Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Was Bill O'Reilly a Victim of Leftist Witch Hunt?

Did Bill O'Reilly sexually harass women, or was it foolish or inappropriate banter which is not illegal. 

Sexual harassment must be defined.  Workers make "sexual" comments incessantly, if the definition is broad, including "You look great!" 

Yet, this is not likely something to result in millions of dollars of pay offs. 

We have two statements issued by Bill O'Reilly. 

Given his training, we expect him to say that he did not sexually harass anyone.  Even without him defining sexual harassment, this is still our expectation.  

We recently have seen an attorney accuse Sean Hannity.  In listening to the audio, she is deceptive, but the next day, she recanted.  There is a "witch hunt" that is well known and if Bill O'Reilly is a victim of witch hunt, we may allow his words to guide us. 

First statement:  April 1, 2017

Just like other prominent and controversial people, I'm vulnerable to lawsuits from individuals who want me to pay them to avoid negative publicity. In my more than 20 years at Fox News Channel, no one has ever filed a complaint about me with the Human Resources Department, even on the anonymous hotline. 

First:  he immediately puts himself in a crowd.  Psychologically, we like to see someone stand alone and say, "I did not..."

guilt hates to be alone and will often associate with others.  He does this from the start.  

Secondly:  This is similar to the language of PED users who boast of how many times they have passed a drug test rather than when they have been caught.  

There is no denial but he specifically qualifies these complaints as to where they did not go:  Human Resources.  

We may consider that complaints went elsewhere.  

I do not doubt that many today are opportunists who in the spirit of larceny, seek to obtain money their own hands have not earned, yet we expect him to deny sexually harassing anyone.  

But most importantly, I'm a father who cares deeply for my children and who would do anything to avoid hurting them in any way. And so I have put to rest any controversies to spare my children. 

Being a father does not preclude someone from adult sex, sexual contact, or sexual harassment.  

This is a diversion and "sermonizing" (moralizing away the allegation without answering it).  

He tells us why he had to "put to rest" controversies:  for his children.  

The worst part of my job is being a target for those who would harm me and my employer, the Fox News Channel. Those of us in the arena are constantly at risk, as are our families and children. My primary efforts will continue to be to put forth an honest TV program and to protect those close to me.  

The language is similar to child molesters who use as a defense that they are "happily married" or "a father" rather than deny.  

It is likely that he was trying to save his job on this date.  
Note "families" and "children" enter his language.  This is emotional manipulation akin to "who will save the children?" by a politician seeking to exploit.  

He seeks pity rather than issue a denial. 

Statement 24 April, 2017

“I am sad that I’m not on television anymore. I was very surprised how it all turned out. I can’t say a lot, because there’s much stuff going on right now. But I can tell you that I’m very confident the truth will come out, and when it does, I don’t know if you’re going to be surprised — but I think you’re going to be shaken, as I am. There’s a lot of stuff involved here.”
“Now, I can’t say any more because I just don’t want to influence the flow of the information. I don’t want the media to take what I say and misconstrue it. And you, as a loyal O’Reilly listener, have a right to know, I think, down the lane what exactly happened. And we are working in that direction, okay?”

The truth will come out. 
This is a common thread in guilt, from OJ to Lance Armstrong to...with the only difference is that the subject gives us his reason for delay.  
Those of de facto innocence state so.  There is no legal nor civil repercussion for the de facto innocent to say "I did not..."

Here he avoids a denial and blames media.  Media will follow its narrative but to say "I did not sexually harass anyone" would have been a place to start for a denial.  
He avoids the denial and feels the need to explain why.  This continues to heighten the sensitivity.  

Analysis Conclusion:

Bill O'Reilly does not deny sexual harassment, therefore, we cannot deny it for him. He is unwilling or unable to issue a reliable denial.  
Even if the second statement's "wait for the truth" is simply exploitation due to build ratings for his program, it does not negate the rest of the analysis. 
It is likely that if Fox did, in deed, pay out millions, it was not due to a witch hunt, but self protection of its brand. 
Fox News sets up a sexualized environment with beautiful women in sexualized outfits. 
A deliberately sexualized environment is going to produce such results. 

