News

Bill O’Reilly’s Firing Shows That You Don’t Need Any Evidence Whatsoever To Destroy A Man

189 Comments

The firing of Bill O’Reilly, who for years headed cable news’ most popular show, The O’Reilly Factor, should highlight to any man that his job can quickly disappear via unsubstantiated and/or made-up accusations of sexual harassment. I am yet to see a single shred of evidence that O’Reilly has done anything sexually untoward to any women. Fox News nonetheless terminated him after advertisers in their droves pulled their money from The O’Reilly Factor.

It is ironic that liberals and SJWs have hated O’Reilly for two decades for what he has actually said and done, but what undid him were things we don’t even know happened. In fact, they almost certainly did not happen, otherwise the women accusing him would have resort to hard evidence. Only if Bill O’Reilly were some kind of superstar spy, rather than a political commentator, could he have successfully “sexually harassed” so many women, with still more now “coming forward,” without any trail.

The New York Times reported that in the years before this, Fox and O’Reilly paid a collective $13 million to five women claiming some form of sexual harassment. Considering the substantial revenues O’Reilly and his show brought to Fox, this would have been something of a pittance. It also reflects the way companies regularly operate, a situation in which settling even the most slanderous cases is the best way to minimize damage from those many would regard as extortionists.

Tellingly, almost every mainstream media organization reporting on the matter has refrained from saying O’Reilly sexually harassed the women. “Accusations” and “alleged” have been the order of the day, making the lack of considered commentary about whether he should have ever been fired all the more unusual.

Make no mistake: Bill O’Reilly was fired for being ACCUSED of sexual harassment, not because he sexually harassed anyone. Even the liberal mainstream media’s interpretations have had to accommodate this reality.

Take, for example, the first paragraph of a summary by Time:

Longtime Fox News host Bill O’Reilly will not return to the network following multiple accusations of sexual harassment against him, parent company 21st Century Fox announced Wednesday.

The Sydney Morning Herald, which falsely accused ROK of promoting rape, couldn’t even bring itself to say that O’Reilly did anything wrong:

The latest allegations come after an explosive report in The New York Times revealed Fox News’ parent company had paid settlements totalling $13 million to keep five women quiet about alleged mistreatment at the hands of O’Reilly.

I understand that Fox News was hemorrhaging money after The New York Times story broke and it needed to arrest and reverse the exodus of advertisers. But there is no evidence available, other than the claims of two sides, that Bill O’Reilly sexually harassed anyone. And because five women were paid an average of $2.6 million to settle their claims, serious questions need to be asked about the massive incentives for women to make accusations and then be paid off. It seems that these evidence-light accusations will never will be seriously tested, instead being decided in the court of public opinion, which is itself shaped by the sensationalism of a handful of liberal-leaning media outlets.

 Why have the accusations leaked, but not any evidence?

How convenient that liberals don’t like O’Reilly’s close relationship with Trump. He is happy to critique The Donald when he wants to, too.

Despite the confidential settlements Bill O’Reilly and Fox News made with the five women, The New York Times became aware of them. So why then have they not become aware also of any smoking gun evidence, pieces of information that would presumably blow O’Reilly and his protestations of innocence out of the water? Well, these pieces almost certainly do not exist.

The hit job by The New York Times amounts to nothing but a scoop without the ice cream. Because of the ability of millions of people, plus many advertisers, to believe hearsay, paying some people to keep quiet is both good business practice and invariably the lesser of two bad scenarios. Resisting a lawsuit spearheaded by an ambulance-chasing lawyer in the mould of Gloria Allred can be deleterious, costing a company like Fox News tens of millions even without a payout to an accuser.

In addition, the involvement of Lachlan and James Murdoch in the firing of O’Reilly is worrying. These two middle-aged sons of billionaire Rupert Murdoch, both key players at Fox, have apparently come out on the side of political correctness. They could have instead encouraged Fox News to adhere to its purported beliefs in reason and fighting precious, self-righteous liberals’ calls for turning around the burden of proof both legally and non-legally.

The Daily Mail reports that Lachlan’s wife Sarah, best known for her role in screwing up the reading out of the winner of Australia’s Next Top Model, was pivotal in convincing her husband that O’Reilly needed to be fired. You could say that a wife is always going to have influence, for better or for worse, but if this story is true, Fox faces a very difficult future once Rupert dies and even now. Decisions like this should avoid “the feels” factor and a woman whose qualifications on the subject seem to amount to this:

Is being told some words really worth millions of dollars?

…Gloria Allred says so.

Though I have pointed to the serious problems with O’Reilly losing his job over “sexual harassment” accusations, there’s another issue of how women can be paid so much often for so little. Like you, I have been told either “unfortunate” or “bad” words over the years. I use inverted commas because much of what I hear in news stories is treated like the aftermath of a hurricane when it should really be considered under the rubric of “absolutely no big deal.” Or at least a deal not worth $x, y, or z million.

Some of this talk coming my way at work or elsewhere has been sexually suggestive. People would make sexual jokes about a range of people. But whereas I have been accused of “whoring” around with other women by two or three female coworkers, none of whom I had sex with, and could not (and did not want to) sue, other people, almost always women, are trigger-happy about litigation or new forms of HR warfare.

And why are we fencing off alleged sexual harassment from other harassment claims? I would think that someone being denied promotion, or being otherwise “discriminated” against, happens a lot more in relation to someone’s looks or personality than over sexual matters. In the end, however, all these claimed workplace and other mishaps need to compete with life-or-death situations, including industrial workers who frequently get far less for losing a limb, being confined to a wheelchair, or other serious emergencies.

Plus, the context of sexual harassment allegations matters. If (and that’s a very big if), a man makes a sexually suggestive comment, there’s a very good chance he has said it in a general conversational thread where the woman is bantering back. But later, sometimes years later, the woman can come forward and claim she was “harassed.” The problem is that if the man admits he engaged in the discussion, which O’Reilly, by the way, has vehemently denied, he is prima facie guilty.

Any office romance is a sexual harassment suit waiting to happen

As I have said, there is no evidence Bill O’Reilly did anything. What prompted his removal was a loss of advertisers, not any proof (far from it) that he harassed these women. O’Reilly’s sheer presence in political circles, having fended off many powerful haters for years, should cause every normal man to seriously consider the consequences of office and other liaisons. Like the fired newsman’s plight, even claims of an attempted workplace pick-up can torpedo a career.

Because there has been no adjudication by a court, O’Reilly’s downfall has been largely adjudicated by the same media outlets who have a vested interest in portraying Fox News as a protected space for “sexual harassers.” The idea that CNN, The Huffington Post, or other publications can handle this impartially is beyond fanciful.

