Lie Alert: O'Reilly Claims ONLY Democrats Oppose Offshore Drilling
6-23-08 -- Note to Bill O'Reilly: Google is a wonderful thing. It lets people like me prove what a GIANT JACK ASS OF A LIAR YOU ARE. And think about this, O'Reilly knows that all these REPUBLICANS opposed offshore drilling, yet he still does a talking points memo saying that only Democrats are opposed to it.
Fact: In 1981 Congress passed the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Moratorium, since then oil and gas companies have been prevented from drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States. Congress has to pass annual extensions to the ban. And they have, every single year, including every year when the REPUBLICANS had the majority in Congress.
Fact: The federal moratorium on Outer Continental Shelf drilling was signed into law by President Reagan and extended by President George H.W. Bush.
Fact: The extension was passed every year for 12 years, from 1994 to 2006 when the REPUBLICANS had a majority in the House. And btw, the REPUBLICAN Ronald Reagan was president in 1981 when the OCS ban was passed.
Fact: The REPUBLICAN George H.W. Bush not only supported extending the ban every year, he backed an extension of the ban that lasted 12 years, rather than the year-at-a-time ban that came before.
Fact: While Governor, REPUBLICAN Jeb Bush signed legislation to protect the Everglades and opposed federal plans to drill for oil off the coast of Florida. Not to mention that when Jeb Bush was running for re-election in 2002 George W. Bush opposed offshore drilling, president Bush took that position to help get Jeb re-elected.
Fact: California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a McCain backer, and a REPUBLICAN said he opposes offshore drilling near California.
Fact: The REPUBLICAN Florida Senator Mel Martinez is opposed to offshore drilling.
Fact: Congress was under Republican control for most of the Bush presidency, until 2006, and they are not blocking any drilling. The number of off-and on-shore drilling permits has exploded in recent years, going from 3,802 five years ago to 7,561 in 2007. Between 1999 and 2007, the number of drilling permits issued for development of public lands increased by more than 361 percent.
Fact: Congress and the Bush administration have already opened the floodgates for more oil and gas drilling. Since 2002, the number of permits issued has greatly outstripped the number of new wells drilled. In the last four years, the Bureau of Land Management has issued 28,776 permits to drill on public land, yet, in that same time, 18,954 wells were actually drilled. That means companies have stockpiled nearly 10,000 extra permits to drill that they are not using to increase domestic production.
And yet O'Reilly claims that only Democrats oppose offshore drilling. And claims to have a no spin zone. Then he spins his head off with his biased and dishonest talking points memo. O'Reilly is basically repeating the Bush lie, last week George W. Bush said this:
My administration has repeatedly called on Congress to expand domestic oil production. Unfortunately, Democrats on Capitol Hill have rejected virtually every proposal - and now Americans are paying the price at the pump for this obstruction.
Both George W. Bush and Bill O'Reilly are spewing out these right-wing talking points lies, they both blame Democrats, when Reagan, Bush Sr. and the REPUBLICAN Congress extended the OCS drilling ban for 12 years from 1994 to 2006, and many many REPUBLICANS also oppose offshore drilling. Then Bush and O'Reilly both claim if Congress votes to allow offshore drilling it will lower gas prices now, when that is also a lie, and they know it.
Now lets have some real no spin.
Fact: The Energy Information Administration says that new offshore drilling would not have "a significant impact" on gas prices for 10 years, or more. Tonight O'Reilly even admitted that any new oil that comes from drilling would just be put on the world market at current oil prices and not lower the cost of gas, all it will do is make the oil companies more money.
Fact: Even the REPUBLICAN John McCain was opposed to offshore drilling, until recently when he flip flopped to support Bush in lifting the OCS drilling ban, but his top economic adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, told reporters that new offshore drilling wouldn't help lower current gas prices:
On June 17th, 2008 Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a senior advisor to McCain's campaign, acknowledged in a conference call to reporters that new offshore drilling would have no immediate effect on supplies or prices.
Reality: THERE IS NO DRILLING BAN. There is only a leasing ban!
Reality: 80% of all off potential offshore sites are already drillable. There's only a ban on giving out further leases for the unclaimed sites. The oil companies want to monopolize all that property, then wait on it. Why would they want to drill more oil to bring down the price for us when they are making record profits?
Funny how O'Reilly never said a word about any of this:
When are the oil companies going to start drilling in the 65,000,000 acres they already hold the leases to.Reality: The oil companies already have the leases to drill on 65 million acres, but they are not doing it, because if they do it would lower the price of gas and cut into their record profits. They do not need more leases to drill offshore, when they are not even using the leased property they have now.
The Responsible Federal Oil and Gas Lease Act of 2008 (H.R. 6251) is a direct response to the facts outlined in the recent House Natural Resources Committee Majority Staff report, "The Truth About America's Energy: Big Oil Stockpiles Supplies and Pockets Profits", that illustrate how energy companies are not using the federal lands and waters that are already open to drilling. The legislation is co-sponsored by Reps. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Ed Markey (D-MA), and John Yarmuth (D-KY).
The 68 million acres of leased but inactive federal land have the potential to produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day. This would nearly double total U.S. oil production, and increase natural gas production by 75 percent. It would also cut U.S. oil imports by more than one-third, reducing America's dependency on foreign oil.
And Bill O'Reilly (the so-called truth teller) does not tell you any of that, then blames it all on the Democrats, when the REPUBLICANS signed the OCS ban into law, and extended it every year, even when the House had a Republican majortiy for 12 years straight, and O'Reilly says this all while he is telling his viewers he is non-partisan. And if you believe that you are as insane as Bill O'Reilly is.
Anyone who says that if Congress votes to lift the ban on offshore drilling it will lower gas prices in the next year, or two years, or five years, is LYING TO YOU. They are LIARS, and it is not possible. If they put drills in the ground, or the water today, it would take 5 to 7 years before any of that oil would make a difference in the oil supply. Yes they can get some of that oil to the market in a couple years, but it would be very little, we would need at least a million barrels of oil a day to make a difference, and that would take 5 to 7 years to get that level of production from any new drilling. America has 2 percent of the worlds oil supply, yet we use 24 percent, so we can not drill our way out of the problem, ever.