Analysis Question:  Was Bill O'Reilly a victim of a leftist witch hunt?

Answer:  No.  

American Thinker had a thoughtful article stating hope that Bill O'Reilly will take time to reflect upon himself and be truthful.  


Karl said...

"My primary efforts will continue to be to put forth an honest TV program and to protect those close to me."

Is he contrasting honest with something else he has done that is dishonest?

General P. Malaise said...


In the Sean vs Debbie statements. you indicate that she is deceptive. can you elaborate?

I see Sean Hannity's "denial" similar to Lance Armstrong plus the aggressive talk about lawsuit (Lance Armstrong also threatened to sue). In Debbie's statement she is clarifying what she said and I will link the radio blog below. The title mentions that Debbie accuses Hannity of sexual harassment, but usually the titles are not made by the guests but the radio host. Debbie did not accuse Hannity of sexual harassment during the show.


Anonymous said...

Fox ruined reporting the news. The left just copied their tactics. If you have to claim 'fair & balanced', whats that tell us? Its the oppisite.

TiffGGGG said...

Wow! This is an interesting bit of analysis. Thank you, Peter! I am honestly surprised that he couldn't simply say he didn't do it--because he did do it. I hadn't watched or listened to anything about this case, so I haven't heard much about it. His statements are quite telling.

Anonymous said...

Great analysis Peter. Bill O'Reilly has always come across as arrogant and full of contempt, feeling himself superior for no discernible reason. He reminds me of David Letterman in that both of their personalities as well as treatment of their guests make me cringe. This contempt O'Reilly has always displayed could easily lend itself to sexual harrassment. Im sure he didnt even think twice about it. Why the media elevates individuals with horrible personalities like O'Reilly & Letterman (neither are funny or compelling just cringeworthy) to such high places is beyond me. Back in the day, I would watch Jay Leno (not Letterman) bc he was funnier and pleasant with much better interviews whereas with Letterman you could see his guests recoil from him and clam up. O'Reillycones across similarly as a bully. It is extra repellant bc there is no discernible reason for their huge egos. In fact you would think due to their homeliness, they might behave more pleasantly to others, but not so.

Statement Analysis Blog said...

A few comments;

"fair and balanced" is unnecessary. I don't watch Fox (some segments on you tube after the fact) as I no longer have a subscription. MSM is just too much. My criticism of Fox has been the sexualization yes, but the I don't enjoy bringing in leftists to accuse those who disagree of phobia and hatred. It got old and it is incessant. Fox did not need to do this. They should have just reported the news and as a conservative show, have conservative views. The leftist accusations of phobia and hatred have only served to increase violence and the division of the country. The newest leftist attempt at destroying the country is

"hate speech" and "hate speech is not free speech."

If you disagree with a leftist (who is neither liberal nor democratic), you are "hate."

The absurdity and increase of emotion (illogic and anger) sets people free to be violent.

As to the Sean v Debbie, if someone wants to transcribe, I will analyze. I am in training all week, so there may be a delay.

In analyzing Sean's response, context is key. Training teaches careful paradigm shifting accordingly. You will see this in an upcoming McCann analysis where the brother-in-law's words are analyzed.


Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Is this a good idea or what?

Senator Cruz introduced the Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order (EL CHAPO) Act on Tuesday. “The U.S. Government is currently seeking the criminal forfeiture of more than $14 billion in drug proceeds and illicit profits from El Chapo.

LC said...