And guess what? The woman accusing you, like those women accusing Bill O’Reilly, doesn’t need to prove anything. If she kicks up a big enough stink, in all likelihood you are gone. Something as “positive” for your situation as keeping your job is still a very poisoned chalice, as anything from an expected promotion to the respect of your colleagues and clients will all be in jeopardy.

Proving that men have done something wrong is now part of a bygone era. Be prepared and have a back-up plan stronger than Bill O’Reilly’s, or potentially face the same fate as him.

Read More: Sexual Harassment “Expert” Claims She Was Harassed By Military Cadets During A Conference On Harassment

189 thoughts on “Bill O’Reilly’s Firing Shows That You Don’t Need Any Evidence Whatsoever To Destroy A Man”

  1. This has been the case for well into the last 20 years. It may have ramped up in the last 10 years, but any environment where the staff is closer to a 50/50 split of men and women and there is a chance to spend a minute after 5 pm, someone on staff will be fucked. Whether if this will be fucked in a ‘this was great sex’ or ‘out of a job’ entirely depends on how comfortable the people are with each other and how much the lesser party stands to profit from the relations. Fucking a woman in your office is still very much a thing and will continue to happen. All Bill is guilty of is being old enough to be an agreed on unattractive man setting him up for the cannibalistic nature of low tier office women looking for a come up.

    1. I don’t think its about his looks or age. His removal is clearly tied to an agenda. Probably because he’s an influential conservative who supported Trump.

      1. There is a high likelihood you are right, as it isn’t just him but three other conservative media figures who were ousted. Tomi Lahren and Milo being two others, who while being thorough enough to be equated to red pill, still were outliers enough, career woman and gay, to be called out. Of course it is easy to brand this as a ‘people who hate Trump’ idea, but, it is likelier they are all being removed by other conservatives to stream line the party so no New Democratic/Republican bridges can be voted in as president again. Not without globalist approval anyway.

        1. I don’t know anything about Lahren, but what happened to Milo and O’Reilly scream “witch hunt”. The timing is off
          and many of these allegations are several years old. It is very suspicious for them to act on these allegations now.

        2. Lahren’s story was she claimed women should have the power to choose whether they will or won’t have a child, which then led to her show being terminated. Not sure if her Daily Show appearance would have been a hindrance as well, but ideally if you are looking for a conservative woman to appeal to a young audience, you would want someone like Tomi. She was young, energized, spouted all of the relevant talking points, and had a tall, blond, white male boyfriend to support her love for traditions. Didn’t even seem to have any visible tattoos.
          To be clear, I agree. This is definitely a spring cleaning in the Republican house.

        3. A pro-choice conservative is quite a rare specimen. It seems that it was not the liberals, but her fellow conservatives who were responsible for her removal. If she had appeal towards a younger audience, it is very strange that she would be terminated for a relatively minor slight. It leads one to suspect that the mainstream liberals and conservatives are essentially the same thing.

        4. Being pro choice aka pro infanticide while claiming to be conservative basically makes you a RINO

    2. It seems safest (especially for a man) to do any dating/playing/flirting outside the workplace. This has ALWAYS been the best strategy–women used to trap/blackmail men through (real or fictitious) pregnancy, threatening to tell the wife/employer/public about sex or advances (real or fictitious), or even threatening to cry “rape”. The details of extortion may have changed; the wisdom of avoiding anything that might facilitate it has not. Caution on the part of men would eliminate most (though, granted, not all) opportunity for false allegations. For instance, even if a man has merely made suggestive comments to women A, B, and C, this makes a serious accusation by woman “D” seem more credible; people will say that where there is “so much smoke” there may well be actual “fire”. The internet, apps, bars, singles events, fundraisers, or ANY other kind of interaction away from co-workers are good places to connect–WITHOUT being accused of abusing whatever power you have over workplace subordinates. (Sure, you can still impress women you meet ELSEWHERE with your job; outside the workplace, that can’t be misconstrued as a threat.) Or for a one-night stand, you can hire an escort–no muss, no fuss, likely no complications; and in an ideal society it would be legal. (Maybe legalizing prostitution would be a worthy cause for those inclined to activism.)

  2. An old saying:
    “As long as a bad behaviour doesn’t costs pain and blood, but is rewarded, it has no reason to change”.
    Strike first, strike hard, and strike last.

  4. Yeah… Here’s the women’s enablers. Just watch this cock sucker white knight ready to get beaten / arrested for a crying woman. These are our real enemies.
    “Sit down, you don’t know what the story is” is the most important part of it.

    1. I saw that and thought, “Sir Knight, sitteth thine ass down. Whilst thou protecteth this maiden a Moor boldly lances thine own wife.” The bawling chick is a perfect example of strong and empowered women who are also, paradoxically, perpetual victims in need of support from males like this ass.

      1. The cock sucker didn’t even know what went down (the bitch didn’t want to follow the rules and check the stroller in, I gather), but oh… vagina. Fucking loser, I was hoping he was gonna get beaten up. What a disappointment…