O'Reilly is trying to make it into a political issue to make Obama and the Democrats look bad, so his buddy John McCain can be the next president. How the hell he has the nerve to call that a no spin zone is beyond me, it's all spin, and nothing more than right-wing spin, right-wing talking points, and right-wing propaganda.
O'Reilly Still Ignoring Big Oil Money Going to John McCain
- 6-19-08 -- Billy is screaming bloody murder over the price of gas, yet he never says a word about all the Republican Congressman and Senators who are in the back pocket of big oil, and who vote against any bill that will hurt big oil profits. The Republicans voted in the Enron loophole that lets the oil speculators do what they do now, and when the Democrats tried to pass a bill to block that loophole the Republicans voted against it. And Bill O'Reilly never reports a word of it, ever.
John McCain is #1 in political donations from big oil, he takes more money from the big oil companies than any other Senator.
McCain heckled for accepting most money from Big OilAnd yet O'Reilly has not reported any of it, not a word, not one, ever. But he has time to devote two full segments to Michelle Obama going on the View.
Last night during a townhall event in Missouri, John McCain was confronted by a protester who yelled out that he had accepted a half million dollars this year from "big oil."
"That's more than any other senator!" the protester said. "How can you be trusted?" Later, McCain was asked about this in a news conference. "I don't know what he's talking about. So I can't respond," McCain said.
The Wall Street Journal wrote:
McCain does lead all other senators, and all others who ran for president, in contributions from the oil and gas industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics' analysis of federal data in the 2007-08 election cycle. McCain collected $724,000 through May.
O'Reilly Shows His Bias With Partisan Attack on Michelle Obama
- 6-19-08 -- Billy devoted two full segments, with two different guests, Tammy Bruce and Dennis Miller, to Michelle Obama going on the View. This is not news, yet O'Reilly wasted eight minutes on a national tv news show, the #1 show on cable news, on this non-news story. Then he had two FOX News stooges on to criticize her, with no Democrat, nobody from the Obama campaign, or anyone to give the counterpoint.
Where is the fairness, where is the balance, how is that a fair and balanced analysis of the Michelle Obama appearance on the View. Tammy Bruce and Dennis Miller are partisan hacks who should not do an analysis of a dog show, let alone anything political.
Bruce said she was charming and likeable, and said only the pillbox hat was missing, but that she's no Jacqueline Kennedy. Then she said Michelle has turned into a Stepford wife. Bruce later claimed her apperance on the View was all an act, and that as a feminist she found it disappointing Michelle Obama came off as a different woman.
So according to Bruce, if you go on the View, and you are charming and friendly to the women there (on a daytime woman's show) somehow you are a Stepford Wife and a different woman. It's a ridiculous analysis, and a biased one. Yet O'Reilly agreed with every word she said, when it was all right-wing propaganda.
Then later in the show Dennis Miller was on, Billy tried to get him to do his usual put downs. In the past, Miller has called Michelle Obama bitter and unhappy. Instead he said she was beautiful. Billy immediately jumped in to say that Laura Bush was good looking. What does that have to do with anything, and let's be honest, Laura Bush is not that good looking, she is about average. But for some crazy reason O'Reilly had to state that Laura Bush is good looking too, like a 5 year old.
Then Miller tried to offer the expected, saying something about her complaining being tedious. Both segments were just stupid, there was nothing to analyze, it was not news, yet O'Reilly decided to use two partisan hacks, in two full segments, on the #1 tv news show on cable to cover her apperance.
And they ignored the funniest part of the whole thing, when she first came out she asked all the women to give her a terrorist fist job, which they all did. That is a direct shot at FOX news and E.D. Hill, who lost her show for implying the fist bump between Obama and his wife was a terrorist fist jab. Yet O'Reilly, Bruce, and Miller did not say a word about that, because then they would have to say why she did it, and that E.D. Hill called it a terrorist fist jab.
This is classis O'Reilly, do two full segments, with nobody to provide the counterpoint, and give an analysis of a non-news story on a Democrat, then bring two partisan stooges on to trash her, and ignore the funniest part of her whole appearance, because it would refer to a FOX news host saying an American fist bump is a terrorist fist jab. This lets O'Reilly trash Michelle Obama, and he can say he has never said one bad word about her, yeah he brings the right-wing goons on to do it for him.
It's not only biased and unfair journalism, it's a total waste of tv time on a national cable news show. Not to mention there was nothing to criticize, Michelle Obama went on the View and talked to the women there. It was lighthearted and fun, not political, and it was not even a news story. O'Reilly did it to trash her, but he knew he would get hammered if he criticized her, so he brings his two goons on to do it for him.
O'Reilly Ignores Republican Racism Against Obama
- 6-18-08 -- A GOP convention button asks, If Obama is president...will we still call it the White House. A booth at this weekend's Texas Republican convention sold buttons asking, If Obama Is President...Will We Still Call It The White House?
The company that makes the buttons boasts how they provide "Patriotic and Republican Products." Another button they sell features a picture of Sen. Hillary Clinton, with the phrase: "Life's a b**ch, don't vote for one."
Republicans Plan to Sell Sock Obama Toy
Creators of "The Sock Obama toy" plan to move forward with production. Last week, it was reported that a racially-charged stuffed monkey toy called "The Sock Obama" was being sold online.
After strong public reaction, the creators decided against manufacturing the product, and they posted an apology on their site:
An ApologyThe Salt Lake City Desert News now reports, however, that the creators have retracted their apology and said that they plan to move forward with manufacturing, as "a few new opportunities have been presented."
We are very apologetic to all who were upset by our toy idea.
We will not be proceeding with the manufacturing of this toy.
Hypocrisy Alert: O'Reilly Runs Exxon Mobil Commercials on The Factor
- 6-18-08 -- O'Reilly's brilliant plan to solve the gas crisis is to stop buying gas on Mondays, which is just stupid and ridiculous, but he also said he will never buy gas from any Exxon Mobil stations. The funny thing is, Exxon Mobil is an advertiser on his show, if you look on the sponsor boycott page you will see it listed on the sponsor list.
O'Reilly claimed that he was never going to buy a drop of gas from Exxon again. Mainly because Exxon CEO, Lee Raymond recieved a $400 million dollar retirement package, but also because Exxon is gouging the American people. He said that in April of 2006, and he said it again a couple weeks ago.
