This comes as ZERO suprise given the $4MILLION 10 years ago to pay off OREILLY'S sexual harassment suit. (OReillly liked to talk dirty to his own producer--including late night and early morning phone calls with sexual specficity). The lawsuit was paid and she kept her mouth shut. That probably, nor below, will be the first or last time...
Report: Ex-Fox News exec Brian Lewis paid $8 million to keep quiet
Print
By DYLAN BYERS | 12/9/13 4:07 PM EST Last week, Brian Lewis and Fox News reached a settlement: For a "a sizable sum," the former Fox News executive would stay quiet about everything related to the conservative news organization and its operations, including founder Roger Ailes.
The sizable sum? $8 million, according to Gawker's J.K. Trotter, who cites "a Fox News executive with knowledge of the negotiations."
It's only fitting that Gawker landed the figure: Nick Denton's news and gossip site has been a thorn in Roger Ailes' side since it's inception, the infamous Fox mole being only the latest player in that campaign.
Lewis, who served as Roger Ailes' guardian for 17 years, threatened to leak private information about the company after he was abruptly fired in July for what Fox's parent company attributed to "financial irregularities" and breaches of contract. In a statement, Lewis' layer said "Roger Ailes and Newscorp have a lot more to fear from Brian Lewis telling the truth about them than Brian Lewis has to fear from Roger Ailes and his toadies telling lies about Brian Lewis."
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/12/report-exfox-news-exec-brian-lewis-paid-million-to-179202.html?hp=r1 (http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/12/report-exfox-news-exec-brian-lewis-paid-million-to-179202.html?hp=r1)
What does this have to do with politics?
Quote from: The Boo Man... on December 09, 2013, 06:27:42 PM
What does this have to do with politics?
And what does the sun have to do with HEAT??
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1227.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fee427%2Famber-55%2FSmileys%2520for%2520RF%2Fbth_hilarious.gif&hash=69063ab26530977a1ee4d54329f91943d7317839)
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 09, 2013, 06:33:27 PM
And what does the sun have to do with HEAT??
I see you're not the brightest crayon in the box. (https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi95.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fl128%2FAloha_Kay%2FHappy%2520and%2520Laughing%2Fbth_rotf.gif&hash=95d11ba4664d6875834e698f10af0bdbaccb63a3)
Moved because it was NOT ABOUT POLITICS??? Seriously?? I repeat. We let 'trolls' on my other boards play without PUNITIVE 'editing', erasing, moving etc. I figured we we're all grownups and have no busy in the kitchen if we can't take the heat. I guess some of us are more 'delicate doilies' than I thought.
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 09, 2013, 06:47:02 PM
Moved because it was NOT ABOUT POLITICS??? Seriously?? I repeat. We let 'trolls' on my other boards play without PUNITIVE 'editing', erasing, moving etc. I figured we we're all grownups and have no busy in the kitchen if we can't take the heat. I guess some of us are more 'delicate doilies' than I thought.
You must remember this is an adult board, not a Romper Room board.
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 09, 2013, 06:47:02 PM
Moved because it was NOT ABOUT POLITICS??? Seriously?? I repeat. We let 'trolls' on my other boards play without PUNITIVE 'editing', erasing, moving etc. I figured we we're all grownups and have no busy in the kitchen if we can't take the heat. I guess some of us are more 'delicate doilies' than I thought.
[/quote
It's not political Dumb ass, get that through your head!
He could have moved it to the Pit and only members would be able to see it, which is where I'd have put it, because it's a non story.
Do you see us posting stories about every lawsuit NBC, CBS, ABC settles?
Quote from: walkstall on December 09, 2013, 06:52:18 PM
You must remember this is an adult board, not a Romper Room board.
Then get your head out of the SANDbox (and from your ass) and pay attention. I'm just sorry this guy rolled for the money! I'd suuuure like to hear the stories from the inside. I'm suuuuuuure they involve the who's who the REPUBLICAN PARTY. The money is probably unimaginable. WE ALREADY KNOW THE FEAR among rank and file employees is demoralizing and often terrorizing. (Read that for yourself)...