      2. You’ve got it exactly right. Women are perpetual victims/attention whores.
        I swear if I ever find myself in a situation where a woman seems to be in distress, I’ll just laugh and grab the pop corn. Women do not deserve our protection anymore. They lost that right long time ago.
        Here’s a point by point of what went down described by an eyewitness:
        “I was on this flight directly across the isle from the woman filming the video. This is what I observed: 1.) woman gets on the plane pushing a car seat type stroller with one child in it, carrying a second child on her hip and dragging behind a very large folded stroller that was too big for the overhead bin or to go under a seat. 2.) the flight attendant shown in the video approached from the back of the plane and informed her in a calm manner that there was nowhere to store the stroller. The woman immediately escalated the situation and within about 30 seconds was screaming at him at the top of her lungs. 3.) the flight attendant evidently decided she was not fit to be on the flight (in my opinion the correct decision) and started to move her and her children towards the front of the plane. 4.) when they got to the from of the plane the woman decided she was not going any further. The flight attendant picked up the stroller and lifted it over his head to try and move past the woman. As he was doing this she pushed him and the stroller fell a bit and struck her in the face. She began crying loudly and dramatically. Shortly after this is where the video begins. 5.) The first class passenger then inserts himself into the drama with his faux chivalry but clearly has no idea what has transpired in the back of the plane since he was in a window seat in the first class section of the plane and could not have viewed the incident from his seat. 6.) after another 10 minutes or so the woman exits the plane only to be returned about 5 minutes later and taken to her seat. We wait another 30-40 minutes while various flight and ground crew come and go speaking to the woman. After about 40 minutes she deplanes again this time telling all of the passengers, who are now becoming vocal in support of the flight crew, that all she wanted was an apology from the flight attendant. Evidently that’s what the 40 minute delay was all about. Then we waited another 10 minutes for the ground crew to find and remove her luggage from the belly of the plane. 7.) the flight finally leaves and arrives in Dallas an hour or so late. American representatives are waiting at the gate to speak with the first class passenger who made the threats. What I heard was a very apologetic tone coming from two American employees, as if the airline had done something to upset the first class passenger. 8.) when I entered the bag claim area the first class passenger was right in front of me and as soon as he made it through the revolving door there was a camera crew waiting for him on the other side to interview him. That’s about as factual of an account as I can provide and I realize there may be other parts of this story that I do not know about or did not witness. From what I saw: a.) if anyone from American should have been punished it should be the ground crew who somehow letting this woman on board with a full size stroller. The flight attendant was put in a horrible situation by a passenger that most passengers in my immediate area thought seemed unstable. She escalated the situation, not him. b.) in my opinion, the first class passenger should have been removed. Had the flight been in progress he might very well have been arrested upon landing for threatening a crew member. Additionally, he could not have seen any of the back of the plane antics of the woman based on where he was seated. c.) I agree the flight attendant may have reacted too harshly in responding to the threatening customer in first class, but his actions with the woman in question were professional throughout the ordeal. I am disappointed American has chosen to punish him.”

    2. Fake tears from the idiot soccer mom with financial settlement fantasies, two fat middle aged would be thugs going mano a mano, and a totally over this pilot … this is hilarious. Thank you, attila!

    3. White knights are the worst, real enemies.
      Secondly, we live in a passive-aggressive nightmare. The female imperative has totally won.

  5. As much as I despise the lynch mob mentality this needs to be put into perspective. Personally, I don’t identify in any way with the big talking heads of the majors. He is a professional shit talker who doesn’t represent anything other than the money, if his advertisers pull out he’s out of business and any corporation that buckles to this nonsense shows their true colours, they’re only interested in pulling people into pointless and distracting screaming matches and operate without any kind of motive outside of profit. If it’s on tv it’s pretty much bullshit. Fuck bill, his “wife” got turned out by flava flave and he had a cop doing his dirty little business. He’s just some random sleazebag to me.

      1. There’s a pretty obvious push to get people “onside” with one team or the other. For example, people are talking like Trump hwas a republican victory while he was quite clearly elected as a rejection of the status quo. It’s not like pay Buchanan was elected, it was a guy who was constantly discussing the systemic lack of democracy and personal rights and freedoms etc. he called the republicans on their bs as well as the democrats and hey fought him tooth and nail.

  6. Maybe Bill O’Reilly and Bill Cosby should team up and start touring the country giving speeches about false rape accusations used by women to extort money from successful men.

      1. And I thought I was the only one who noticed that pattern, LOL!
        But seriously, I and others (it’s been said before) believe that the timing of the rape allegations against Cosby were suspect, as they came soon after his “Pull up your pants and quit being a punk” speech.
        The elites, media and otherwise, had an ‘Oh, Shit!’ moment upon realizing Cosby wasn’t “one of theirs” and proceeded to try knocking him down.

        1. What’s funny with folks like Paula Deen and Bill Cosby is that they were hardcore Dems. Wonder if anyone will pay attention to how their own ideological kin slashed their tires?

  7. This is what happens when you work with cunts. (No defense of O’Reilly here whatsoever. He’s a douchenozzle with an 85 IQ, irrespective of his politics.)
    My late father had an observation on why it was inadvisable to do business with women: If you do business with women, they will fall in love with you. They can’t help it. Then, when something (inevitably) doesn’t go right, they will hate you — and dedicate themselves to seeking revenge. Nobody ever has to take out a pecker or even say anything the least bit inappropriate for that to happen. It’s the natural order.
    And as a friend observed when we last worked in an office with a bunch of women (long, long ago), “You either have to fuck none of them or all of them; fucking only one or two will initiate chaos.”

    1. Exactly. Pussy doesn’t belong in the workplace with men, it belongs at home watching kids, cooking, babbling to other vaginas at home and most importantly, remaining quiet and obedient around the menfolk. Women employed around men is, and has always been, an abomination.

      1. Agreed. They are too easily influenced by their vaginas for everything, especially when work requires cooperation. Factions get formed. People stop talking based on either a desire for sex or to snub someone. The whole Alpha/Beta dichotomy dictates who they will and won’t listen to and then there is the sex harassment. It is a shit show waiting to explode.

        1. Beta’s are too easily influenced by their vaginas too. If it wasn’t for all the betas implementing useless HR departments staffed with post wall women with nothing else to do then start witch hunts for fighting the patriarchy then half these sexual harassment lawsuits wouldn’t even exist.

      2. I don’t mind women in secretarial positions. Also, as real estate brokers they are very helpful. In my office I have always had female exec admins and have never had an issue with any of them. Of course I ever cocked any of them.
        Other jobs where females, in my experience, have been excellent have been bookkeepers, office managers, reeptionists and graphic design.
        The key isn’t to keep women out of the work place, the key is to keep them from having authority. A woman given power over men or even other women WILL abuse that power

        1. I have six sisters and have had 4 wives. Every single one of them will tell you that they have hated working for every female boss they have ever had and will never willingly work for a woman again. When I agree that women should not be managers they will say that of course women make wonderful managers and I shouldn’t be so misogynistic. My current wife agrees with me that women should not be in charge of even a lemonade stand.

        2. Your comment here is right but 4 wives!!! Well, I can say now that I wouldn’t want to get in a persistence contest with you

        3. Exactly. We can put women to work without making them our bosses. Also don’t forget maids, server’s strippers and prostitutes. They are very good for those things as well. Of course there always needs to be a player with a ready pimphand to keep them in line.

      3. I learned the hard way about flirting with women at work. Their moods change too easily. A girl told me and I quote “I don’t have any panties on”. Next thing I know, she’s telling HR I’m harassing her. Obviously she left out the part about her giving me a hug and telling me she wasn’t wearing panties.
        On the other hand, I could have told HR that I felt sexually harassed by her telling me she wasn’t wearing panties. But, we all know, me being a man, they wouldn’t have taken it as seriously. True, officially, on paper, sexual harassment policies are gender neutral, but in the real world, they tend to be biased against men.
        The same as “yes means yes”. Even if she says yes, she can later say that she said yes because she felt scared or too intimidated or manipulated to say no. If the burden of proof is on the man, it’s impossible to prove how she felt at the time because feelings are subjective and change frequently.
        Now a man could say he only had sex with a girl because he was scared she would beat him up or call him gay if he didn’t.
        Do you think it would be taken seriously? Would she be prosecuted for rape?
        Take a wild guess.