So he tells people to not buy gas from Exxon, and says he will never buy one drop of gas from Exxon Mobil, then he takes their money to run commercials on his show, now that is the ultimate hypocrisy.
On a side note:
Big Oil fuels McCain Straight Talk Express
This afternoon in Houston, John McCain is delivering a "speech to energy industry leaders." Seeking to boost his cash-strapped campaign, McCain appears to be ditching his principles in favor of policies more palatable to oil interests. A whopping 74 percent of McCain's lifetime campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry has come since he announced for president.
Also, included in the McCain tax plan is a $4 billion per-year tax break to the 5 biggest oil companies (including $1.2 billion for Exxon Mobil alone). The very company O'Reilly is boycotting, yet he never reports that McCain wants to give Exxon a $1.2 billion dollar tax cut. Why do gas and oil companies need more tax cuts when they are already making Billions and Billions a year in PROFITS. And notice that Bill O'Reilly has not reported any of this, or the fact that McCain has 48 lobbyists working for his Campaign.
O'Reilly Still Spinning Illegal Immigration Issue
- 6-14-08 -- On the June 12th O'Reilly Factor Billy wrote a talking points memo stating that the border alien controversy has erupted as a major issue. He claims that under heavy pressure from the people, President Bush has finally ordered 6,000 National Guard troops to the border. Who are these people, and where is the evidence of heavy pressure.
The facts show that only a couple of cable tv news anchors like O'Reilly and Lou Dobbs even care about the issue. The Illegal Immigration issue is barely on the radar, in every poll taken Immigration comes in at 5th or 6th, with only 3 to 5 percent of Americans saying they care about the issue. Of course we should try to keep Illegal Immigrants out of the country, but to claim it's a major issue is ridiculous.
And it's mostly an issue with Republicans, Bill O'Reilly and Lou Dobbs are both Republicans, almost no Democrats or Independents care about it, because they worry more about the real issues, the economy, energy prices, gas prices, jobs, health care, the war in Iraq, etc.
Just look at a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll taken June 6 to the 9th by 1,000 registered voters. They ask which one of these items you think should be the top priority for the federal government.
1) Job creation and economic growth -- 27%
2) The war in Iraq -- 24%
3) Energy and the cost of gas -- 18%
4) Health care -- 8%
5) Terrorism -- 6%
6) Illegal Immigration -- 5%
As you can see Illegal Immigration comes in 6th at five percent. Hardly a major issue as O'Reilly claims, even terrorism comes in ahead of Illegal Immigration, and we have not had a terrorist attack in 7 years. Now you have the real no spin truth, with actual evidence from a poll to back up what I say. Unlike O'Reilly who never shows any polls, or any data to back up his claims, he just makes it up and hopes his brainwashed viewers will believe him.
P.S. I oppose illegal immigration, as most Americans do, and I support the border patrol enforcing the immigration laws. But it is wrong for O'Reilly to lie about the issue, and claim it's a major issue facing America today, when only five percent of the people say it is.
Fraud Alert: O'Reilly Says Bill Moyers is Not a Journalist
- 6-11-08 -- O'Reilly says he is the journalist and Bill Moyers is a fraud, look at their careers, and their journalism awards, then you be the judge. One guy has 46 national journalism awards, including 10 peabodys, more than 30 emmys, 3 polk awards, the other guy has 2 local emmys from 28 years ago, so who do you think is the real journalist.
Moyers has spent 35 years producing hundreds of hours of television interviews for various series broadcast primarily on PBS. Bill Moyers journalistic career began when he served as publisher for the, New York daily newspaper Newsday from 1967 to 1970.
In 1971 he began working for the Public Broadcasting System, hosting a news program called Bill Moyers Journal, which ran until 1981 with a hiatus from 1976-1977.
In 1976 he moved to CBS, where he worked as editor and chief correspondent for CBS Reports until 1980, then as senior news analyst and commentator for the CBS Evening News with Dan Rather from 1981-1986.
Moyers briefly joined NBC News in 1995 as a senior analyst and commentator, and the following year he became the first host of sister cable network MSNBC's Insight program.
Moyers hosted the TV news journal, NOW with Bill Moyers, on PBS for three years. He retired from the program on December 17, 2004 but returned to PBS soon after to host Wide Angle in 2005.
On April 25, 2007, Moyers returned to PBS with Bill Moyers Journal. The first episode, entitled "Buying the War", had Moyers investigating the general media's shortcomings in the run-up to the War in Iraq.
Bill Moyers National Journalism Awards (46):
In 2006 Moyers revieved a lifetime emmy, the National Television Academy awarded him with their highest honor -- the Lifetime Achievement Award.
Moyers has earned more than 30 Emmy awards and 10 Peabody awards.
He has received virtually every other major television journalism prize, including a gold baton from the DuPont-Columbia Journalism awards, a lifetime Peabody award, and a George Polk Career Award (his third George Polk Award) for contributions to journalistic integrity and investigative reporting.
O'Reilly earned an M.A. in Broadcast Journalism from Boston University in 1976. While attending Boston University, he was a reporter and columnist for various local newspapers. O'Reilly did his broadcast journalism internship in Miami during this time, and was also an entertainment writer and movie critic for The Miami Herald.
O'Reilly's early television news career included reporting and anchoring positions at WNEP-TV in Scranton, Pennsylvania, where he also reported the weather.
He then moved to KMGH-TV in Denver, Colorado. O'Reilly also worked for KATU-TV in Portland, Oregon, as well as TV stations in Hartford, Connecticut, and in Boston, Massachusetts.
In 1980, he anchored his own program on WCBS-TV in New York.
In 1986, O'Reilly joined ABC News as a correspondent for ABC World News Tonight.
In 1989, O'Reilly joined the nationally syndicated program Inside Edition, a tabloid/gossip television program.
In 1995, O'Reilly was replaced by Deborah Norville on Inside Edition. He then enrolled at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. After Harvard, he was hired by Roger Ailes, chairman and CEO of the then startup FOX News Channel, to anchor The O'Reilly Factor.
Bill O'Reilly Local Journalism Awards (2):
While at KMGH-TV in Denver, O'Reilly won a Local Emmy Award for his coverage of a skyjacking.
In 1980 O'Reilly won his second Local Emmy for an investigation of corrupt city marshals.
