Hello friends,
I just thought I would follow up yesterday's diary regarding my encounter with Bill O'Reilly's producer in Bennington VT with an editorial that was printed in The Bennington Banner today regarding their own experience with Fox News "investigative journalism".
After reading it, or should I say, after VOMITING after reading it, I was reminded of sections of my conversation with, ahem, "the reporter" whom some of my esteemed fellow kossacks took umbrage with the fact that I posted this degenerate's name after it was clear that the piece was a hit job (It aired soon afetr I posted the diary).
I ask those of you who thought it was in bad taste to look below the fold to see the true definition of bad taste.
This Op-Ed warrants greater distribution and it should set the record straight or at least offer Bennington's own version of events to a broader audience.
First, one of O'Reilly's henchmen might call you on a Friday afternoon, say, at the Bennington Banner office, and ask for your file photos of a local judge and prosecutor involved in a child molestation case.
This would be my Dunkin Donuts pal who told me that no one would "talk to him". NOT that no one would give him the photos or home address' of the judge and prosecutor, but this poor, poor Fox News Guardian of the Fourth Estate could notget anyone to talk to him SOLELY because he was with Fox News. Poor vicitmized Republican.
Now, say you have a few concerns — as we certainly did — about how Fox might use a Banner photo in a hatchet job against local officials, and you decide not to be a part of that and turn them down.
Bad move. Because later that night, as you are heading home after a long day, you would be ambushed by a horde of "60 Minutes" wannabes with cameras and lights blazing. And they would harass you all the way to your car, shouting insinuating questions like "do you protect judges who are soft on child molesters?"
Oh, and somewhere in there someone says, "why didn't you give Fox a photo of the judge? Do you hate Fox?"
So they refused to comment having been attacked AT HOME. Damn Liberals.
This reminded me of something he had said to me. He--the "reporter"--told me that he was so frusturated and upset that "no one would talk to him", he had no choice but to resort to "Ambushing" them. I had forgotten about this comment until I read it in the article.
*...wouldn't a legitimate newsperson call to ask for an interview or an opinion on a subject like this case, especially when that person is not in any way involved in the case?*
The above bolded portion is a point I brought up to Mr. "reporter" during our gab-fest.
....O'Reilly gets really wound up about attacks not only the judge, the prosecutor and the Banner, but just about every official in Vermont. The governor is acting "cowardly," he charges, and everyone here is too liberal and soft on molesters.
And many facts of the case tend to undermine O'Reilly's whole foaming, frothing point.
1.)People closer to the case than O'Reilly think a conviction would have been very difficult if the judge had rejected a plea agreement that spared the defendant jail time.
2.) The defendant did plead guilty to a felony and must register as a sexual offender, and if he fails to comply with his treatment program he will get prison time.
3.) Had this gone to trial and the prosecution lost, the man would have walked completely free.
4.)O'Reilly, unlike our good friend the reporter who told ME that they had run the AP wire twice, said that the Banner did NOT report on this case, when the paper ran two stories on it, one on the front page.
I would like to refer to my final impressions in my original diary from the encounter that I had with this papparazzi, this witch-hunt, this hit job. When he drove away in his Ford SUV, I had a realization...
At that moment I realized something. In their eagerness to "expose" liberals, Fox News and Republicans like them, don't ever even consider the collateral impact on their witch-hunts. They unflinchingly will stomp entire populations if they can use it to advance the propaganda of a failed political philosophy. Their abuse not only slanders those whom they intend to slur and lie about, but as well as any poor bastard who happens to standing next to them.
It's the wingnut version of the baghdad car bomb.
It is they and producers like Bill O'Reilly's that are very own domestic terrorists. They deeply believe that they are right and if winning means some unintended casualties, then so be it.
My conclusions drawn yesterday stand.
My "hyperbole" about it being a form of domestic terrorism illustrated and justified.
My disgust with this form of assassination at it's apex.