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/ (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/)
how-roger-ailes-built-the-fox-news-fear-factory-20110525
I always go back to my having a cigarette about 9 years ago with CARL CAMERON in the front of a hotel in Orlando. (Smokers still bonded back then). We were discussing FOX News and OREILLY. Carl was giving me the pitch to give
FOX another try as frankly I told him what I
really thought. I told him OKAY, but fat chance in hell I'd tune into OREILLY. He offered up a look of utter disgust. And I quote,
"you think he is an ASSHOLE on TV".
Oh no. Could it be true that a major news organization has some internal politics going on???? Oh dear...
Quote from: taxed on December 09, 2013, 07:34:09 PM
Oh no. Could it be true that a major news organization has some internal politics going on???? Oh dear...
Remember, AISLES helped package and sell NIXON! Nuff said.
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 09, 2013, 07:45:08 PM
Remember, AISLES helped package and sell NIXON! Nuff said.
Any chance you can articulate your point, or is that wishful thinking on my part?
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 09, 2013, 06:47:02 PM
Moved because it was NOT ABOUT POLITICS??? Seriously?? I repeat. We let 'trolls' on my other boards play without PUNITIVE 'editing', erasing, moving etc. I figured we we're all grownups and have no busy in the kitchen if we can't take the heat. I guess some of us are more 'delicate doilies' than I thought.
It was moved because it's a bunch of here say and assumptions to trash FOX...
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 09, 2013, 07:45:08 PM
Remember, AISLES helped package and sell NIXON! Nuff said.
Awesome, post that in the political for so it can be moved here...
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 09, 2013, 07:45:08 PM
Remember, AISLES helped package and sell NIXON! Nuff said.
Hillary Clinton worked for Nixon...and was fired for unethical behavior in the Nixon Administration.
http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/60962/ (http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/60962/)
Your point, aside from the one on top of your head?
If you click all the way through the links, this whole thing originated in a story at Gawker, which quotes an unnamed "Fox executive" as the one and only source for the $8 million figure. Gawker stuck it in the midst of other stories that demonstrate just how serious a news outlet Gawker really is, with headlines like, "Pranksters Convince Alcoholic Friend He's Been in a Coma for 10 Years," and "Teen Claims Krokodil Ate Her Genitals," and "Childless Adults Should Not Have Christmas." POLITICO seems to be the only other publication willing to stick the number out there. HuffPo and NYT reported the story in a small way, but even they wouldn't touch the settlement figure.
Whether it's political or not, the story is shit.
Quote from: TboneAgain on December 09, 2013, 10:31:02 PM
If you click all the way through the links, this whole thing originated in a story at Gawker, which quotes an unnamed "Fox executive" as the one and only source for the $8 million figure. Gawker stuck it in the midst of other stories that demonstrate just how serious a news outlet Gawker really is, with headlines like, "Pranksters Convince Alcoholic Friend He's Been in a Coma for 10 Years," and "Teen Claims Krokodil Ate Her Genitals," and "Childless Adults Should Not Have Christmas." POLITICO seems to be the only other publication willing to stick the number out there. HuffPo and NYT reported the story in a small way, but even they wouldn't touch the settlement figure.
Whether it's political or not, the story is shit.
A liberal has to hang on to something you know.
Quote from: taxed on December 09, 2013, 07:50:27 PM
Any chance you can articulate your point, or is that wishful thinking on my part?
Which part would you like me to expand on. I'll be more than happy to do so!
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 10, 2013, 08:03:24 AM
Which part would you like me to expand on. I'll be more than happy to do so!
The part containing anything true.
Quote from: walkstall on December 09, 2013, 06:42:41 PM
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1227.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fee427%2Famber-55%2FSmileys%2520for%2520RF%2Fbth_hilarious.gif&hash=69063ab26530977a1ee4d54329f91943d7317839)
I see you're not the brightest crayon in the box. (https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi95.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fl128%2FAloha_Kay%2FHappy%2520and%2520Laughing%2Fbth_rotf.gif&hash=95d11ba4664d6875834e698f10af0bdbaccb63a3)
Actually being in the 'graphics' biz, I am certainly bright enough and when it comes to identifying crayons in a box. In fact I am particularly skilled. More importantly, I
easily recognize 'black and white'. It applies to politics as well.
Quote from: taxed on December 09, 2013, 07:50:27 PM
Any chance you can articulate your point, or is that wishful thinking on my part?
The board moderator has me on a short leash on 'chunks' of copy from articles. But you can start here with the expanded article should you 'dare' to click.
