Bill O'Reilly is the latest from the Fox stable to jump to the defense of beleaguered Rupert Murdoch who after all does sign his lucrative paycheck.
Speaking on the O'Reilly Factor Bill O' stated;
“You have The New York Times absolutely running wild with the story. Front page, front page, front page. Column, column, column. Vicious stuff. Vicious stuff, and it’s all ideological, isn’t it?”
Bill O' was talking to Nile Gardener of the Heritage Foundation,a right wing think tank who heartily agreed with O'Reilly that there was a witch hunt against Rupert Murdoch who was being unfairly treated.
It is a classic case of blaming the messenger, in this case The New York Times which broke several major developments in the story.
The spluttering of outrage might be a little more convincing if we didn't know that Bill O' had recommended serious criminal charges when a hacker hacked into Sarah Palin's e mail in 2008. That hacker later did jail time for an offense that was minor compared to what Rupert's boys were up to.
This is what O'Reilly said at the time;
"Now, it is a felony, a federal crime, also a state crime in Alaska to hack into people's private correspondence. And what I want to know--and I'm not going to mention the website that posted this, but it's one of those despicable, slimy, scummy websites that in a free society we have to tolerate, but I'd like to see the website prosecuted, arrested, put in cuffs, all the people who run it.
He added:
Look, we know, everybody knows, the Feds know, the state authorities in Alaska know, everybody knows where the stuff is, OK? And they know the people who run the website. So why can't they go there tonight, to the guy's house who runs it, put him in cuffs, and take him down and book him?
That surely is a different take. It is amazing how much it all depends on whose ox is being gored.
Surely O'Reilly is not defending the hacking of the cell phone of a dead school girl as Murdoch's minions did?
No I don't think so but when you go out to defend Rupert Murdoch you get lots of slime on your shoes too Bill.
You're better than that Bill O'.
Speaking on the O'Reilly Factor Bill O' stated;
“You have The New York Times absolutely running wild with the story. Front page, front page, front page. Column, column, column. Vicious stuff. Vicious stuff, and it’s all ideological, isn’t it?”
Bill O' was talking to Nile Gardener of the Heritage Foundation,a right wing think tank who heartily agreed with O'Reilly that there was a witch hunt against Rupert Murdoch who was being unfairly treated.
It is a classic case of blaming the messenger, in this case The New York Times which broke several major developments in the story.
The spluttering of outrage might be a little more convincing if we didn't know that Bill O' had recommended serious criminal charges when a hacker hacked into Sarah Palin's e mail in 2008. That hacker later did jail time for an offense that was minor compared to what Rupert's boys were up to.
This is what O'Reilly said at the time;
"Now, it is a felony, a federal crime, also a state crime in Alaska to hack into people's private correspondence. And what I want to know--and I'm not going to mention the website that posted this, but it's one of those despicable, slimy, scummy websites that in a free society we have to tolerate, but I'd like to see the website prosecuted, arrested, put in cuffs, all the people who run it.
He added:
Look, we know, everybody knows, the Feds know, the state authorities in Alaska know, everybody knows where the stuff is, OK? And they know the people who run the website. So why can't they go there tonight, to the guy's house who runs it, put him in cuffs, and take him down and book him?
That surely is a different take. It is amazing how much it all depends on whose ox is being gored.
Surely O'Reilly is not defending the hacking of the cell phone of a dead school girl as Murdoch's minions did?
No I don't think so but when you go out to defend Rupert Murdoch you get lots of slime on your shoes too Bill.
You're better than that Bill O'.
Comments