      3. “Hire only one really hot woman and fuck the shit out her!”
        A problem with that is the men who can’t fuck her will be resentful toward those men who fuck her. Especially when the can-not men hear stories of her kinkiness, slutiness, and wildness behind closed doors, from the can-do men.
        Good idea at face value. But ultimately disruptive of harmony and productivity in the work place.
        So all the men who can’t fuck her have to be fired, or she has to be fired. Well, you know, they will just fire all those men who can’t fuck her, give her a raise and a bonus, then hire new betas.

    4. Meanwhile in germany a turkish guy who raped a german woman for several hours got acquitted because ‘he wasnt aware
      From a german news article (Google Translate):
      “A Turk has been released from the accusation of rape, although he had violent sex with her for four hours against the will of a woman. The prosecutor admitted that the acquittal must be a “heavy blow” for the injured party, but no verdict is possible without intention, the Märkische Allgemeine Zeitung reported. “I believe Mrs. G. every word,” said the judge, according to the paper after the verdict. Her tormentor, however, probably did not know what he did to the acquaintance when he had so aggressive sex with her in the middle of August 2016 that she couldn’t work for two weeks.”
      Non-German males in germany -> Yes means Yes and No means Yes.
      German males in germany -> Yes means No and No means No.

      1. I read the article it clearly states that he would have been convicted if she didnt answer the prosecutors questions “could he have thought you were consenting?” with yes.

      2. I feel worse for the poor German guy she’ll date / marry without telling about how some rapefugee raw-dogged her for hours and gave her all kinds of STDs / STIs. And that guy will wonder why he ends up with dick cancer at age 40.

        1. she was buying speed from him, no need to feel bad for anyone who is stupid enough to marry her

        2. She should definitely get tested, if she han’t already. And isn’t it a crime in some countries to not tell a potential partner if you’re infected with an STD? Also, maybe we should bring back mandatory STD testing for a marriage license. (Remember reading about the Wassermann test?) New tests for the new diseases, of course.

        3. I had to google this, I had no idea! Yes, it wouldn’t be a bad thing. I have a friend who discovered she had contractrd herpes from her new husband. He was dormant and “didn’t think” to mention it.

        5. Yes, but more important you can easily spot the german girls that hang out with turkish guys, i dont know how to best explain it but they have a certain aura about them – style and demeanour of the lower social class

    6. HR is an infected toxic twat pit inhabited by females who would otherwise be working on a street corner. We got rid of Office Assistants and secretaries due to the electronic office. These slags had to go somewhere so they headed to HR. Disgusting parasites.

      1. This is what HR has become. In my office HR is actually helpful as we have one HR woman who handles benefits administration, union paperwork, health insurance, questions from staff and other things that need to be done. The idea that there is any policy administration coming from her office is laughable. She is too busy doing real work

        1. That is the exception and certainly not the rule. Usually HR sits around sorting through paperwork, bothering people about how they should and should not be looking and acting and basically being the PC police. Their real joy comes when they can witch hunt someone whether the person has done wrong or not.

        2. Absolutely true…this is a huge exception. My company is lucky because we only created an HR position 2 years ago and HR admin job description was defined by and answerable to me

        3. Keeping HR out of policy and attending to benefits,etc. is mandatory. Kudos for defining the job position and keeping HR under thumb. I have to assume your office is male dominated?

        4. It is kind of odd Senior and Junior management in 98% male (one woman in upper management one in junior). The owners, however, are the three children of a very brilliant man….2 women and a man (and one of the women’s adult son).

      2. I have never seen an HR person (I hate to think of them as female) who could earn a dollar on the street corner.

    7. In my experience, it’s definitely true whether or not you have a physical relationship with one makes no difference. Women in the workplace can be a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation.
      If you refuse or ignore a woman’s sexual advances towards you, she is just as likely to try and make your life hell using any workplace leverage against you she can.
      Women belong out of the workplace and that’s compounded in a day and age when, starting with the father, women have been left to their own devices to wreak havoc on society rather than properly stewarded and restrained by responsible male headship.

      1. Some percentage of women have always been in the workforce though. Mill workers, nurses, teachers, secretaries. It seems to have worked in the pre feminist past. Maybe modern changes to the workplace itself have created the issues?

        1. My grandmother was adamant this nation’s problems began when women started going to work during WW2 and taken out of their rightful places at home.
          I think women in the workplace worked in times past in areas that compliment a woman’s nature. You mention nurses and teachers, for example. My paradigm is Biblical, as was America’s in years long forgotten, and a woman is not to hold authority over a man. Biblically, it can be demonstrated that a “little one”, or “young man” becomes considered a man at age 20. So, women teachers for young people up to the age of 20 is consistent with her having authority over young people and not men, so it worked.
          “Modern changes” is hitting the nail on the head in ways too numerous to lay out in this response. Women in times past would be ashamed to act or dress like women do today, and the caliber of men we had in those times would never stand for the whoredom that runs rampant today.
          The root word translated “whore” from Hebrew is defined as “sexual commerce”. Most often that is obviously actual sex in exchange for money, but can include any way one can use sex for gain. A woman hitting the streets to get a job using her sex appeal and flirting is sexual commerce. A woman using her sex appeal to cause drama in a workplace in order to advance her career is again sexual commerce. We’re warned in the Bible:
          “‘Do not profane your daughter by making her a harlot, so that the land
          will not fall to harlotry and the land become full of lewdness.” – Leviticus 19:29
          Fathers, by their active or passive behavior in our day, by and large profane their daughters and make them harlots. We’re warned the results of this is that “the land will fall to harlotry”. I think a good case can be made that in most of our nation the land has fallen to harlotry.

    8. Sleeping with none of them at one job have them all hating me. Dangerous. When will the courts wisen up?

      1. Can’t win no matter what you do in a situation like that. Of course, you could try Plan B and start fucking them all. Nothing to lose. Make them do horrible, degrading stuff, record video of it, and then sell the video. Embrace your inner entrepreneur.

        1. I actually contemplated that when put in that situation at my next job. But, there is no way that I’d allow dizzy, bird-brained females to dictate house I behave at work. Unfortunate n that women have this upper-hand.