Though the Jon Stewart vs. Fox News battle seems to have petered off the past few days, there's no denying the contentious relationship Fox News has for most of the media and vice versa. It's been that way since its inception in 1996 as the "fair and balanced" answer to what founder Roger Ailes saw as a skewed media landscape in 1996. It's even been that way since the idea was just a kernel of an idea, being tossed around the Richard Nixon White House in the 1970s.
A memo entitled "A Plan for Putting the GOP on TV News," buried in the the Nixon library details a plan between Ailes and the White House to bring pro-administration stories to
television networks around the country. It reads: "Today television news is watched more often than people read newspapers, than people listen to the radio, than people read or gather any other form of communication. The reason: People are lazy. With television you just sit—watch—listen. The thinking is done for you." It's just one 15-page section in a 318-page cache John Cook, at Gawker, pulled out from the Richard Nixon and George H.W. Bush libraries.
The documents are a fascinating look in the construction of image building. Even back then, Ailes had his signature impassioned style, writing that they were responsible for the life or death of America.
Cook writes:
The documents show Ailes to be an engaged, brilliant, and often catty adviser with an obsessive, almost evangelical focus on the power of television to manipulate people for political purposes
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/richard-nixon-and-roger-ailes-1970s-plan-to-put-the-gop-on-tv/2011/07/01/AG1W7XtH_blog.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/richard-nixon-and-roger-ailes-1970s-plan-to-put-the-gop-on-tv/2011/07/01/AG1W7XtH_blog.html)
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 10, 2013, 08:25:45 AM
In fact I am particularly skilled.
:lol: Skilled at what? You didn't specify skilled
in graphics, and it certainly isn't logic, spelling, or how to use a quote function.
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 10, 2013, 08:28:52 AM
The board moderator has me on a short leash on 'chunks' of copy from articles. But you can start here with the expanded article should you 'dare' to click.
Though the Jon Stewart vs. Fox News battle seems to have petered off the past few days, there's no denying the contentious relationship Fox News has for most of the media and vice versa. It's been that way since its inception in 1996 as the "fair and balanced" answer to what founder Roger Ailes saw as a skewed media landscape in 1996. It's even been that way since the idea was just a kernel of an idea, being tossed around the Richard Nixon White House in the 1970s.
A memo entitled "A Plan for Putting the GOP on TV News," buried in the the Nixon library details a plan between Ailes and the White House to bring pro-administration stories to television networks around the country. It reads: "Today television news is watched more often than people read newspapers, than people listen to the radio, than people read or gather any other form of communication. The reason: People are lazy. With television you just sit—watch—listen. The thinking is done for you." It's just one 15-page section in a 318-page cache John Cook, at Gawker, pulled out from the Richard Nixon and George H.W. Bush libraries.
The documents are a fascinating look in the construction of image building. Even back then, Ailes had his signature impassioned style, writing that they were responsible for the life or death of America.
Cook writes:
The documents show Ailes to be an engaged, brilliant, and often catty adviser with an obsessive, almost evangelical focus on the power of television to manipulate people for political purposes
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/richard-nixon-and-roger-ailes-1970s-plan-to-put-the-gop-on-tv/2011/07/01/AG1W7XtH_blog.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/richard-nixon-and-roger-ailes-1970s-plan-to-put-the-gop-on-tv/2011/07/01/AG1W7XtH_blog.html)
Is this some kind of attempt to paint Ailes as some evil RW? If so, it only proves one thing, that the media was solid leftist all the way back to Nixon, which we all knew, but the libs refused to listen.
So thanks for validating our point, that Ailes was right in securing a void in the Mkt place, and he's not even a True Conservative.
Quote from: taxed on December 09, 2013, 07:50:27 PM
Any chance you can articulate your point, or is that wishful thinking on my part?
This is the WASHINGTON POST news article derived from NIXON materials in the NATIONAL ARCHIVES (I guess Nixon's secretary couldn't get rid of these)....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/ri (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/ri)
chard-nixon-and-roger-ailes-1970s-plan-to-put-the-gop-on-tv/2011/07/01/AG1W7XtH_blog.html
Okay let's put this tangled pastiche to rest shall we?
