Categories
Media in America Politics

Bill O’Reilly Says There Is Only One Person Trump Should Consider As Veep (Video)

Bill O’Reilly has this whole 2016 election deal all figured out. On his show last night, discussing the GOP race with former Bush press secretary Dana Perino, O’Reilly said he’s now convinced Trump will win the delegates he needs to secure a first ballot victory at the Republican convention in July. Now all that’s left to decide is who will run with him as his Vice President. According to O’Reilly, there is only one person Trump should consider if he wants to beat Hillary Clinton in the general election: New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez.

Perino put some other names on the table, including Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions, but O’Reilly would hear none of it, making you wonder why he even bothered to ask for her opinion. O’Reilly declared:

“There is only one choice if he wants to win the White House, only one person. That is the only choice — with all due respect — if Mr. Trump wants to be President. [Martinez] cuts across all the ethnic boundaries. She’s very bright. She is a Republican conservative.”


Martinez seems like an odd choice when you consider that earlier this week Governor Martinez harshly criticized Trump for his inflammatory language on the issue of immigration. Does that sound like someone who would even consider running with a xenophobic asshat like Trump? Hardly.

The Washington Post reported that Martinez was speaking at an event held at GOP megadonor David Koch’s house:

“She told the crowd of about 60 wealthy GOP backers that, as a Latina, she was offended by Trump’s language about immigrants. Noting her years working as a prosecutor on the Mexican border and now as a border-state governor, Martinez said Trump’s plan to build a wall and force Mexico to pay for it was unrealistic and irresponsible, according to multiple people in attendance.”

As usual, Bill O’Reilly knows as much about real world political strategy as he does about nuclear physics, and once again he has proven that he’s a complete and total idiot.

Watch O’Reilly play campaign strategist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsCAsLcfWgE

This article was originally published by the same author at LiberalAmerica.org.

Categories
Immigration WTF?!

San Francisco Official Blasts Fox News, So Bill O’Reilly Throws A Hissy Fit

Bill O’Reilly just loves to call people he disagrees with “pinheads.” Of course, this is classic projection, as O’Reilly is the real pinhead who can never admit when he’s wrong.

Earlier this week, during a discussion of so-called “sanctuary cities” in America, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously voted to remain a sanctuary city for undocumented immigrants who have done nothing wrong. It was a slap in the face of conservatives who get their propaganda and marching orders from Fox News.

But it was what one official of that board said that enraged O’Reilly the most.  Supervisor Malia Cohen remarked:

“We cannot allow hateful conservative news stations to drive how we respond to incidents in our city. I’m not afraid of Fox News and they don’t influence how I make my policy decisions here in San Francisco. We can talk all we want about improving public safety in this building, but if people in our community don’t trust law enforcement, no level of police staffing is going to make our community safe.”

But the way O’Reilly reacted, you would have thought Cohen had just called for the Fox News headquarters in New York city to be razed to the ground. O’Reilly even said Cohen should be arrested and charged! Here’s what he said:

“Let me be very clear. That woman is a disgrace, and if I were the attorney general of the United States, I would immediately place her under arrest. I might not win the case, but I would send a message to all subversive office holders in this country, that if you do not obey federal law, you yourself will be prosecuted.”

You would also be laughed out of court and reprimanded by the presiding judge, Bill.

As usual, O’Reilly doesn’t have a clue as to what he’s talking about. Facts are irrelevant to him, and anyone who dares to disagree with one of his inane opinions is suddenly his enemy.

Bill, next time you want to see a true pinhead, go find a mirror.

This article was originally published by the same author at LiberalAmerica.org.

Categories
Fox News Lies

Bill O’Reilly Gets His Wittle Fee-Fees Hurt By Critics Of His Reagan Biography

Looks like Bill O’Reilly’s penchant for telling lies has caught up with him again, and this time he’s so mad with historians that he spent the last few minutes of the Friday edition of his show, The O’Reilly Factor, trying to defend his hack reputation.

If you don’t know, O’Reilly’s latest book, Killing Reagan, is the subject of great controversy among fellow biographers and former Reagan Administration officials for several notable inaccuracies. But O’Reilly would have none of their criticism, saying:

“Killing Reagan is a book that tells the truth. It accurately portrays Reagan’s incredible journey from a flawed, shallow man to a courageous, brave man. Why anybody who respects President Reagan would want to denigrate that story is a mystery.”

But former Reagan National Security Advisor Richard Allen begs to differ, noting:

“This is simply an unserious attempt that blunders into, I believe, plagiarism, simplicity, and deception.”

Most of the criticism has arisen over a section of the book in which O’Reilly asserts there was discussion Reagan had in 1987 with then-White House aide James Cannon to Reagan’s Chief of Staff, Howard Baker, and counsel A.B. Culvahouse that supposedly was intended to be a “quiz” as to whether Reagan was still mentally fit to serve as President of the United States.

But Canon and Culvahouse have both said such a thing never took place. Culvahouse remarked:

“The myth that Howard Baker and I, at the Monday luncheon or otherwise, were contemplating whether President Reagan should be removed from office under the Twenty-Fifth Amendment was thoroughly discredited when it first appeared 27 years ago. It should be returned to the dustbin of fiction masquerading as history.”

How dare they question the credibility of Bill O’Reilly, even if he has been caught in numerous lies over the course of his career. Feelings hurt, O’Reilly went on the attack Friday evening, declaring:

“My books on Lincoln, Kennedy, Jesus, and Patton were all attacked by zealots and jealous people. And their garbage didn’t work.”

