Referring to the last time Dan Rather made assertions without documentation, Bill O'Reilly said Dan Rather should produce proof after claiming that Fox News got "talking points" from the White House.
Said Rather on HDnet:
I think it's fair to say, Bill, in fact I know it is, that FOX News operates in at least a somewhat different way than every other news organization that I know, that they have their "talking points," in which somebody in the hierarchy, whether this is Roger Ailes who runs the place or not, we know that they get talking points from the White House. And they can say well, we don't always take those talking points, but I think it's pretty clear that they had wished the election had gone another way.O'Reilly said he had previously defended Rather during the Memogate scandal, but once again it appears he has no proof for his assertions.
Mr. Rather's assertions are nonsense, untrue, seriously dopey. I've been here from the beginning, and have never seen a White House "talking points." — And I don't know anyone else who's seen one either.I asked senior management if they have ever seen a White House talking points. No one had.
So we called Dan Rather to ask for some "documentation." He's on the road, but said he'd come on “The Factor” next week to explain. Can't wait.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓As you may remember, I defended Rather in the Bush National Guard debacle. I said Rather did not intentionally put on a bogus story. He just didn't check it out, he was too anxious for the story to be true.
Now many of you criticized me for that defense, but I'm a fact-based guy. And there's no evidence Dan Rather fabricated anything. It was sloppy reporting that did him in.
But now the fabrication word is in play again. If Dan Rather has evidence of White House dictums coming to FOX News employees, he needs to display that evidence. We are awaiting his appearance. We'll let you know when it is.
—Matthew Sheffield is the creator of NewsBusters and its Executive Editor.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Good. The moonbats in my fa
December 6, 2006 - 14:05 ET by CrimsonfistedGood. The moonbats in my family repeat that canard over and over and over. Fox gets its memo blah blah blah. Although Bill O'Reilly gets no respect from them, at least proof would be nice. I would feel vindicated in my own home.
Rather & O'Reilly
December 6, 2006 - 14:12 ET by PeterDKeep in mind Rather and O'Reilly have the same agent, and that was perceived at the time as to why Bill was not as hard on Rather as others during Rather's Memogate. I doubt they will have an explosive confrontation.
The dog pees and the caravan tips over
(not a proverb)
Dan Rather has an "Agent"
December 6, 2006 - 16:05 ET by exLibI can see that BOR has an agent as he bills himself as an entertainer and NOT a journalist although he does journalistic type work.
But DAN RATHER? He is supposedly a "Calls it like he sees it" journalist with no partisan ties and he needs an agent.
The thing that always puzzles
December 6, 2006 - 16:35 ET by paperheadThe thing that always puzzles me about liberals is that they don't see themselves as liberal. Why is that? A couple of weeks ago Rather was raised that question in an interview with People. He flat out denied any bias. Dan, did you suddenly forget that you tried to throw the 2004 presidential election with phony documents and you are guilty as charged? I doubt that Dan will actually go on the factor, but if he does, it should make for some good viewing.
Dan Rather not biased? Right.
December 6, 2006 - 17:00 ET by Clear thinkerDan Rather not biased? Right.... and I have a full head of hair : (
People who eat green onions a
December 6, 2006 - 21:39 ET by SemperrightPeople who eat green onions at taco bell have better, more intelligent things coming out of them then Dan Rather.
Let's ask Dan Rather..
December 6, 2006 - 16:50 ET by Gary HallWhile you got him [Rather] on the air, Bill, how about asking him about the MSM's use of what appears to be the Democrat Party "talking points?"
talking points
December 6, 2006 - 17:07 ET by Sugar LandActually, any network or commentator that doesn't follow the liberal/Dim-o-crat talking points is accused of following the White House's. The MSM wonders why wouldn't you build every store around the core belief that Bush is evil? All of their friends believe it to be so... so it must be. Oh, that evil, evil Fox News going off the reservation like that.
S Land
December 6, 2006 - 17:24 ET by Gary HallBingo!
Rather
December 6, 2006 - 17:30 ET by pocomocoWhen Rather speaks, in his insufferable caveat way, doesn't he remind you of Hank Kimble, the incompetent agricultural agent, on Green Acres?
Dan Rather
December 6, 2006 - 21:31 ET by SanityClauseYou are right!
I had not noticed the similarity before, but now that you point it out--wow. With i network (formerly PAX) rerunning Green Acres, even the youngsters of today can get a chuckle.
Back on the White House talking points--I think the phrase "talking points" was first used to refer to the observation that Eleanor Clift, the uberliberal on the McLaughlin group, taped Friday afternoons, would shoehorn in certain phrases even when pretty far off topic. These phrases would then also be spoken by others on the Sunday morning political talk shows. The word "gravitas" to describe GWB's supposed lack of presence was the most notorious example.
Finally on Dan Rather in HD: Why would anyone want to see him in high definition? Sports, of course. Nature shows, sure. Travelogs, yes. A geriatric newscaster--ya kiddin me??