First off all the source. One unnamed source.Making all these accusations based on one source is tabloid journalism. Something Gawker has been accused of in the past as seen HERE (http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/12/10/business/media/if-a-story-is-viral-truth-may-be-taking-a-beating.html). Secondly there is the issue of who is referenced. Politico, a left wing site and the Hollywood reporter. Another left wing and rather vapid publication. Thirdly who is covering the story. Politico, Huffington Post and Media Matters. All far left sites with direct access to the White House who has been obsessed with FOX for years.
And finally the story itself. It claims Lewis worked directly with Ailes and was an integral part of FOX and fails to even attempt to prove it or disprove FOX's own claims that he was fired for financial irregularities. And most importantly it fails to mention Gabriel Sherman who is writing a book about FOX (do out in January) which is going to be anti Ailes and Lewis was supposedly feeding information in Ailes.
So what do we have? 4 paragraphs based on one unnamed source and supported by two far left publications with no attempts to prove or disprove anything.
Can I get a bitch slap?
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Di%26amp%3Bsource%3Dimages%26amp%3Bcd%3D%26amp%3Bdocid%3D99L4wUSTZakvKM%26amp%3Btbnid%3DKf9r4suHaKPgOM%3A%26amp%3Bved%3D0CAUQjBw%26amp%3Burl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fbigstickcombat.files.wordpress.com%252F2010%252F10%252Fslap.jpg%26amp%3Bei%3DAXWnUruFN83ooATOoYDoDA%26amp%3Bpsig%3DAFQjCNEgr1SN4IQEYKK2EEcuPMqBTZQW7A%26amp%3Bust%3D1386792577948519&hash=feb60d6fb9d3d17f34f8a870af3c42bd0eaebefd)
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdata1.whicdn.com%2Fimages%2F72030997%2Flarge.jpg&hash=af4a8aab11b9e526984976f1cdb38465b511f0c4)
Quote from: Solar on December 09, 2013, 07:06:35 PM
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 09, 2013, 06:47:02 PM
Moved because it was NOT ABOUT POLITICS??? Seriously?? I repeat. We let 'trolls' on my other boards play without PUNITIVE 'editing', erasing, moving etc. I figured we we're all grownups and have no busy in the kitchen if we can't take the heat. I guess some of us are more 'delicate doilies' than I thought.
[/quote
It's not political Dumb ass, get that through your head!
He could have moved it to the Pit and only members would be able to see it, which is where I'd have put it, because it's a non story.
Do you see us posting stories about every lawsuit NBC, CBS, ABC settles?
HELLLLLOOOOOO ! That's for your side to find and POST!!!
Der Quotemeister strikes again.
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 10, 2013, 12:16:20 PM
author=Solar link=topic=13813.msg160852#msg160852 date=1386644795]
author=cpicturetaker12 link=topic=13813.msg160837#msg160837 date=1386643622]
Moved because it was NOT ABOUT POLITICS??? Seriously?? I repeat. We let 'trolls' on my other boards play without PUNITIVE 'editing', erasing, moving etc. I figured we we're all grownups and have no busy in the kitchen if we can't take the heat. I guess some of us are more 'delicate doilies' than I thought.
[/quote
It's not political Dumb ass, get that through your head!
He could have moved it to the Pit and only members would be able to see it, which is where I'd have put it, because it's a non story.
Do you see us posting stories about every lawsuit NBC, CBS, ABC settles?
HELLLLLOOOOOO ! That's for your side to find and POST!!!
Are you ever going to learn how to quote? You do realize this is relative to your low brow posts, right?
Keep it up, you do more for our side than you'll ever realize. :lol:
Quote from: The Boo Man... on December 10, 2013, 11:57:52 AM
Okay let's put this tangled pastiche to rest shall we?
First off all the source. One unnamed source.Making all these accusations based on one source is tabloid journalism. Something Gawker has been accused of in the past as seen HERE (http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/12/10/business/media/if-a-story-is-viral-truth-may-be-taking-a-beating.html). Secondly there is the issue of who is referenced. Politico, a left wing site and the Hollywood reporter. Another left wing and rather vapid publication. Thirdly who is covering the story. Politico, Huffington Post and Media Matters. All far left sites with direct access to the White House who has been obsessed with FOX for years.
And finally the story itself. It claims Lewis worked directly with Ailes and was an integral part of FOX and fails to even attempt to prove it or disprove FOX's own claims that he was fired for financial irregularities. And most importantly it fails to mention Gabriel Sherman who is writing a book about FOX (do out in January) which is going to be anti Ailes and Lewis was supposedly feeding information in Ailes.