  8. That was already proven: there was no evidence AT ALL in the Bill Cosby issue.
    This is anocher chapter of the same story

  10. Allred looks like she crawled straight out of The Capitol. “Here we are – our tributes from District 12! “

  11. “-we don’t even know happened. In fact, they almost certainly did not happen, otherwise the women accusing him would have resort to hard evidence.”
    ———————-
    New meme to spread everybody.
    “Serious crimes demand serious evidence.”
    Injects logic into frame while denying feminists ‘you’re a rape supporter!’ line intended to silence opposition.
    Uses percieved weightiness of offense to reinforce critical thinking over emotion.

  12. Bill “Oh Really” went to town
    Riding on a bimbo
    Stuck his pecker in her mouth
    And got his a-hole rimmed, bro…

  13. Bill’s probably sitting on a beach somewhere counting his money. Honestly, I can’t understand why someone with so much money would still be working, especially at that age. Just run off to beaches in countries where ‘sexual harassment’ doesn’t exist.

    1. Bill’s probably an agent. You keep working till they tell you it’s okay to stop…

    2. “Go to beaches in countries where ‘sexual harassment’ doesn’t exist.”
      Go to beaches in countries where ‘sexual harassment’ is encouraged.
      There. Fixed it.

  14. This is probably a blessing in disguise, since fox news has been dying for awhile anyway. Their target demographic is above 67 years old, and their recent push towards political correctness will mean they can’t replenish their audience once the current set dies.
    Young guys like me (27 going on 28), come here, or go to places like breitbart or rebel media. Fox news is considered too far left.

    1. “Fox News is considered too far left.” Except by those who consider it too far right. Millennials are a diverse generation.

  15. After these “scandals”, women always ask “When will it stop?”
    Yet the O’Reilly scandal leaves men wondering, “Who’s got the proof?”
    O’Reilly was a right leaning independent, and is now being replaced by a true conservative, which may be the only shining light out of this whole thing.

  16. Any father who sends his boys to college these days without handing them a copy of the Rational Male upon High School Graduation is a bad parent.

  17. The article is mostly correct, save one point: Ad revenue. Cable channels make their money from bundling, not ads. This is why shows that nobody watches, like Samantha Bee, don’t get cancelled because those shows aren’t accountable for profit. I read somewhere Fox News gets something like 1 dollar per month per cable subscription, which amounts to something like 13 billion dollars annually. While the ads generate additional revenue, it is not only not the primary source of revenue but not even a close second. The point is Fox could have easily weathered the short term (and it would have been short term, I believe) ad revenue loss if it wanted. Ad revenue loss is mainly an excuse to fire BOR, with the real reason being Murdoch’s children assuming more control over the network and driving their ideology.

  18. After I scam women on seeking arrangement (usually promising them $400 for sex and not delivering ) I get about 2 dozen messages on the app that amount to threats of violence and hatred. When the shoe is on the other foot and men are scammed out of our money we get called creeper, weirdo, psycho, and the cops usually get involved, if we get angry

    1. Dude! Scamming an escort (which is what women on that site are) is theft of services. It’s not “game”, PUA, seduction, masculinity, being “attractive” to women, or anything else ROK claims to teach. What next–“tips” on how to get a free meal using “dine and dash”? How to buy things on credit and default on the bills?

      1. Agreed…
        Whores should be judged by the same standards as everyone else. Do they provide a service at a reasonable rate in a courteous manner acceptable to the client.
        I am well on the record not being a fan of prostitutes, but just because I don’t patronize them doesn’t mean I think they are evil.
        If a service and a price is agreed upon then both people need to bring it

        1. I agree, if they are indeed whores. If there’s an agreement in place: “you will come to my place at 8pm, stay till 12 then leave, and I will screw you as many times as I like during those 4 hours and will pay you 200 cash,” then, yes, she is a whore, and deserves her money.
          However, seeking arrangement blurs the line for legal reasons (prostitution is illegal, and escorts are usually licensed) as well as societal reasons (you’re paying for her fun for the evening, and her college bills, and she is rewarding you by keeping you company.)
          Traditional dating is “pay for woman’s fun and get sex.” It used to be girls would only date people that they could marry (otherwise she was seen as loose and was shamed), so, provided you stuck with it, you WOULD get sex at some point. Now, girls will use a guy for cash and fun and never intend to have sex, and this is wrong morally, but ok by society.
          It’s also wrong to not pay for sex if you have established a price for it, either the direct whore model as seen above, or discussing it before hand after a dinner. I have had girls where they put out after dinner. I spent two meals on a girl, and some ammo (took her to the range), and hit that a few times.
          But, like the article about cheating seeking arrangement here a while back said, you can hack the culture by simply playing by the other side’s rules. Just like it is ok to take a guy’s time and money for a night of fun, and bail without having the implied sex, it is ok to have sex with a girl, then bail without giving her the implied money because there was no agreement, simply the implied future establishment of one.
          What I mean is, as long as it is deemed ok for a girl to expect a guy to pay for her night and then not have sex with him even though he expects it, then it is ok for a guy to have sex with a girl that expects to be given money and then ditching her.
          Women’s liberation has weaponized dating, workplace, and leisure interactions between men and women.

        2. Fair enough. I don’t really know what the seeking arrangements thing is. I agree with you though. If there is an oral contract in place (oral heh heh) then it ought to be honored. If is is some other shenanigans then so be it

        3. Also, Luke, while you aren’t wrong I would suggest that traditional dating can be (and is for me) much different. You say:
          “Traditional dating is “pay for woman’s fun and get sex.”
          But I see it differently even if in practical terms it works out the same.
          I love dating. And when I take a girl out I always pay but my concept of dating is different. Dating is a night out for me. A good night out for me does entail a beautiful, well dressed and proper woman on my arm and sex st night but in the end I am spending the money on myself…I am not treating a woman, quid pro quo or otherwise, in the hopes of earning sex but rather picking a woman to bring in the same way that I pick out my cufflinks. She is an accessory.

        4. Mr. Knee, your advice is good. Perhaps we could meet next time I make it to the City. I’m not an introvert, but I am a bit of a misanthrope, so my times “on the town,” do not occur much. I used to do some theater, and it was nice to go to parties with hot actresses on your arms; perhaps I should reestablish that activity again. I do live in the Midwest, and it is an austere desert in terms of culture, so perhaps I am limited unless I go to Indy, or St. Louis, or Louisville, or Nashville. I do admire your sense of self; it has been said in dating books, that one should not ask girls out per se, but rather, one should say I am doing X tonight, you should come, then you go, with or without her, or with another lady.
          Pretty women ARE an accessory, and they’re cool with it, since it gets them places. You think a ring girl at a WWE event is there for anything other than her looks? She’s cool with it. Feminists aren’t, because THEY don’t get anywhere on their looks (they’re ugly), so why should any other woman be able to?