Gold Baton Awards - 0
Lifetime Achievement Awards - 0
Lifetime Peabody Awards - 0
Lifetime Emmys - 0
Peabody Awards - 0
Polk Awards - 0
As O'Reilly would say, I report and let the folks decide, so the folks can decide who the real journalist is, Bill Moyers or Bill O'Reilly.
Great Articles That Show O'Reilly to be a Right-Wing Spin Doctor
- 6-10-08 -- Here are some recent articles on Bill O'Reilly that show what a biased and partisan right-wing spin doctor he really is.
O'Reilly Compares The Left To Tim McVeigh
by Steve Young
Stop me if you've heard this before.
On the June 9th Radio Factor, Bill O'Reilly called the Far Left the greatest danger to the country, and once again claimed to be an Independent who didn't have to excoriate the far right because "after Tim McVeigh and the Oklahoma bombing, the government put an end to militias."
While in the past he has equated the Far Left with Nazis - "The Far Left in this country, the zealots, are Nazis," - before we castigate him for denigrating in the worst terms, we should first find out who Bill is speaking about when he mentions the "Far Left." If for no other reason, so we can round up the usual suspects when the next building explodes.
Sure, the Far Left has the obvious bomb-toting militia members: Nancy Pelosi, a "far-left secular-progressive bomb thrower," George Soros, "the single most dangerous individual in the United States of America," the ACLU, "the most dangerous organization in the United States of America right now...They're, like, second next to Al Qaeda," Mediamatters.com, "the worst Americans in the country." And, of course, Bill Moyers. Just, Bill Moyers.
Read The Full Story Here:
Moyers vs. Murdoch: Journalism vs. Megalomania
by Josh Silver
Rupert Murdoch's favorite megalomaniac Bill O'Reilly sent a crew to Minneapolis this weekend to stalk journalists Bill Moyers and Dan Rather. This probably doesn't surprise you. And that's exactly why Moyers and Rather were in Minneapolis. They were speaking at the National Conference for Media Reform, a gathering of 3,500 people aimed at finding ways to get better journalism to the American people.
How dare they! So Fox decided to crash the party; smear as angry radicals thousands of good people who took three days out of their lives to help improve our democracy; and play games with Moyers and Rather -- two actual journalists who understand the crisis in their craft.
That's right. Fox News sent grown men with cameras to lurk behind doorways, hide in alcoves, and crouch in the bushes at night (literally) waiting to surprise two reporters in their seventies with angry questions and a boom mic.
You can see this pathetic ambush -- and Moyers classy response -- here on Olbermann. But the attack-dog tactics are already backfiring on Bill O. because they illustrate so clearly what so many of us already know: The corporate media system is broken, and it's hurting our democracy.
The O'Reilly ambush is typical cable news entertainment-posing-as-journalism whose purpose is to sell eyeballs to advertisers, not to inform citizens or better society. Add in a good dose of shouting, name-calling, head-shaking, and spurious guilt-by-association invective... and voila! Ratings points.
Read The Full Story Here:
What Bill O'Reilly Is Really Afraid Of
by Timothy Karr
Rupert Murdoch has sicced his favorite henchman on the media reform movement, sending a crew from The O'Reilly Factor to dig for dirt at this weekend's National Conference for Media Reform.
During his Wednesday night broadcast Bill O'Reilly called Dan Rather's attendance at this week's Minneapolis conference proof positive that the former CBS anchor was farther than far left. "These people are crazy! Crazy!" O'Reilly said of the more than 3,000 people attending the conference. "He's hanging with real nuts!"
What O'Reilly is afraid to admit is that the media reform movement encompasses everyone who thinks our mainstream media -- that means you, Bill -- could do a lot better.
Call us crazy but you don't have to be liberal or conservative, rich or poor, white or black to know that Fox News' trash-talking, prime-time headliner is little more than an apologist for those in power -- and especially for his boss Rupert.
Murdoch's News Corp has spent tens of millions of dollars on well-heeled lobbyists who roam the halls of Washington to peddle policies that allow Murdoch to gobble up local media outlets without any respect for journalism or accountability to the public -- you know, people like you and me, whose interests O'Reilly claims to be looking out for in the "No Spin Zone."
Read The Full Story Here:
FOX News Wants to Know if Obama & His Wife Did a Terrorist Fist Jab
- 6-9-08 -- That's the question FOX news E.D. Hill asked. She asked if it was a terrorist fist jab, if it is, then I am also a terrorist for doing a fist bump with my friends after winning a game of pool. Almost everyone in pool leagues do fist bumps, are they all terrorists? If they are then about 200 million other Americans are also terrorists for doing a fist bump.
During the June 6 edition of Fox News America's Pulse, host E.D. Hill teased an upcoming discussion by saying, "A fist bump? A pound? A terrorist fist jab? The gesture everyone seems to interpret differently." In the ensuing discussion with Janine Driver -- Hill referred to the "Michelle and Barack Obama fist bump or fist pound," adding that "people call it all sorts of things."What it really says??? It's a freaking fist bump you right-wing moron, it's the same as a high five, and only a right-wing idiot working for FOX news would imply it means anything else. And O'Reilly wonders why liberals believe FOX news has a right-wing bias, open your eyes Billy. She implied it was a terrorist fist jab, because Obama did it with his wife. That is the most ridiculous thing ever said on FOX, and that's saying a lot.
HILL: A fist bump? A pound? A terrorist fist jab? The gesture everyone seems to interpret differently. We'll show you some interesting body communication and find out what it really says.
Memo to E.D. Hill and Bill O'Reilly, that is just one example of why FOX is seen as having a right-wing bias. No other person at any media outlet would imply such a ridiculous thing. Especially when probably 200 million Americans do a fist bump every day, are they terrorists too, it's the same thing as a high five, and many Republicans probably do it too.
This is just one example why no Democrat should ever do any FOX news show. Because they accuse Obama of being a terrorist for doing a fist bump, which is American as apple pie, not to mention all my white American friends do fist bumps, and none of them are terrorists. She should at least be suspended for a week or two for even making such a ridiculous statement, if not a month, and without pay. But FOX will probably give her an award, and a pay raise, because they love that kind of partisan smear attack.