The conservative Fox news channel is not the Only station with the female anchors in sleeveless, low-cut dress. This has become the norm across the whole media spectrum. I first noticed the change while watching some of the "Law and Order" type programs several years ago. Programming seemed to showcase female authority by the ability to wield a gun and pursue a perpetrator while wearing a scoop-neck tank top & leather jacket. Somehow, this manner of dress became acceptable as 'professional' on-screen attire.
I do think that Bill O'Reilly has to be careful with his chosen response statements, but mostly for litigation purposes. He could have issued a blanket denial, but harassment charges can stem from misunderstood comments to more heavily pressured circumstances. Lisa Bloom jumped right on Bill's 'invitation' and had her newest "hot chocolate" client make a report directly to Human Resources. That particular frivolous lawsuit suddenly became legitimate. Thus far, his denial is not reliable; but it may be a calculated strategy for legal purposes. No doubt there is a witch hunt. The doubt stems from whether each case is warranted.

Anonymous said...

I can't stand David Letterman, like he literally makes my skin crawl worse than anyone ever. His giant ego is disgusting. He's not good at interviewing people either and the "rapport" or lack thereof that he has with his guests is not fun to watch. It is very uncomfortable for me to try to watch him, I have a very negative reaction to him and his show.

Anonymous said...

During his show's last few years he improved. But back in the 90's I stopped watching for years.

Anonymous said...

Peter -

This statement sounds very odd, almost like an embedded confession?

"...I don’t know if you’re going to be surprised — but I think you’re going to be shaken, as I am. There’s a lot of stuff involved here."


Anonymous said...

Is anybodys else getting confused? Who is our president, DJT or Ivnka?

General P. Malaise said...

I will try to transcribe the radio blog and forward it and Sean's denial. It may take me a few days to do it.

Anonymous said...

Coulter no speak at Berkeley, yet Sarsour speak ay cuny?


As to the real truth, who knows? So far as I know there is no tangible proof. Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. In the past we have seen witch hunts (Anita Hill....) and we have seen men who were true pigs (Anthony Weiner...). But the bottom line is that Fox either would no longer tolerate making payouts for him so he was sacked. I suspect it was due to advertising and ratings. But, he's 67 and a multi millionaire. Must be a tough life.

John Mc Gowan said...


Desperate Search Underway for Toddler Who Vanished While Playing in Yard

Search teams are desperately looking for a baby girl who disappeared while playing outside her Illinois home, authorities said.

One-year-old Semaj Crosby was with a group of about a dozen kids gathered in the yard of a Joliet subdivision. The toddler’s parents were outside working on their car.

The family called the Will County Sheriff’s Office at 6:30 p.m. to report their daughter missing. “The family had been looking for her for an hour and a half,” Public Information Officer Kathy Hoffmeyer told InsideEdition.com Wednesday.

More than 80 people are now searching for the child, aided by bloodhounds and drones. An all-night canvas of the neighborhood using a helicopter equipped with an infrared and heat-seeking device found nothing, authorities said.

The child was last seen wearing a gray long-sleeved shirt with a cat face on it, and dark jeans. She has multiple ponytails with white beads.

Police asked residents within a five-mile radius to search their homes and properties for the little girl. A pond in the neighborhood was also being searched Wednesday.

There is no apparent sign of foul play, Hoffmeyer said. "The family is fullycooperating with us," she said.


DCFS Investigating Mother Of Missing Baby In Will County


As police continue to search for a missing 16-month-old girl near Joliet, the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services said it is investigating her mother for an allegation of neglect

Meantime, DCFS said it is investigating Semaj’s mother for neglect, and had visited the home about three hours before the toddler vanished.

“We have had prior contact with this family including four unfounded investigations for neglect and two prior pending investigation for neglect opened in March 2017. DCFS had been at the home on April 25 at approximately 3:20 p.m. and had seen all three of the mother’s children including Semaj. There were no obvious hazards or safety concerns at that time. DCFS has been working with the family, offering services since September 2016,” DCFS spokeswoman Veronica Resa said in an email.


Investigators have been questioning the family, which they said is standard procedure. However, police said there have been conflicting reports from relatives about whether it had been 30 minutes or up to 2 hours before Semaj was reported missing.