  19. I’m pretty sure Fox News didn’t shell out 13 million dollars over unsubstantiated claims.

  20. I know a lot of the people around here are into Breitbart News…as usual, it always pays to connect the dots and do your own homework on the players involved, especially with any alleged “fair and balanced” news outfit, before handing them over a large part of your brain –
    From Wikipedia –
    Laurence Gregory “Larry” Solov is co-founder, CEO, co-owner, and president of Breitbart News.[1] He is a graduate from Stanford University[2] and earned a law degree from UCLA.[1]
    He became CEO, main owner, and president of Breitbart News after the death of Andrew Breitbart in 2012.[2] Solov was Breitbart’s childhood friend,[3] and served as general counsel for the company since 2007. Previously, he was litigation partner at the law firm Katten Muchin Rosenman, which he left in 2008. DURING A STAY IN ISRAEL, Andrew Breitbart and Larry Solov conceived of the idea of founding Breitbart News Network, with “the aim of starting a site that would be unapologetically pro-freedom and pro-Israel. We were sick of the anti-Israel bias of the mainstream media and J-Street.”[4]
    Larry Solov—who like Andrew Breitbart, is also Jewish[5]— writes:
    “One night in Jerusalem, when we were getting ready for dinner, Andrew turned to me and asked if I would de-partner from the 800-person law firm where I was practicing and become business partners with him. He said he needed my help to create a media company. He needed my help to “change the world”… We were blown away by the spirit, tenacity, and resourcefulness of the Israeli people on that trip. Andrew could be quite convincing, not to mention inspiring, and I decided right there and then to “throw away” (my Mom’s phrase) a perfectly good, successful and safe career in order to start a “new media” company with Andrew Breitbart.[6]
    From Wikipedia –
    Breitbart News Network (known commonly as Breitbart News, Breitbart or Breitbart.com) is a far-right[5] American news, opinion and commentary[6][7] website founded in 2007 by Andrew Breitbart. Co-founder Larry Solov is the co-owner (along with Andrew Breitbart’s widow Susie Breitbart and THE MERCER FAMILY)[8]
    From Wikipedia –
    The Mercer Family Foundation is a private grant-making foundation in the United States. As of 2013, it had $37 million in assets.[3] The foundation is run by Rebekah Mercer, the daughter of computer scientist and hedge fund manager Robert Mercer.[4][5]
    Under Rebekah’s leadership, the family foundation invested about $70 million into conservative causes between 2009 and 2014.[6]
    =============
    Add it all up and it spells – E-l-i-t-i-s-t C-o-n-t-r-o-l-l-e-d O-p-p-o-s-i-t-i-o-n.
    =============
    Y’all have an excellent day now…keep your nose in the wind, and your eyes along the skyline.

    1. Nothing new for me to learn, but still very important.
      Breitbart is to journalism what Geert Wilders is to politics:
      Zionist controlled opposition.

      1. I was wondering when the loony toonie anti-Semite was going to show up. Say hi to the lizard people for me!
        Btw, it’s awful what happened to O’Reilly. Misandry prevails again.

        2. I hope your next flight gets diverted to Israel and they detain you indefinitely and force you to convert to Judaism lulz

        4. Yes, I do. Because clearly I am kidding around. But the anti-Semitism around these parts is no joke.
          There is no Jewish world conspiracy and the white genocide everyone is talking about is not coming from the Jews. Half of Jews are indigenous to Europe. It’s coming from Black Lives Matter, feminism, and Islamists, basically everyone BUT the Jews.

    2. was there ever any suggestion that Breitbart was pro Israeli, or founded to support the “conservative” israeli cause.
      Bannon is the only one who has been accused of anti-semitism / anti-jewishness, because his ex-wife claimed during a divorce hearing (or something) that he didn’t want his daughters going to school with jews, and because he was thought to be an “american-firster”. It seems likely he was the main force behind the american first platform that was so important in winning Trump the election, but how on earth could he have survived and prospered at Breitbart if he was really anti-jewish? The apparent paradox even led one outlet to describe him as a pro-zionist anti-semite, at which point we can see that the media has descended into high comedy.
      Truth is there is some anti-zionism in the Breitbart’s comments but other than that both Breitbart and most of its commentariat are pretty pro israel / pro jewish.
      Whether that makes it controlled opposition, or simply fairly transparently conservative pro-zionist is something that only the Trump administration will get to determine perhaps: if Trump defends Israel on a reasonable basis, nobody will bat an eyelid; on the other hand if he continues to go down the road of kow-towing to the neo-con butchers and the military industrial complex, while doing the bidding of the goldman sachs squid monster, then there perhaps be some justification in concluding that we have indeed been had, and that all those accusations of anti-semitism, and Trump as Hitler etc was just so much bad theatre

      1. Actually they kinida do somewhat regularly. Although the comments rarely do (besides me).

        1. I noticed that about the comments. Say one thing against the Jews and all the peace-loving, god-fearing Christians turn into rabid attack dogs.

    5. I didn’t even know Breitbart News was a thing. Happy for it now, really. But good to know, thanks Bob

  21. the silver lining at least is that Tucker Carlson is a pretty hard-core host / interviewer. I don’t seem him falling pretty to bimbos either. If he fucks them it will be by destroying their arguments when they say stupid feminist shit

  22. My question irrelevant to this subject is…why hasn’t any Rok’er turn in to a modern day masculine, alpha, good looking yuppie in a suit yet?

  23. TV is a pacifier for those suffering arrested development.
    All media is Establishment’s media. All top personalities are paid millions to be the voices and the facial gesture makers of the Establishment.
    Some in the Establishment always prefer rapid change. They fund the Democrats and Democrat media (CNN, MSNBC, etc.) Some in the Establishment always prefer measured change. The fund the Republicans and Republican media (Fox, etc.).
    Stupid O’Reilly likely flirted with, aka “harassed,” a bunch of four-to-seven dogs. Tens don’t work in TV either in front of the camera or behind it.
    A prime example is Megyn Kelly. She is kind of doggish, but many see her as “hot.” They do so because Megyn has high status.
    People who see talking head TV news women as “hot” do so because of the effect of power. The TV talker has status above the viewer and so naturally, the viewer sees the TV talker in a better light.