O'Reilly Wins Dumbest Comment of The Week Award
- 6-9-08 -- Last week Billy said this:
"Be that as it may, the really interesting part of this story is the vast left-wing conspiracy in the media. But -- and this is important -- there's no media counter for NBC News, Newsweek, The New York Times and dozens of other committed-left media. There's no right-wing media conspiracy."
Yeah right Billy, just as there is no hate on the right either. There is no media counter for NBC, Newsweek, The NY Times, etc.? Only if you are a dishonest lying right-wing idiot. Here is a small and partial list of right-wing media, and mind you, this is only a partial list.
FOX News Network
FOX Radio Network
G. Gordon Liddy
The Drudge Report
The Wall Street Journal
The Washington Times
The Media Research Center
Accuracy in Media
National Review Magazine
All the Republicans on CNN and MSNBC, Buchanan, Scarborough, etc.
AEI & The Heritage Foundation - who pay their people to go on media shows to spin things for the right.
All the right-wing websites, www.townhall.com, www.humanevents.com, www.rightwingnews.com, www.conservative.org, www.newsmax.com.
The list is endless, and almost all the political talk radio in America is done by Republicans like Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, Savage, etc. They even brag about how many millions and millions of listeners they have every day and every week. In fact, more people listen to talk radio than watch network news.
Yet O'Reilly claims there is no counter to what he calls the liberal media, when there is a massive counter to it. And what O'Reilly calls the liberal media, is in reality a media outlet that does not lean right. He calls any media that does not have a right-wing bias, the liberal media. Then he says FOX news is fair and balanced, and has no bias. So in his world FOX news is a true fair and balanced news network, and everyone else has a liberal bias.
And if you believe O'Reilly you should go check in to a mental hospital, because you and O'Reilly are insane. There are a few liberals in the media, and there are a few conservatives, it all balances out. There is a liberal media, and there is a conservative media. To claim there is no counter to the liberal media is just ridiculous, and untrue. There are hundreds, if not thousands of conservatives on TV, Radio, in print, working for newspapers, blogs, websites, etc.
There are tons of right-wing groups, like the people for the American way, the religious groups, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, etc. the NRA, the eagle forum, etc. etc. etc. All these groups pay people to get on TV news shows on CNN and MSNBC, then they go on and spin everything to the right, that is a counter to the so-called liberals. So it's insane to say there is no counter to the so-called liberal media.
O'Reilly Ignores Senate Intelligence Report
- 6-6-08 -- As expected O'Reilly totally ignored the release of the Phase II Senate Intelligence report. Jay Rockefeller held a 30 minute press conference yesterday to detail the report, it was covered by C-SPAN, and Senator Whitehouse and Wyden were also part of the press conference. It was the big news story yesterday, FOX news covered it a little, and most news shows reported it, including Keith Olbermann. But not a word was mentioned about it on the O'Reilly Factor, by Bill, or anyone.
This is just more evidence that Bill O'Reilly is not a journalist. He ignores major news stories that prove he was wrong, and stories that make Bush look bad. O'Reilly can not report this story, because he has argued that the Bush administration did not use propaganda to sell the Iraq war, even though the evidence proves otherwise. And he also can not report this story because he has argued that every intelligence agency in the world said Saddam had WMD's, which is also a lie.
This report not only proves that Bush, Cheney, Powell, and Rumsfeld lied about the Iraq intelligence, it also proves that John McCain, O'Reilly, and a hell of a lot of other Republicans also lied. The report details lies from President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. They document those lies in the report.
This is big news, yet O'Reilly totally ignored the story, instead he reported on the MMA full contact fight on CBS. Here we have a Senate report that proves Bush, Cheney, Powell, and Rumsfeld, lied us into a war that has KILLED over 4000 Americans, and SEVERLY WOUNDED 30,000 other brave Americans, yet O'Reilly ignores the entire report to talk about a karate fight.
The Senate Report also undermines Bush's claim that he is a 'Credible' leader because he reads the intelligence. As Sen. Jay Rockefeller said, the report concludes "that the Administration made significant claims that were not supported by the intelligence."
In yesterday's press briefing, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino was dismissive of the report, explaining that President Bush made false statements before the Iraq war simply because he was kept in the dark:
PERINO: That dissent amongst experts within the intelligence community at some level did not reach the president.
So they admit Bush made false statements, they just say he did not read all the intelligence. That means if O'Reilly ever does report this story he can not argue Bush did not make false statements, because right here we have the White House Press Secretary admitting Bush made false statements, which is the polite way of admitting he lied to the American peole, and the world.
In fact, Bush is lying again. As the report notes, the intelligence reports did contradict the administration's hawkish statements. In fact, the National Intelligence Estimate of 2002, which the White House used to make the case for war, also included a "clear dissenting views" section:
The Estimate itself expressed the majority view that the program was being reconstituted, but included clear dissenting views from the State Department's Buerau of Intelligence and Research, which argued that reconstitution was not underway, and the Department of Energy, which argued that aluminum tubes sought by Iraq were probably not intended for a nuclear weapon.
This report destroys Bush's rationale as to why he makes a good wartime leader. In 2007, he said that he is credible as Commander-in-Chief because he "READS" the intelligence:
Q: Can you explain why you believe you're still a credible messenger on the war?"All of the intelligence I looked at...the Congress looked at, said the same thing," Bush said in 2004. Unfortunately, it seems that Bush only selectively "LOOKED AT" the intelligence.
BUSH: I'm credible because I read the intelligence, David.
The Senate report shows that what the Bush administration did was ignore all the dissenting views in the intelligence reports, and they only told the American people about the views in the intelligence that agreed with their agenda to invade Iraq. It shows that they mislead (lied) to the American people on purpose. This was propaganda, they knew that dissenting views were in the intelligence reports, they just never told anyone about them, and only reported the views in the intelligence that agreed with their lies.
And yet Bill O'Reilly, who has the #1 show in all of cable news, never says a word about any of it. Then he claims to be an Independent, fair and balanced journalist, with a no spin zone, who is fair to both sides. While spinning, and lying, and covering up for the Bush administration. A real journalist would have covered this story, and done at least 20 minutes on it, if not 30 minutes. O'Reilly did nothing, zero, not a word, he never even mentioned the story, not even to claim it was all BS, like most Republicans are doing, nada, not a word.
