obama continues the gray hair trend

Southern Man said:
But you don't have any evidence. :pke:
Click to expand...

Well, there were tapes. However-- I believe O'Reilly was guilty the same way I believed Clinton was guilty when he settled the Paula Jones lawsuit. And I also believed Edwards was guilty and his claim that he's not Rielle's baby daddy is bogus. There are probably more that I can't recall at the moment. For me it has nothing to do with political affiliation but with the bad behaviour these people are trying to cover up.
 
Yurt said:
but you don't know and it can't actually be proven he was guilty of anything, thanks for admitting that you have nothing on o'reilly but conjecture :clink:
Click to expand...

O'Reilly's accuser is no innocent if she was trying to shake him down for $60 million. I didn't defend her then and I'm not defending her now. But IMO, if her accusations were truly false, O'Reilly should have defended his name in a court of law. That he paid her off suggests to me that they're both fruitcakes.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1013042oreilly1.html
 
Yurt said:
why is it you refuse to answer my question about everyone being guilty?

o'reilly is not you, he is a major public figure and often times for them it is safer and cheaper to simply end the ordeal so it is out of the public's mind...look at OJ...even though found innocent in a criminal trial, people believe he is guilty, so it is not true that always fighting something and being declared innocent makes people believe you're innocent, much better to shut it down and get it out of the public view....

you don't know how much he paid, nice try.....
Click to expand...

Even if he paid *only* $2 million, that's a lot of scratch to shut somebody's mouth.

The New York Daily News, citing unidentified sources, reported that O'Reilly had agreed to pay Mackris anywhere from $2 million to $10 million. Separately, the New York Post said it was believed that O'Reilly paid "multimillions of dollars" to settle the suit.
 
Yurt said:
i'm not the one who paraded around the o'reilly issue as fact, you did and were shown you were wrong, it is not fact and you have nothing but conjecture as to whether he is guilty or not....so you get pissy, call people cockroaches, me a twink.....unbunch your panties
Click to expand...

Would you, as a lawyer, advise your client to settle for millions if he was innocent?
 
christiefan915 said:
Well, there were tapes. However-- I believe O'Reilly was guilty the same way I believed Clinton was guilty when he settled the Paula Jones lawsuit. And I also believed Edwards was guilty and his claim that he's not Rielle's baby daddy is bogus. There are probably more that I can't recall at the moment. For me it has nothing to do with political affiliation but with the bad behaviour these people are trying to cover up.
Click to expand...
Lets hear the tapes then. I prefer solid evidence before I pass judgment.
 
TuTu Monroe said:
Nothing was ever proven. It was always a he said/she said case.
Click to expand...

True, and I haven't defended her for trying to shake him down. But the big question is, why didn't he go to court to defend his *good* name if he was 100% innocent?

I think they both indulged in sexual suggestive comments, she saw dollar signs, and he paid up to keep it all from coming to light. (Not to mention, the age and employee thing was reminiscent of Clinton and Lewinsky.)
 
Yurt said:
you're a liar...as i said before, i never said one way or the other whether he is innocent, i don't know if he or isn't....stop making stuff to make yourself look better after you failed to show o'reilly is guilty of anything

i've told you your misstatements, you're obfuscating and creating strawman out of thin air....i never said he was my hero, i never said he was innocent or guitly, you're flat speaking falsehoods because you can't accept the fact you were shown that your statements that o'reilly is guilty are not fact...accept it and move on
Click to expand...

Then what do you think? Is he innocent or guilty?
 
Southern Man said:
Lets hear the tapes then. I prefer solid evidence before I pass judgment.
Click to expand...

I'd like to hear them, too. I believe she was trying to shake him down.

"O'Reilly lawyer Ronald Green had said he believed there were tapes of conversations between the two and asked a court to compel Mackris to produce them so they could be played publicly.

"I know that he does not fear what is on the tapes," Green said at the time.

O'Reilly told his viewers Thursday night, "This matter has caused enormous pain, but I had to protect my family, and I did. All I can say to you is please do not believe everything you hear and read."

Shortly before "Factor" aired, O'Reilly's lawyer Green, issued a statement saying the cases and claims had been withdrawn and all parties agreed there was no wrongdoing by O'Reilly, Mackris or Mackris' lawyer Benedict Morelli.

"Out of respect for their families and privacy, all parties and their representatives have agreed that all information relating to the cases shall remain confidential," Green's statement said.

When the accusations began, Green refused to confirm or deny specific things that Mackris claimed O'Reilly said to her, but he said at the time that, "Mr. O'Reilly denies that he has done anything that rises to the level of unlawful sexual harassment."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/20/entertainment/main650282.shtml
 
christiefan915 said:
I'd like to hear them, too. I believe she was trying to shake him down.

"O'Reilly lawyer Ronald Green had said he believed there were tapes of conversations between the two and asked a court to compel Mackris to produce them so they could be played publicly.

"I know that he does not fear what is on the tapes," Green said at the time.

O'Reilly told his viewers Thursday night, "This matter has caused enormous pain, but I had to protect my family, and I did. All I can say to you is please do not believe everything you hear and read."

Shortly before "Factor" aired, O'Reilly's lawyer Green, issued a statement saying the cases and claims had been withdrawn and all parties agreed there was no wrongdoing by O'Reilly, Mackris or Mackris' lawyer Benedict Morelli.