  24. There’s a common sense method of dealing with women when you’re a target. Never allow yourself to be alone with a woman from the workforce, no matter what. Always have someone with you. O’Reilly is a fool, but he’ll still be a rich fool.

    2. I’ve always fucked a co-worker at each company I have worked for . Never a problem provided they showed interest first

      1. “Co-worker” is different for a manager. As a young executive, I quickly realized that I was a target of women who blatantly came on to me…I was married and had a young family, and it was imperative that I maintain witnessed separation between them and me.


  25. I haven’t read the article yet but, I always thought he was an asshole and stopped watching him at all after he jumped on the gun control bandwagon.

  27. Women have nothing to do, that’s the problem. They are a misfit in today’s world. They can’t be mothers and they suck at everything else. They suck so much that the whole world has to be turned upside down to cover it up.
    Can they return to being mothers? No. Corporations make a living on products that replace mothers; elites fear overpopulation; working women are dream consumers that spend twice as much as they make. We’re stuck with this.

  29. Damn.
    If they’re willing to throw O’Reilly out on his ass after 20 years, it shows no one is safe.
    He was around at the time of the Lewinsky scandal and Columbine:

    1. and fox news probably won’t even do a clip / farewell episode: after 20 years, they just pull it

    2. Thanks for sharing this. Every time I watch old videos like this one, I realize how stupid and weak we men have been during the last 15 years. We stopped wearing the pants and everything, immediately, collapsed up to the point of irreversible degeneration. In a decent society, subversive provocateurs like Marilyn Manson would have thrown from a Helicopter into the sea without thinking it twice.

      1. The truly fucked up thing is when you realize that Marilyn Manson would be considered offensive for an entirely different reason today.
        Back in the 90s, he performed as a woman to shock.
        Now, parents would be angry and claim his stage persona is offensive to their transgender son.
        In 20 years, Marilyn Manson went from being offensive to Conservatives to being offensive to Leftists. Even his lyrics would be attacked today as insensitive. In his song, “Dope Show,” he mentions “cops and queers.”
        I guarantee you he wanted Trump to win so had something to rebel against.

        1. He is definitively a very intelligent provocateur. And I am not surprised about what you say: cultural and moral relativism leads to a society without direction. What if I told you that feminists in the 70’s were bothering for 20 years in favor of creating separate restrooms for women (costing millions of dollars), while they bother now with inclusive “transgender” restrooms. Progressiveness is a societal disease.

  30. Why aren’t men only , all male employee work forces the answer?? Same rationale as same sex schools. Less distraction . Is it legal for a business owner to have men only employees??

    1. Men aren’t allowed their own spaces. Only women are. Female-only gyms but women can choose to go to any gym they prefer. No male-only gyms. On and on.

      1. Male only places aren’t illegal, its just that when women create companies, they start by thinking “how can I make this a ‘safe place’? or more specifically, “how can I propagate my very strong in-group bias?” Men on the other hand, when creating a business either 1) don’t give a fuck about having a male-only space because women don’t bother them or 2) Have financial solvency/meritocracy has a primary goal, and thus try to maximize their costumer/user/employee base.
        tl’dr, male spaces don’t exist because men are less misogynistic than women are misandrous.

        1. You could have not said it better. I think it’s time to start being openly “misogynistic”.

        2. And also, most men and most women actually LIKE people of the other sex. Which is why single-sex high schools and colleges are not very popular with students. (Parents are another matter.)

  31. And another step by James Murdoch to oust any vestige of a vague hint of conservativism from Fox. Wouldn’t surprise me if the whole thing was orchestrated by the PC little turd to get rid of O’Reilly. Before we know it, Fox will be just like ABCBSNBC and the birdcage liners like the NY Times and the Wash Post – pointless PC liberal propaganda drivel (although Fox isn’t that far away now).
    And a very sad commentary on today’s cucked, PC, pro-femiNazi culture that the merest hint of an accusation, devoid of the slightest bit of proof, can destroy someone. In older times, such baseless accusations would have been laughed at by most men (women still need their gossip and feigned outrage). Now the White Knight betas are only too anxious to toss fellow men to the wolves in order to get a head-toss or smile of acknowledgment that they exist by a fat blue-haired feminist.
    The way things are going, before long, it’ll be a crime to READ websites such as this – and one noted feminist has proposed concentration camps for men and boys. I could see feminists insisting on ‘re-education’ camps for wayward misogynist men, or at least those accused of it by an angry feminist. Add in a little “Internet of Things” implanted monitor to warn of potentially alpha behavior. Sure – they’ll let you go free from the camp – as soon as you’re brainwashed to being a gay-boy or made into a tranny.
    We’re very perilously close to a dystopia inflicted by technology, feminists, and their enabling white-knight cucks.

    1. I stopped watching Fox Snooze with the others along time ago. Their formats (including those of CNN and “MSNB-hee-haw”), are old and tired, with the scrolling shit on the screen. Made me dizzy and angry at the same time.

    2. Wouldn’t surprise me if the whole thing was orchestrated by the PC little turd to get rid of O’Reilly.
      Bingo!
      I thought it was really strange, the way the whole thing went down.

  32. O’Reilly should take his talent and money and come over to the alternative media i.e. internet. Some sort of internet show . Support Dave Rubin’s , Stefan Molyneaux , Black Pigeon Speaks etc… give Fox and the MSM a big middle finger…

      1. Glenn Beck did it. While I see your point I know people over fifty that get on a computer etc.

        1. I wasn’t suggesting people over 50 were computer illiterate. Heck, the class of people in their 50s now were responsible for the first widespread adoption of PCs into the home in the late 80’s early 90’s.
          I’m was thinking more along the lines of people over 50 have better things to do with their time, and would be more prone to being stuck in their ways of consuming news from cable TV.
          Beck is a different animal. I’m not convinced that would be an apples to apples comparison.

  34. O’Reilly should strike back at both Fox and the bitches that levelled the accusations.
    I’m sure he has the money, position and power to hire the best lawyers who would be perfectly able to drag his accusers through every pigsty in the country. By not doing so he might just as well scream “I’m guilty” to the world.
    Should his accusers be found guilty of lying they should face a slander suit not to mention a substantial prison sentence.

    1. He doesn’t give a F. He’s 67, with oodles of money, and no reason he ever needs to be seen by anyone with a net worth of less than 10 mill, outside of the help.

    2. thats exactly it. this is a complete set-up and O’Reilly is part and parcel to it. This paves the way for women to accuse any man she wants to take down. We are setting precedents here gentlemen, and believe me, they are not positive for men.