And this guy (Billy) has the nerve to say other journalists are dishonest. When O'Reilly is the most dishonest and biased so-called journalist in America, if not the planet. He should be mad that the Bush administration lied us into a war, instead he ignores all the stories that prove it, and helps the Bush administration spin it and cover it up by ignoring it. This is 100% conclusive proof that O'Reilly is a biased right-wing spin doctor, otherwise he would report the truth about Bush, and report this story.
Senate Intelligence Report Proves O'Reilly Lied
- 6-5-08 -- During the McClellan interview O'Reilly said two things that the recently released Senate Intelligence Report proves he was wrong about. O'Reilly told McClellan that everyone said Saddam had WMD's, The NY Times, The British Government, Bill Clinton, everyone, and that the Bush administration did not use propaganda to sell the war.
The Senate Intelligence Report released today (on June 5, 2008) shows that O'Reilly was lying. It says that some intelligence agencies did not think Saddam had WMD's, and it also says that the Bush administration did use propaganda to sell the war.
And btw John McCain is telling the same lies O'Reilly is, just last week McCain said he supported the Iraq war, because he believed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction as did every intelligence agency in the world and every assessment. So Bill O'Reilly and John McCain are both spreading these lies.
Here are the actual quotes from the report that prove they are both liars.
Press Release of Intelligence Committee
Senate Intelligence Committee Unveils Final Phase II Reports on Prewar Iraq Intelligence
Bipartisan Reports Detail Administration Misstatements on Prewar Iraq Intelligence, and Inappropriate Intelligence Activities by Pentagon Policy Office
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Washington, DC -- The Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, John D. Jay Rockefeller IV, and a bipartisan majority of the Committee (10-5), today unveiled the final two sections of its Phase II report on prewar intelligence. The first report details Administration prewar statements that, on numerous occasions, misrepresented the intelligence and the threat from Iraq. The second report details inappropriate, sensitive intelligence activities conducted by the DoD's Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, without the knowledge of the Intelligence Community or the State Department.
"Before taking the country to war, this Administration owed it to the American people to give them a 100 percent accurate picture of the threat we faced. Unfortunately, our Committee has concluded that the Administration made significant claims that were not supported by the intelligence," Rockefeller said. "In making the case for war, the Administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent. As a result, the American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than actually existed."
"The Bush Administration was fixated on Iraq, and used the 9/11 attacks by al Qa'ida as justification for overthrowing Saddam Hussein. To accomplish this, top Administration officials made repeated statements that falsely linked Iraq and al Qa'ida as a single threat and insinuated that Iraq played a role in 9/11. Sadly, the Bush Administration led the nation into war under false pretenses.
"There is no question we all relied on flawed intelligence. But, there is a fundamental difference between relying on incorrect intelligence and deliberately painting a picture to the American people that you know is not fully accurate."
"These reports represent the final chapter in our oversight of prewar intelligence. They complete the story of mistakes and failures - both by the Intelligence Community and the Administration - in the lead up to the war. Fundamentally, these reports are about transparency and holding our government accountable, and making sure these mistakes never happen again," Rockefeller added.
The Committee's report cites several conclusions in which the Administration's public statements were NOT supported by the intelligence. They include:
-- Statements and implications by the President and Secretary of State suggesting that Iraq and al-Qa'ida had a partnership, or that Iraq had provided al-Qa'ida with weapons training, were not substantiated by the intelligence.
-- Statements by the President and the Vice President indicating that Saddam Hussein was prepared to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups for attacks against the United States were contradicted by available intelligence information.
-- Statements by President Bush and Vice President Cheney regarding the postwar situation in Iraq, in terms of the political, security, and economic, did not reflect the concerns and uncertainties expressed in the intelligence products.
-- Statements by the President and Vice President prior to the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq's chemical weapons production capability and activities did not reflect the intelligence community's uncertainties as to whether such production was ongoing.
-- The Secretary of Defense's statement that the Iraqi government operated underground WMD facilities that were not vulnerable to conventional airstrikes because they were underground and deeply buried was not substantiated by available intelligence information.
-- The Intelligence Community did not confirm that Muhammad Atta met an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 as the Vice President Cheney repeatedly claimed.
Read The Full Press Release Here:
Separately, in early 2007, the Pentagon Inspector General released its own report on the intelligence activities conducted by the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy and also concluded that those activities were inappropriate.
O'Reilly Presidential Candidate Pastor Bias Exposed
- 6-4-08 -- John McCain spent a year seeking the endorsment of Pastor John Hagee, then on 2-27-08 Hagee endorsed McCain. Then on the May 30, 2008 O'Reilly Factor, Billy discussed controversial supporters of John McCain and Barack Obama, and claimed that "the Pastor John Hagee thing isn't going to take off because there's no tape on Hagee." Hagee withdrew his endorsement of McCain after McCain recently rejected it following the revelation of comments Hagee made in the late 1990s about Adolf Hitler.
Contrary to O'Reilly's claim, there is audio and videotape of several of Hagee's comments. So O'Reilly is lying when he says there are no tapes of Hagee.
While O'Reilly discussed Hagee on the May 30 edition of The O'Reilly Factor and asked McCain about Hagee during their interview on the May 8 edition of the program, Hagee had been mentioned on only one previous show since his endorsement of McCain on February 27. During that broadcast, on March 14, it was Fox News anchor Geraldo Rivera -- not O'Reilly -- who brought up Hagee. Discussing Obama's former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Rivera stated of Obama, "He's not the first candidate, in fairness ... to be burned by a religious endorsement, like Hagee." O'Reilly did not respond to Rivera's mention of Hagee.
A Nexis search of O'Reilly Factor transcripts between February 27 and June 2 produced only three broadcasts on which Hagee was mentioned. A similar search for Pastor Rod Parsley yielded zero results. Parsley, a senior pastor of the World Harvest Church in Columbus, Ohio -- whose endorsement McCain accepted on February 26, but then rejected on May 22 -- has been widely criticized for comments about Islam.
By contrast, a Nexis search of broadcasts of The O'Reilly Factor between February 27 and June 2, found that Pastor Wright was prominently discussed and/or mentioned in the context of Obama's presidential campaign on at least 37 editions of the program, often during multiple segments of the same edition, so it was way more than 37 times. Because during that time frame multiple segments on some shows were about Obama's Pastor. Some shows had 4 or 5 segments devoted to the Pastor Wright story, sometimes the entire show was about Pastor Wright, so it was covered way more than 37 times.
