility... However, the story behind this story should be much more interesting.
Posted by Capsu78 2004-10-14 2:55:50 PM||   2004-10-14 2:55:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 If there's tapes, he's done. If no tapes, he wins
Posted by Frank G  2004-10-14 3:23:00 PM||   2004-10-14 3:23:00 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 I have to wonder one thing: if it's true that O'Reilly indeed was reciting all that crap over the phone, why? The guy has his own show, he's well-known, and he's likely paid very well. Why upset all that?
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-10-14 3:54:19 PM||   2004-10-14 3:54:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 If there are tapes I don't think O'Reily is the only one speaking.

As another poster listed:

"Morelli, his firm, and his wife, Arlene, are known supporters of and contributors to the Democratic Party, contributing to the campaigns of U.S. Senators John Kerry, John Edwards, Tom Daschle, and Charles Schumer, among others"

The above list of radical Dems has every reason wanting O'Reilly off the air.

Posted by Mark Espinola 2004-10-14 9:18:06 PM||   2004-10-14 9:18:06 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 Nobody has ever spoken to me inappropriately for very long. It could be that I've led a very sheltered life (could be? - ed.) But easy ways to break off such a conversation need not be more complicated than, "I'm sorry, I have urgent work to do"; if at home, "Whoops! The curling iron is starting to smell funny. Gotta go!"; or simply, "Why?" (Real conversation from my briefly unmarried youth: "Wanna go to bed?" "Why?" The lad never did answer, just quietly went away.) In a situation like this, it seems to me that O'Reilly could have been put in his place very simply and politely. That this woman chose not to do so marks her either as setting him up or even more naive than I am, which I'm told is not very unlikely.
Posted by trailing wife 2004-10-14 11:03:12 PM||   2004-10-14 11:03:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 I'm sure that some of the ladies here have much better stories than mine. And I have no doubt that some of you gentlemen have been stopped in your tracks at least once in your lives.
Posted by trailing wife 2004-10-14 11:06:01 PM||   2004-10-14 11:06:01 PM|| Front Page Top

03:06 YouLove6334
01:38 Unains Elmeper5354
01:37 Unains Elmeper5354
01:37 Unains Elmeper5354
01:36 Unains Elmeper5354
01:36 Unains Elmeper5354
14:28 YouLove6334
14:18 YouLove6334
03:08 YouLove6334
03:35 YouLove6334
03:38 YouLove6334
03:32 YouLove6334
15:24 CrazyFool
15:16 Elmoling Elmenter5811
07:56 Shipman
01:50 lex
00:36 Beau
00:34 Kalle (kafir forever)
00:15 mojo
23:59 Chinese Unomoger1553
23:58 Fred
23:55 Stephen
23:51 Zenster
23:49 Floting Elminelet7175









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com