      1. Exactly!
        If O’Reilly takes this laying down, he is setting precedence for women to destroy the lives of God knows how many men – with, of course nothing but rewards and absolutely no accountability or consequences for the woman.

  38. I mean, he did make settlements. If he wasn’t guilty why didn’t he sue them for false defamation? I am all against false accusations, but this is what you should expect when you all but admit guilt.

    1. It’s always cheaper to settle.
      So self interest means you settle or kill your accusers.

  39. so what are men supposed to do
    we cant work anymore
    employers do not want us
    why work hard at something when a false accusation can take you down

    1. Well, if you aren’t guilty don’t do a settlement for starters, sue them for defamation before they can sue you.

      1. but he was advised that i is cheaper to settle…. I know if the roles were reversed, men would not get any sympathy.

        1. Well he got bad advice then, guess he learned the hard way other men can learn the easy way.

        2. Andy is giving legal advice? What do you do for a living Andy? What exactly is that men is suppose to learn that makes it easier when you are accused of sexual harrassment?

        3. “Andy is giving legal advice? What do you do for a living Andy?”
          If you are trying to ask me if I’m a lawyer in a stupidly passive aggressive way, then no, I’m not, but here is an article by an actual lawyer backing me up: http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/personal-injury/legal-recourse-falsely-accused-crime.html
          “What exactly is that men is suppose to learn that makes it easier when you are accused of sexual harrassment?”
          This is too broken for me to understand, but I presume you meant to say “What exactly is IT that men ARE supposed to learn that WILL make it easier when you are accused of sexual harassment?”
          Well, I never said it will make it “easier”, I simply said don’t do a settlement because all you do now is make it look like you did it and are trying to pay them off. Sue them for either Libel or Slander.

        4. You confirm you are not a lawyer and your advice regarding legal issues is simply your unvalid opinion.
          Thanks. Dismissed.

        5. So why is your opinion any better than mine? I wasn’t talking to you in the first place. Good day

        6. Rule that kids USED to learn – you never, ever, EVER give in to a bully. If you pay, there is a public presumption of guilt, that you’re paying hush money. If you have the money, you have to fight to protect your reputation, even if you come out losing money. Those of us who can’t fight don’t necessarily have this option, but when a big-name person gives in, it hurts us all because it encourages the feminazis.

      2. Always fight a lawsuit weather you are right or wrong. Our legal system has nothing to do with the truth and everything to do with what you can or can not prove in a “court of law”.

    2. You have to build a skill at something (and a general talent stack) and start your own enterprise around yourself. That’s going to be the only way to be truly safe.
      From both frivolous crap like this and automation.

      1. and then they will launch smear campaigns against these businesses?
        Kind of like they are trying to do with UBER because their board is not feminist 50/50?

    1. Guess the downside of being rich is having to be a little more careful. (The upside? Being rich.)

    2. It also helps to be well-known, and to be associated with a corporation with a reputation for paying our whopping settlements in response to flimsy allegations. Rupert Murdoch’s operating strategy was to have hot bitches with too much lip gloss reading the news. What could possibly go wrong?

    3. These captions and pics pretty much says it all. And women wonder why decent men think they are fuckin’ worthless!

  41. That racist sexist quack destroyed his own career. It is his own actions that sunk him. Fox wouldn’t have canned him if there weren’t any allegations of wrongdoing. Where there’s smoke there’s fire……..

  42. He wasn’t even accused of “assault” or any real wrongdoing.
    Not shitting where you eat is obvious, but it’s fast coming to the point that if you can’t avoid workplaces with women, you’re going to need to record all of your encounters with them, sexual or otherwise, as insurance. I don’t like it, but that’s how it is. If Bill had a few tapes he probably would have cleared this. Have a strong card or be at the mercy of any woman who accuses you of anything. She will be automatically believed.
    And now that they’ve smelled blood, will they stop? Of course not. I already saw one hit piece on Tucker Carlson. Tucker probably scares them even more because he’s extremely popular with young right wing crowds.

    1. “Not shitting where you eat.” That bit of folk wisdom is underrated. Sometimes tradition is right.

    2. “You don’t sh*t where you eat, and you REALLY don’t sh*t where I eat”
      -Tony Soprano

  43. The Daily Mail reports that Lachlan’s wife Sarah, best known for her role in screwing up the reading out of the winner of Australia’s Next Top Model, was pivotal in convincing her husband that O’Reilly needed to be fired.

    I bet that once Rupert Murdoch dies then things will start to fall apart because of this. If you look at the The Daily Mail article with the two images of Lachlan and Sarah Murdoch posing together he is showing a degree of hoverhand and she appears to be somewhat disengaged from him. My interpretation is that they are more of a power couple than actual husband and wife.

      1. David Rockefeller finally croaked… there’s always hope.

  44. Eh, O’Reilly was an idiot anyway.
    Though it will be interesting if Hannity is the next to fall.

  45. As a former lawyer, it is a lay person’s biggest misconception that corporations fold and pay big bucks for bogus claims. Most have insurance companies handling the litigation. I seriously doubt that they paid that much money for claims that were without some merit. More than just “he said, she said.” Enough to make me want him fired? We’ll never know since all the “evidence” is being withheld.

    1. That’s my thought as well. What corporation is just going to hand over 13 MILLION BUCKS to someone on the basis of hearsay?

  46. Irrelevant if a woman’s hot or ugly, they all sport the same hairy clam and love to power trip with it. Not worth the aggravation irrespective of individual talents or benefits. They don’t belong in a man’s world of business. Case closed.

  48. I don’t get the whole sexual harassment thing. Aren’t women big, strong, independent yougogrrls? Surely they can handle a few unwanted advances? No?

  50. So the liberal media finally managed to get rid of Bill O’Reilly on the word of some paid bimbos claiming he said naughty things. As per usual… accused but not convicted.
    It wouldn’t have mattered if Bill O’Reilly harassed anyone or not…he was targeted because he told the truth. Bill O’Reilly IS the Walter Kronkite of our time and we trusted him. Above all, the Globalists are afraid of the truth and leaders we trust. That is why Bill O’Reilly had to go.
    Of Course, this will be the end of Fox News and they have no one to blame but themselves. Another news network will be formed and will give accurate, unbiased news unlike the lying, contemptible, treasonous Globalist News networks (ABC,NBC,CBS,MSNBC,CNN,etc.) working to undermine our President, flag, country and Constitution today.
    I will boycott Fox News and the rest of the Globalist propaganda mills and their sponsors until they BRING BILL BACK!!! Better to be UN-informed than MIS-informed.

Comments are closed.