It proves how biased O'Reilly is in covering the Pastors for Obama and McCain. Hagee had only been mentioned three times on the factor, and one mention was by Geraldo, not one mention of Parsley, none, by anyone. While during the same time period Pastor Wright was mentioned on 37 different shows, with multiple segments about Wright on some shows, so it was way more than 37 mentions. Not to mention the lie from O'Reilly that no tapes are out on Hagee, when there are multiple tapes, and some video on him.
O'Reilly Still Lying About Ratings For Network News
- 6-4-08 -- On the Monday night Factor O'Reilly once again lied about the ratings for NBC and ABC news. He said that ABC news beat NBC in the ratings because the people are turning NBC off, because they have moved to the left. Nothing could be further from the truth, and O'Reilly is a flat out liar. This is all (childish) revenge against Keith Olbermann, because Keith exposes the bias, the spin, the lies, the hypocrisy, and the double standards from O'Reilly, and names him worst person in the world almost every night.
So to get revenge O'Reilly has started a campaign of lies against NBC, even though Keith is on MSNBC, and O'Reilly is such a coward he wont even mention his name. He just says that guy at NBC, or the people at NBC, when it's Keith Olbermann, not anyone at NBC. O'Reilly is in a war with Keith Olbermann, except he never says a word about Keith, because everything Keith says about him is true, so he can't attack Keith, because he is telling the truth about O'Reilly.
What Keith does is read from a Factor transcript, or play the video clip, so it's using O'Reilly's own words, either in print, or video. O'Reilly can not attack him for it, because he knows it's true. So he attacks NBC news as a whole to get revenge for what Keith is doing to him. And he also avoids saying Olbermann's name because he does not want to give him any publicity, which could improve his ratings, just as he never mentions this website on the Factor either.
What O'Reilly does is wait for ABC news to beat NBC news in the ratings for one week. Then he states that ABC news is beating NBC because they have moved left and their viewers are leaving for ABC. What he does is called cherry picking, he cherry picks the ratings for a one week period when ABC barely beat NBC in the ratings. Then he claims ABC is getting higher ratings because NBC has moved left and their viewers are leaving.
It's all lies folks, here is the truth, the cold hard facts. For the 2008 calendar year, NBC has won in Total Viewers 15 weeks, compared to five for ABC (with one tie).
Nightly News Executive Producer Alexandra Wallace said this:
"We are certainly not on cruise control, We spend a lot of time thinking about what we want to put in our 22 minutes, so in that regard I think competition is good. I want to win."In 2008, NBC news with Brian Williams has been #1 in total viewers, for 15 out of 20 weeks, Yet O'Reilly claims ABC news is winning, even though they have lost 15 out of 20 weeks. It's ridiculous, and just more proof that O'Reilly will lie to get revenge on Keith Olbermann. It also shows that nothing O'Reilly says can be trusted to be true, because if he will lie about this, he will lie about anything.
"I don't dispute its a close race, but we are proud of what we do every night. I feel like the tide has turned in our direction, and we certainly are winning most weeks," says Wallace.
ABC news with Charles Gibson beats NBC news with Brian Williams about one week out of five, and when they do win it's just barely, sometimes less than one week out of five, sometimes NBC will win 8 to 10 weeks in a row. But when ABC does beat NBC for one week, O'Reilly pulls out the ABC is winning because NBC moved left garbage. It's all lies, NBC is winning almost every week, 15 out of 20 weeks this year.
Notice that O'Reilly never reports the network news ratings for the five to 10 weeks in a row when NBC beats ABC, he only reports on the network news ratings in the one week when ABC wins that week. That is what you call bias, and dishonest reporting. It's called cherry picking the ratings to fit your agenda, and the agenda from O'Reilly is to make NBC look bad, as revenge against Keith Olbermann for doing nothing more than telling the truth about him.
O'Reilly's McClellan Interview Was a Biased And Partisan Joke
- 6-2-08 -- All Billy did was sit there for 30 minutes and tell McClellan that everything in the book is just his opinion. And then disagree with everything he said, when he let him talk anyway, which was not much.
O'Reilly never said a word about Bush admitting to McClellan that he authorized the leak of the NIE report to Scooter Libby, not a word, and that was not just his opinion, it's a fact. O'Reilly ignored all the facts in the book, and just hammered McClellan non-stop so he could barely get a word in.
It was basically a hit job on McClellan, O'Reilly tried to imply everything in the book is just opinion, that's an attempt to discredit him. Now the right-wingers will quote O'Reilly from his interview, and claim everything O'Reilly said was right, when it was all bull.
O'Reilly said the book covered three things, the Iraq war, Valerie Plame, and Katrina. But he forgot to mention it also covers the leak of the NIE report by President Bush. Funny how O'Reilly never said a word about that, because that is a fact. And because it makes Bush look bad, especially after he said leaks will not be tolerated. And Bush Sr. said leaks are treason.
Bush Jr. said anyone who leaks will be fired, so he should have fired himself. But O'Reilly never said a word about any of that. Billy spent the whole 30 minutes doing a partisan spin job on the book, and barely let McClellan talk.
It was more of a speech, or a lecture, or both, then it was an interview. Every time McClellan tried to explain what actually happened O'Reilly would cut him off, or just talk over him. Then end that line of questioning and move on to spin another issue in the book.
O'Reilly would take an issue in the book, then put out his spin on what McClelan wrote, then ask McClellan if that is right. Then McClellan would say no that's not right, and disagree with O'Reilly, then he would start to explain the truth, but before he could do that O'Reilly would either talk over him, or just cut him off totally.
Then change the subject and move on to spin another issue in the book. And the whole 30 minute interview went just like that. And I bet O'Reilly is really proud of what he did, when it was one of the worst interviews I have ever seen. When you interview someone you are supposed to let them talk, O'Reilly just told him his opinion of the book, and never let McClellan have the time to explain how he was wrong.
It looks to me like O'Reilly just put him on the show to smear him, try to discredit him, and browbeat him, so his right-wing viewers could see McClellan attacked. Like throwing red meat to the lions, it was all a PR stunt to feed some meat to his viewers, and to get ratings.