"Out of respect for their families and privacy, all parties and their representatives have agreed that all information relating to the cases shall remain confidential," Green's statement said.

When the accusations began, Green refused to confirm or deny specific things that Mackris claimed O'Reilly said to her, but he said at the time that, "Mr. O'Reilly denies that he has done anything that rises to the level of unlawful sexual harassment."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/20/entertainment/main650282.shtml
Click to expand...

From your quote it appears that O'Reilly wanted the tapes to be heard, and I can only assume that this was because they would have exonerated him. But, since the tapes are confidential, we won't be hearing them. Therefore any allegation towards O'Reilly with respect to what is on them is baseless.
 
Southern Man said:
From your quote it appears that O'Reilly wanted the tapes to be heard, and I can only assume that this was because they would have exonerated him. But, since the tapes are confidential, we won't be hearing them. Therefore any allegation towards O'Reilly with respect to what is on them is baseless.
Click to expand...

Yup, The tapes prove O'Reilly's innocence so to keep them silent he paid $2 million dollars. That makes a lot of sense.
 
christiefan915 said:
Would you, as a lawyer, advise your client to settle for millions if he was innocent?
Click to expand...

this is the most stupid question you've ever asked....

as you know each and every case is unique, so for me to answer this hypothetical question is absolutely absurd and you should know it

plus, i've already said in this thread that many public figures often settle simply to get allegations out of the spotlight as we all know allegations, even when proven false, think duke boys, have already damaged their valuable reputation....

so it is very clear that lawyers who have represented public figure clients have in fact advised them to settle.....
 
Yurt said:
you apparently missed this part of my quote:



:pke:
Click to expand...

I didn't ask you what you wrote. I read your post. I asked what you think, i.e. your opinion. Given that your arguments are leaning in favor of O'Reilly, it appears you think he's innocent.

...o'reilly is not you, he is a major public figure and often times for them it is safer and cheaper to simply end the ordeal so it is out of the public's mind..

...again, thank you for admitting all you have is conjecture/speculation....

...amazing how pissy you get when you're proven wrong...

Why are you so afraid to give an opinion on this? Methinks you protest too much.
 
Yurt said:
this is the most stupid question you've ever asked....

as you know each and every case is unique, so for me to answer this hypothetical question is absolutely absurd and you should know it

plus, i've already said in this thread that many public figures often settle simply to get allegations out of the spotlight as we all know allegations, even when proven false, think duke boys, have already damaged their valuable reputation....

so it is very clear that lawyers who have represented public figure clients have in fact advised them to settle.....
Click to expand...

Again you're blowing smoke. This is an opinion forum. Topics are introduced and people speak their minds. Of course every case is unique. I'm asking you what you would have suggested to O'Reilly based on as much information you've learned from reading.

My opinion is that if O'Reilly swears he's innocent, he should have filed a countersuit for slander, taken it to trial and let the chips fall where they may. After all, if he could *prove* his innocence, he could collect a settlement plus costs, so what, exactly, did he have to lose?
 
Yurt said:
dude, how many times can you be wrong in this thread....his grandparents paid for him to attend the most exclusive private HS in hawaii....get your facts straight
Click to expand...

I understand you consider yourself the board arbiter of who is stupid and which posts fail but you really need to research before throwing out the insults. Below is an article from World Net Daily, a conservative bible, and even they say he got a scholarship.

"Though from a modest background, Obama began attending the prestigious Punahou School in Honolulu, one of Hawaii's top private institutions. He reportedly received a scholarship and attended the school from the fifth grade until he finished high school, though no financial records have been released."

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=100613

Here's a quote from another conservative bible, National Review Online:

"But what’s often overlooked is that President Obama also shares the perspective of the scholarship recipients. After all, he received a scholarship to attend an excellent private school in Hawaii. That school helped put him on the path to the Ivy League and, ultimately, the White House. He is perhaps the greatest school choice success story."

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTgzZmQyZTM1YzMyMjU2ZGJlZGQ3ODYwY2RiNjI3ZTE=

Please feel free to post a site or sites that dispute the above.
 
christiefan915 said:
I understand you consider yourself the board arbiter of who is stupid and which posts fail but you really need to research before throwing out the insults. Below is an article from World Net Daily, a conservative bible, and even they say he got a scholarship.

"Though from a modest background, Obama began attending the prestigious Punahou School in Honolulu, one of Hawaii's top private institutions. He reportedly received a scholarship and attended the school from the fifth grade until he finished high school, though no financial records have been released."

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=100613

Here's a quote from another conservative bible, National Review Online:

"But what’s often overlooked is that President Obama also shares the perspective of the scholarship recipients. After all, he received a scholarship to attend an excellent private school in Hawaii. That school helped put him on the path to the Ivy League and, ultimately, the White House. He is perhaps the greatest school choice success story."

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTgzZmQyZTM1YzMyMjU2ZGJlZGQ3ODYwY2RiNjI3ZTE=

Please feel free to post a site or sites that dispute the above.
Click to expand...

there is nothing to dispute....all it says is "reported"....it is not reported as fact and it does not say that he received a full scholarship....it is a known fact his grandmother was VP for the bank of hawaii....trust me, if he recieved a scholarship, it was not a full ride....

nice try....but perhaps you could come up with something better than "reported"

and if you want to whine to me about judging others as stupid, you often call what others say or post as garbage, so pull the plank out of your own eye
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top