So what do we have? 4 paragraphs based on one unnamed source and supported by two far left publications with no attempts to prove or disprove anything.
Can I get a bitch slap?
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.sodahead.com%2Fpolls%2F001526361%2F542295464_polls_slap_xlarge_xlarge.jpeg&hash=e1cba05beb18e3e505fbcf399cb9f4838d998117)
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 10, 2013, 12:16:20 PM
Quote from: Solar on December 09, 2013, 07:06:35 PM
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 09, 2013, 06:47:02 PM
Moved because it was NOT ABOUT POLITICS??? Seriously?? I repeat. We let 'trolls' on my other boards play without PUNITIVE 'editing', erasing, moving etc. I figured we we're all grownups and have no busy in the kitchen if we can't take the heat. I guess some of us are more 'delicate doilies' than I thought.
[/quote
It's not political Dumb ass, get that through your head!
He could have moved it to the Pit and only members would be able to see it, which is where I'd have put it, because it's a non story.
Do you see us posting stories about every lawsuit NBC, CBS, ABC settles?
HELLLLLOOOOOO ! That's for your side to find and POST!!!
It's a gossip story you fucking moron. Gawker is a gossip site and provided no sources other than one unnamed source. Then it uses two left wing sites as back up. It never attempted to prove or disprove anything. It was nothing more than a hit piece. That is why it was moved here. YOU HAVE NO CREDIBLE SOURCES FOR YOUR ACCUSATIONS.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on December 10, 2013, 12:41:36 PM
It's a gossip story you fucking moron. Gawker is a gossip site and provided no sources other than one unnamed source. Then it uses two left wing sites as back up. It never attempted to prove or disprove anything. It was nothing more than a hit piece. That is why it was moved here. YOU HAVE NO CREDIBLE SOURCES FOR YOUR ACCUSATIONS.
He still doesn't get the difference in tabloid spin and real news.
Can you say "Typical Lib"?
Quote from: Solar on December 10, 2013, 12:46:42 PM
He still doesn't get the difference in tabloid spin and real news.
Can you say "Typical Lib"?
He's always droning on about the sources we use when they refute his crap and then he presents us with Gawker, Politico, Huffington Post, The Hollywood Reporter and Media Matters. it's beyond laughable.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on December 10, 2013, 12:52:00 PM
He's always droning on about the sources we use when they refute his crap and then he presents us with Gawker, Politico, Huffington Post, The Hollywood Reporter and Media Matters. it's beyond laughable.
It's all they have, oh, and don't forget, he admitted to being a CBS viewer. :lol:
Quote from: Solar on December 10, 2013, 12:46:42 PM
He still doesn't get the difference in tabloid spin and real news.
Can you say "Typical Lib"?
:lol: with a 2004 OS. :lol:
Quote from: quiller on December 09, 2013, 10:23:27 PM
Hillary Clinton worked for Nixon...and was fired for unethical behavior in the Nixon Administration.
http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/60962/ (http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/60962/)
Your point, aside from the one on top of your head?
YOU PEOPLE IDIOTS. You don't even vet your own materials and certainly not your OWN sources!
DO YOU EVER GOOGLE A GD THING YOU READ BEFORE YOU POST??? That story is old VETTED and the SOURCE said he did not FIRE HILLARY CLINTON!!! Take it up with him!!Rush Limbaugh asserted that Jerry Zeifman, former counsel to the House Judiciary Committee, was "the guy who fired" Sen. Hillary Clinton when she worked as an attorney on the committee, apparently basing his claim on an article that cites Zeifman.
But Zeifman's reported claim is undermined by his own previous reported acknowledgement that he did not fire Clinton and did not have the power to do so.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on December 10, 2013, 12:52:00 PM
He's always droning on about the sources we use when they refute his crap and then he presents us with Gawker, Politico, Huffington Post, The Hollywood Reporter and Media Matters. it's beyond laughable.
He'll be quoting Chinese fortune cookie messages, next.
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 10, 2013, 01:24:03 PM
How do you like my new ad? I'm diversifying from childish angst and puerile drama.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages114.fotki.com%2Fv271%2Fphotos%2F1%2F1595431%2F10201489%2Fsyntheticoutrage-vi.png&hash=583b4a47af0dc15da46cbc4320b3d99bf07660f3)
You were saying, muffin?