If you wanna see a good interview of McClellan by a real journalist, go read the transcript that Keith Olbermann did on last thursdays Countdown, or read the transcript from tonight's hardball with Chris Matthews. He had McClellan on tonight and it was a pretty good interview, even though Matthews did cut him off a few times, it was nowhere near what O'Reilly did. And they actually let McClellan talk, unlike O'Reilly, who barely let him get a word in.
O'Reilly Claims There is Nothing in The McClellan Book
- 6-1-08 -- O'Reilly claims to be a non-partisan, fair and balanced Independent Journalist, who is fair to both sides, those are his words, and he has said them many many times. Then after the McClellan book comes out he says the book is ridiculous, he calls McClellan a Judas, and a weasel. And basically trashes the book, parrots the Republican talking points, and uses nothing but right-wing spin doctors to trash McClellan's book for 2 days. Then he puts Karl (the king of right-wing spin) Rove on the Factor and gives him a full 30 minutes to spin everything in the book. With nobody to give the counterpoint, ever.
And that's a non-partisan, fair and balanced, Independent analysis of McClellan, and the book, how? Then O'Reilly told Bernie and Jane that the book is ridiculous, that there is no headline in the book, and that there is nothing in the book. Then why does Congress want McClellan to testify about what is in the book?
If there is nothing in the book why is every news show in America trying to get McClellan on their show to interview him, including BILL O'REILLY.
If there is nothing in the book why is the White House doing a smear campaign on McClellan, if there was nothing in the book they would not be so mad, and they would not be trying to smear him and ruin his credibility.
Here is a partial list of things that are reported in the book, very important things, and things that O'Reilly has never reported. And they are being reported by the man who was there, the man who saw it happen, not some liberal journalist, he was the Presidents Press Secretary, so he saw it first hand.
1) When asked by Keith Olbermann if he ever lied as White House press secretary, he said yes. He admits to lying to the American people about Karl Rove and Scooter Libby being involved in the Valerie Plame leak scandal. Karl and Scooter both lied to him, and he passed that info on to the American people. The news here is that Rove and Scooter lied about leaking a CIA agents name, then allowed McClellan to lie to the American people about it. At the time O'Reilly reported that Rove and Libby were not involved, and used the McClellan statement as proof. When we now know they were involved, and McClellan was lying. Yet O'Reilly claims there is nothing in the book.And that is just a partial list of what is in the book, yet O'Reilly claims there is nothing in the book, and that it's just ridiculous. And that's, fair and balanced, non-partisan Independent Journalism from O'Reilly?
2) After the 9/11 terrorist attacks Bush and his administration started their war on terror. They tried to link the 9/11 attacks to Saddam to drum up support for an invasion of Iraq. This started on 9/12, which is what liberals have been saying for years, and O'Reilly has been saying it's all a lie to hurt Bush. But McClellan confirms that the liberals were right, that on 9/12 Bush and his administration wanted to use the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to invade Iraq, which is exactly what they did. McClellan admits the Bush administration used the 9/11 attack to advance their Iraq invasion policy, even though we now know Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 terrosist attack. Yet O'Reilly claims there is nothing in the book.
3) McClellan admits that President Bush told him he authorized the secret leaking of the classified National Intelligence Estimate. Even after Bush had spoke out about leaks of secret information, and said that anyone who leaked anything will be fired. The President told the American people that he is 100% against any leaks, and that anyone who is caught leaking information to the press will be fired. Then he authorized the leak of the secret NIE report, so that information could be used to out a CIA agent, and to smear Joe Wilson as revenge for telling the truth about their yellowcake in Niger lies, the lies they later admitted were not true. McClellan said that after Bush told him he authorized the leak of the secret and classified NIE report, is when he decided he would resign. Yet O'Reilly claims there is nothing in the book. I would say that when a President of the United States authorizes a leak of a secret and classified NIE report to get political revenge by outing the guys CIA agent wife, that's something, if not treason.
4) McClellan said he took the press secretary job very much believing that the president was somewhat committed to being a bipartisan leader and that he was going to reach across the aisle and that he was going to change the way things worked in Washington, and that he had hopes Bush would be able to do that. He said this:
"I was deputy press secretary during the buildup to the war. Like a lot of Americans, I wasn't certain about the rush to war, that it was the right thing to do. From a moral standpoint, I believe we should not be going to war unless it is absolutely necessary. And we now know that it was not absolutely necessary with regards to Iraq. It was not the grave and gathering danger that we portrayed it as." Yet O'Reilly claims there is nothing in the book.
5) O'Reilly and his Republican friends quote what the White House is saying about the book, and all the stooges they sent out to spin what's in the book, but they never quote what Mike Turk says about the book and the reaction to it. He said this:
The former e-campaign director for President Bush's 2004 reelection campaign, Mike Turk, e-mailed TheHuffingtonPost.com to say Scott McClellan is, quote, "getting savaged for saying what everyone knows to be true."
Adding, "People had high hopes for President Bush to bring America together after his election and after the attacks on 9/11. They felt disillusioned by the administration's adoption of the 'win at all costs' partisan mentality in this town. I think the bigger point of Scott's book comes from the lessons he learned while playing a part in the permanent campaign. It's an exploration of how that mind-set can lead to some really bad choices."
It's funny how O'Reilly never reported what Mike Turk said, and how he only reports what the Bush spin doctors are saying. Then claims there is nothing in the book.
Bill O'Reilly also claims he is a respectful and trusted news analyst, who never calls anyone names or personally attacks them. Then he calls McClellan a Judas and a weasel, for doing nothing more than writing a book with the truth about the Bush administration. That's not respectful, it's name calling, and a personal attack.
Critics of Scott McClellan (including Bill O'Reilly) claim McClellan does not know what he is talking about because he was out of the loop. These are Republican talking points from the White House, they are meant to discredit McClellan by claiming he was out of the loop, but those talking points are lies. And O'Reilly parrots those talking points word for word, like a good little Republican.
McClellan said that he only writes in the book about things he had direct knowledge about. When asked questions about things he does not know about, he says he can not talk about it because he has no direct knowledge about that issue. So everything in the book, is what he had direct knowledge about. That means when you hear O'Reilly, Rove, Hannity, Bartlett, Fleischer, etc. say McClellan has no idea what he's talking about because he was out of the loop, remember this, they are LYING to you.