The girl's mother pleaded for anyone with information about her toddler's whereabouts to come forward.
"I just want my baby home," she told WGN-TV. "I just want her home, I just want to know she's safe. I just want to know she's OK."

Anyone with information on Semaj can contact the sheriff's office at 815-727-8575.



This is not looking good

Statement Analysis Blog said...


trust the words.

There are witch hunts and there are false accusations, but truth speaks out.

See the statement analysis of Anita Hill Clarence Thomas. There, the words guide us too.


Anonymous said...

And now Breitbart has immoral ads? This is tiring?

Anonymous said...

Bingo I just noticed those ads yesturday.

Foolsfeedonfolly said...

Maybe it's just me, but if someone accused me of sexual harrassment, I'd be flat out angry, hotly and loudly denying it. If I were a well known, highly-paid TV commentator, I'd definitely be broadcasting(pun intended) my denial. You've only got one shot at reputation, particularly in a media-driven, internet-fueled world. The accusation is bad enough. These days accusation=guilt to many who will never follow up on the story to see if it's actually true or not and who will never see/hear about any retraction/legal action. If my income was threatened by said accusation, I'd be even more angry, upset, and worried- if I could potentially lose my job because someone was lying about me.

I don't see any of these stressors in O'Reilly's language. I'm not seeing "righteous indignation", but then again, I'm no SA expert either. I thought this comment was very awkward-"...I don’t know if you’re going to be surprised — but I think you’re going to be shaken, as I am. There’s a lot of stuff involved here."

Who is "you"? The interviewer? The audience? The individual viewer? His family? His children? His friends? His colleagues? His detractors? His competitors? There's a vast difference between "surprised" and "shaken". He's unsure about the "surprised", but he's expecting the "shaken". He tacks on"...as I am.", which bothers me. He wasn't expected to be shaken. Why not? Because in previous instances, he's gotten away with something? Because in previous instances, the network (whichever one employed him at the time of the incident) backed him or paid out? Because he himself has been able to escape previously via a personal pay out?

"There's a lot of stuff involved here."- Stuff? What kind of stuff? Who's stuff? Involved? I'm not sure if he's being deliberately vague due to pending litigation or what. The accusations are pretty clear and pretty damning, Id expect him to be equally clear in rebutting them. Given his well-documented dogmatic nature, I'd expect him to be aggressively, characteristically (if not a tad condescendingly) blunt. He's used to "winning", bullying when it benefits him to do so. Not SA so much, as my opinion based on my observations of his show and reading his background.

John Mc Gowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John Mc Gowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John Mc Gowan said...

Unfortunately Baby Semaj Crosby has been found deceased.

A tragic ending to the life of a beautiful baby girl. Semaj Crosby has been found dead in her family home.

It is reported that she was found stuffed in the couch in the home. people were sitting on the couch.


Here in the second clip down is an interview with her Mother.

Her pronouns are all over the place.


It is understood that they (LE) had to gain a warrant to search the property.

Mom taking into custody. Aunts were very evasive, They were that at the time of the "search"

John Mc Gowan said...

SEMAJ CROSBY UPDATE: The Will County sheriff's office discusses the investigation surrounding 1-year-old Semaj Crosby who was found dead overnight in a Joliet home


Anonymous said...

BLAZER PROPHETApril 26, 2017 at 3:54 PM
As to the real truth,who knows? So far as I know there is no tangible proof. Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. In the past we have seen witch hunts (Anita Hill....) and we have seen men who were true pigs (Anthony Weiner...). But the bottom line is that Fox either would no longer tolerate making payouts for him so he was sacked. I suspect it was due to advertising and ratings. But, he's 67 and a multi millionaire. Must be a tough life.

Is there such a thing as "unreal" truth? Truth is real. An antonym for real is "fake."

Fake truth?

Truth is truth and cannot, by its definition, be fake.