Translation: The Bloviator in Chief could care less if what he wrote is the least bit accurate. All he cares about is hearing the cash register ring as gullible acolytes buy his latest tome.

This article was originally published by the same author at LiberalAmerica.org.

Categories
Uncategorized

Bill O’Reilly Caught In MORE Lies – Why Is He Still On The Air?

It’s been a bad week for Fox News host Bill O’Reilly. First Mother Jones magazine published a story in which it accused the loudmouthed O’Reilly of never having been near a “war zone” during the Falklands conflict. Now, former colleagues of O’Reilly say he could not have witnessed the suicide of a friend of JFK assassin Lee Harvey Oswald. Why? Because he was in Dallas at the time of the suicide, which took place in Miami.

O’Reilly has said on numerous occasions that he went to Miami to interview George de Mohrenschildt, who was a friend of Oswald’s. The way O’Reilly tells the story, he was about to knock on de Mohrenschildt’s door when he heard the self-inflicted gunshot that killed the man. As O’Reilly recalled on Fox:

“I was about to knock on the door where [de Mohrenschildt] was, his daughter’s house, and he blew his brains out with a shotgun.”

But O’Reilly’s co-workers at Dallas TV station WFAA, say that isn’t true. Tracy Rowlett, who worked at WFAA when O’Reilly was there, told Media Matters:

“He was in Dallas. Bill O’Reilly’s a phony–there’s no other way to put it.”

Also, Rowlett’s account is corroborated by another associate from O’Reilly’s, Byron Harris. Harris reports that:

“(WFAA) would have reported it as some kind of exclusive–and there was no exclusive–if O’Reilly had been standing outside the door.”

The story of George de Mohrenschildt’s suicide was instead first reported in Dallas by the local newspaper, the Dallas Morning News.

O’Reilly has also been known to brag that while he was covering the civil war in El Salvador, he witnessed the execution of four Catholic nuns by the Salvadoran National Guard in 1980. But there’s a tiny problem with that statement: O’Reilly wasn’t in El Salvador for CBS until 1981, a full year after the nuns had been murdered.

Both Fox News and O’Reilly say the accusations against him are nothing but an attempt by left wing media to discredit him. Fox issued a statement saying:

“Bill O’Reilly has already addressed several claims leveled against him. This is nothing more than an orchestrated campaign by far left advocates Mother Jones and Media Matters. Responding to the unproven accusation du jour has become an exercise in futility. FOX News maintains its staunch support of O’Reilly, who is no stranger to calculated onslaughts.”

At this point, the only question that remains for Fox is this: Why is this man allowed to remain on the air?  Bill O’Reilly was delighted when NBC News suspended anchor Brian Williams for six months without pay, yet Fox lets its primetime star stay on air. Why? The answer is self-evident. Fox, unlike NBC, is not in the business of news. Instead, it is, as we have long suspected, merely a vehicle for right wing propaganda. If nothing else, at least we now know this fact beyond all doubt.

The article was originally published by the same author at LiberalAmerica.org

Categories
Uncategorized

Former CBS Colleague Says Bill O’Reilly Is Lying About War Coverage

Bill O’Reilly’s claim that he knows what war is like because he witnessed it as a war correspondent is once again being questioned, this time by someone who worked with him at CBS News.

Eric Enberg, a former colleague of the Fox News host, said yesterday that Buenos Aires was not a “war zone” or a “combat situation” as O’Reilly has alleged. Enberg was also in the Argentinian capital during the Falklands War between Great Britain and Argentina.

In fact, as Enberg posted Saturday on Facebook:

“It was an ‘expense account zone.’ We–meaning the American networks–were all in the same, modern hotel and we never saw any troops, casualties or weapons.”

Enberg’s account stands in stark contrast to what O’Reilly has written and repeated in the media on several occasions about knowing what war is like because he served as a war correspondent during the Falklands conflict.

Further, Enberg says in his Facebook posting that O’Reilly was an undisciplined reporter who ran into trouble with CBS News for ignoring instructions from his producers. In addition Enberg, refuting O’Reilly’s claim that he was the only reporter “out there pretty much by (himself) because the other CBS News correspondents were hiding in the hotel,” said that was a lie:

“If he said such a thing, it is an absolute lie. Everyone was working in the street that night, the crews exhibiting their usual courage. O’Reilly was the one person who behaved unprofessionally and without regard for the safety of the camera crew he was leading.”

The unprofessional behavior Enberg refers to was O’Reilly’s ignoring orders from the CBS bureau chief for camera crews to not use lights, as they might draw attention to themselves and endanger the health of the crew in the field.

O’Reilly’s veracity was first questioned earlier in the week when Mother Jones magazine published an article looking at the Fox News mainstay’s repeated claims that he “reported on the ground in active war zones from El Salvador to the Falklands” and “survived a combat situation in Argentina during the Falklands War.”

David Corn, who wrote the piece for Mother Jones, said Saturday that Enberg’s account of what happened in Argentina is further proof that O’Reilly has been less than honest about the matter:

“This account from a veteran CBS News correspondent and a former colleague of O’Reilly–who witnessed O’Reilly’s short stint in Buenos Aires at the end of the Falklands War–is additional confirmation of what we reported and raises additional questions for O’Reilly. Will he responsibly respond to all the questions or will he continue to rely upon invective and bombast?”

Also on Saturday, the veterans group VoteVets.org called on Fox News to take O’Reilly off the air, much as NBC did with anchor Brian Williams, who was suspended without pay for six months after incorrectly recalling false details from his Iraq war reporting.

This article was originally published by the same author at LiberalAmerica.org.