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 10, 2013, 01:24:03 PM
DO YOU EVER GOOGLE A GD THING YOU READ BEFORE YOU POST??? That story is old VETTED and the SOURCE said he did not FIRE HILLARY CLINTON!!! Take it up with him!!
Rush Limbaugh asserted that Jerry Zeifman, former counsel to the House Judiciary Committee, was "the guy who fired" Sen. Hillary Clinton when she worked as an attorney on the committee, apparently basing his claim on an article that cites Zeifman. But Zeifman's reported claim is undermined by his own previous reported acknowledgement that he did not fire Clinton and did not have the power to do so.
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/clinton-watergate.htm#.Uqeu5OIlgqI (http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/clinton-watergate.htm#.Uqeu5OIlgqI)
Quote from: Solar on December 10, 2013, 04:20:26 PM
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/clinton-watergate.htm#.Uqeu5OIlgqI (http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/clinton-watergate.htm#.Uqeu5OIlgqI)
The kid needs a new OS, 2004 just don't cut it. :lol:
Quote from: walkstall on December 10, 2013, 06:07:18 PM
The kid needs a new OS, 2004 just don't cut it. :lol:
Hell, he probably can't open that one either.
Quote from: walkstall on December 09, 2013, 06:52:18 PM
You must remember this is an adult board, not a Romper Room board.
Adults are NOT afraid of facts, numbers, statistics, science, and even 'dirt'. ADULTS discuss/argue/ even shout about those facts, numbers, statistics, science, and even the dirt. That is an ADULT 'board'.
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 11, 2013, 01:28:57 PM
Adults are NOT afraid of facts, numbers, statistics, science, and even 'dirt'. ADULTS discuss/argue/ even shout about those facts, numbers, statistics, science, and even the dirt. That is an ADULT 'board'.
Your idea of an adult board and my idea of an adult board are not the same troll.
Quote from: Solar on December 10, 2013, 08:38:44 AM
Is this some kind of attempt to paint Ailes as some evil RW? If so, it only proves one thing, that the media was solid leftist all the way back to Nixon, which we all knew, but the libs refused to listen.
So thanks for validating our point, that Ailes was right in securing a void in the Mkt place, and he's not even a True Conservative.
REALLY?? Gee, and all the way back, I thought the MEDIA liked the
story! He
who broke the story first WINS! Let the chips fall where they may. Actually MOST of the media people I knew in my youth--and they were WASHINGTON POST employees were pretty damn cynical. ALL were registered Independents! (A couple told me they didn't even vote). I did sit at a bar with several of them during episodes of Watergate. I heard things that hadn't broken yet. YES, THEY DIDN'T LIKE NIXON. After his Atty. General of the US claims their WAPO boss "has her tit caught in a big fat wringer", I might not like NIXONITES either. After their company (thus their company stock was potentially affected) had all its licenses for TV stations around the country CHALLENGED for revenge, I might not like NIXONITES either. And hell that doesn't even begin to cover the Watergate break-ins, lies, more lies and THREATS by the NIXONITES.
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 11, 2013, 01:28:57 PM
Adults are NOT afraid of facts, numbers, statistics, science, and even 'dirt'. ADULTS discuss/argue/ even shout about those facts, numbers, statistics, science, and even the dirt. That is an ADULT 'board'.
In this thread you have presented no facts. Just on unnamed sources claim.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on December 10, 2013, 11:57:52 AM
Okay let's put this tangled pastiche to rest shall we?
First off all the source. One unnamed source.Making all these accusations based on one source is tabloid journalism. Something Gawker has been accused of in the past as seen HERE (http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/12/10/business/media/if-a-story-is-viral-truth-may-be-taking-a-beating.html). Secondly there is the issue of who is referenced. Politico, a left wing site and the Hollywood reporter. Another left wing and rather vapid publication. Thirdly who is covering the story. Politico, Huffington Post and Media Matters. All far left sites with direct access to the White House who has been obsessed with FOX for years.
And finally the story itself. It claims Lewis worked directly with Ailes and was an integral part of FOX and fails to even attempt to prove it or disprove FOX's own claims that he was fired for financial irregularities. And most importantly it fails to mention Gabriel Sherman who is writing a book about FOX (do out in January) which is going to be anti Ailes and Lewis was supposedly feeding information in Ailes.
