DISQUS

DISQUS Hello! MsUnderestimated is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.

Community Page

MsUnderestimated

Conservative political video blogger, proud infidel, and admirer or our men & women in uniform.
Jump to original thread »
Author

MsUnderestimated » Blog Archive » Laura In for Bill O’Reilly Tonight on O.J.’s Deal (VIDEO)

Started by MsUnderestimated · 10 months ago

No excerpt available. Jump to website »

1 comment

  • orion

    2 years ago

    Yeah, Laura and Bill had quite the self congratulatory love fest this week, Ok, ok, alright, alright..?

    Apparently OJ did get a $3Mil upfront payment for this travesty and it was protected so the Goldman's can''t touch it.

    Right-wing media mogul Rupert Murdoch has portrayed his decision to cancel the O.J. Simpson book and interview as a principled stand, calling it an “ill-considered project.” But new details seriously undermine that claim.

    An executive from Murdoch’s News Corporation told the New York Times that the rights to the Simpson’s book “could still be sold to another publisher,” meaning that Murdoch would still profit from the project. And this morning on NBC’s Today Show, Nicole Brown Simpson’s sister Denise accused News Corp. of trying to buy her family’s silence for “millions of dollars.”

    Video: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/21/brown-...or...

    And....
    In one of the most bizarre and delusional segments I've ever seen on FOX News, Laura Ingraham and a vacationing Bill O'Reilly (the Caribbean, perhaps?) claimed victory last night over the cancellation of the OJ Simpson special.

    This is unequivocally the mother of all straw-men: In O'Reilly's mind, News Corp and FOX broadcasting — who he reiterated have "nothing to do with FOX News" (which is true as long as you don't count the whole corporate ownership and Roger Ailes connection nonsense; not to mention the fact that HarperCollins is also owned by News Corp.) — had the audacity…

    video: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/11/21/t...ha...
    reply

Add New Comment

Returning? Login