So what do we have? 4 paragraphs based on one unnamed source and supported by two far left publications with no attempts to prove or disprove anything.
Can I get a bitch slap?
And ANOTHER unamed source telling NEW YORK Magazine the same thing. (You know--NY Magazine, where AISLES offices are. Where FOX News headquarters is. I think they might have a little interest story). INCIDENTALLY, same EXACT MO as when FOX paid off OREILLY's sexual harrassment case to keep it from going to court. $4million, then as I remember, and that was awhile back.
Quote from: TboneAgain on December 09, 2013, 10:31:02 PM
If you click all the way through the links, this whole thing originated in a story at Gawker, which quotes an unnamed "Fox executive" as the one and only source for the $8 million figure. Gawker stuck it in the midst of other stories that demonstrate just how serious a news outlet Gawker really is, with headlines like, "Pranksters Convince Alcoholic Friend He's Been in a Coma for 10 Years," and "Teen Claims Krokodil Ate Her Genitals," and "Childless Adults Should Not Have Christmas." POLITICO seems to be the only other publication willing to stick the number out there. HuffPo and NYT reported the story in a small way, but even they wouldn't touch the settlement figure.
Whether it's political or not, the story is shit.
Tell that to NY Times, you know, down the street from FOX NEWS. Incidentally, SAME MO as when they paid off OREILLY'
s sexual harrassment case! "Will neither confirm or deny"....
When Roger Ailes banished his one-time confidante Brian Lewis from the Fox News headquarters over the summer, potentially for leaking insider info, the company charged that Lewis had engaged in "financial irregularities" and "multiple, material and significant breaches of his employment contract." The fired top executive's lawyer played hardball, noting, "Ailes and News Corp. have a lot more to fear from Brian Lewis telling the truth about them than Brian Lewis has to fear from Roger Ailes and his toadies telling lies about Brian Lewis," and things got momentarily exciting. Since then, though, nothing, probably because Fox News ponied up.
The New York Times reports today that neither side would confirm a rumored settlement — "a deal that would pay [Lewis] a sizable sum to remain quiet about whatever he knows about operations at the notoriously secretive company" — and that the network has responded with only "silence."
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 11, 2013, 03:21:18 PM
And ANOTHER unamed source telling NEW YORK Magazine the same thing. (You know--NY Magazine, where AISLES offices are. Where FOX News headquarters is. I think they might have a little interest story). INCIDENTALLY, same EXACT MO as when FOX paid off OREILLY's sexual harrassment case to keep it from going to court. $4million, then as I remember, and that was awhile back.
It was 2004. The monetary value of the settlement has never been disclosed, though it is known that the original harassment suit sought $60 million damages plus costs, and the suit had been preceded by an allegation of felony attempted extortion against the woman in the case. Roger Ailes' surname contains only one "s."
And your OP is still shit.
cpicturetaker12
Reply #45 on: Today at 15:24:26
You don't look good when you can not even figure out the quote function. Does admin need to give you a time out.
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 11, 2013, 03:21:18 PM
And ANOTHER unamed source telling NEW YORK Magazine the same thing. (You know--NY Magazine, where AISLES offices are. Where FOX News headquarters is. I think they might have a little interest story). INCIDENTALLY, same EXACT MO as when FOX paid off OREILLY's sexual harrassment case to keep it from going to court. $4million, then as I remember, and that was awhile back.
Provide a link to this claim.
Quote from: quiller on December 09, 2013, 10:23:27 PM
Hillary Clinton worked for Nixon...and was fired for unethical behavior in the Nixon Administration.
http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/60962/ (http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/60962/)
Your point, aside from the one on top of your head?
Except the MAN named in RW land as having fired her among SAID HE DIDN'T! And he went on to say, he had no authority to do so. At the end of HER and the other attorneys on that part of the Watergate case had finished their they were all LET GO! Maybe that is a FIRING. When I and the other 169 employees were 'let go' during a downsizing, I guess we were all 'fired'??
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 12, 2013, 01:06:50 PM
Except the MAN named in RW land as having fired her among SAID HE DIDN'T! And he went on to say, he had no authority to do so. At the end of HER and the other attorneys on that part of the Watergate case had finished their they were all LET GO! Maybe that is a FIRING. When I and the other 169 employees were 'let go' during a downsizing, I guess we were all 'fired'??
I sure don't see reputable links showing she was not fired.