Connect with us

Bill O’Reilly: Cell Phone Armed Occupy Wall Street Anarchist Attacked Me



Apparently, Bill O’Reilly’s “no spin zone” is reserved for news not related to Bill O’Reilly, because I’m pretty nauseous after watching the conservative Fox News pundit spin and spin and spin this story of why he’s not currently behind bars after attacking a man who merely asked him a question.

As you know, Wednesday night Bill O’Reilly was walking out of a hotel when Wisconsin community organizer Brendan Lane approached O’Reilly and asked him if he had attended the Gingrich fundraiser the twas being held at the same hotel. Lane asked twice, and after the second time, O’Reilly apparently took his open umbrella and shoved it into Lane, disrupting the cell phone video and setting Lane off-balance. Watch the video — you decide. O’Reilly, not satisfied, then said, “Hey, sorry about that.” You know, the way high school bullies trip you and then say, “Hey, sorry about that.”

Still not satisfied, O’Reilly then walked over to a police officer and said he wanted to press charges against Lane.

The nerve!

But wait, there’s more!

O’Reilly then went on his Fox News show last night and spun this story round like a record baby right round round round.

I mean, get this:

Bill O’Reilly calls the event, in which he attacks Brendan Lane, “a close encounter with an Occupy protestor.” Really? O’Reilly says the person who appeared to be a police officer was a Secret Service agent. OK. It’s D.C., whatever.

Then he says of Branden Lane, “I felt the guy was out of control.” O’Reilly also says Branden Lane was armed — “armed with a cell phone camera.” Do you believe this? What did O’Reilly think Lane was going to do? Call him?

Gotta love how O’Reilly has to make this an attack not only on him, but how he attacks the Occupy Movement.

O’Reilly then lies and says, “I turned to shield myself, and my assistant, with an umbrella.” Apparently “shielding” includes pushing an umbrella into someone.

Then — get this — O’Reilly, a small government conservative, says he’s angry “and there ought to be a law,” to protect him from “attacks” like this.


As Keith Olbermann pointed out, O’Reilly did not show his viewers the video — because it proves he’s not telling the truth.

“I think I was definitely surprised and I think you can hear that in the video,” Lane tells Olbermann. “I’m like ‘Mr. O’Reilly why are you doing this to me? Why are you attacking me with your umbrella?’ I was shocked. I was telling someone earlier it’s not every day you meet Bill O’Reilly, and it’s not every day you get attacked by an umbrella.”

“I was completely shocked with the situation,” Lane adds. “You would think that somebody who’s in the public spotlight just like he is just like you are would not react that way. Like you said people come up to you all the time and ask to take your picture or they video you, and even if they don’t agree with you, you’re a decent human being.

“You don’t attack them then try to accuse them of attacking them. Like I said it’s another example of the type of person Bill O’Reilly is. He’s main informant of the one percent, and it’s just sad. People like him need to be checked, and I’m glad we had the opportunity to do that.”

Branden Lane told Keith Olbermann that O’Reilly represents the one percent, and I agree.

The lying one percent.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.


Trump Could Face 20 Years Behind Bars for ‘Serious Felonies’ at Mar-a-Lago: Legal Analyst



A legal analyst for ABC News pointed out that former President Donald Trump is potentially facing 20 years in prison for “serious felonies” after the search of his Mar-a-Lago home.

Dan Abrams told ABC host Jonathan Karl that the Department of Justice could indict Trump for multiple crimes after finding classified documents during the search.

“They’re very serious,” Abrams said of the charges. “And the one that’s being talked about most is this espionage act because it has the word espionage in it. But the truth is that when it comes to potential criminal sentences, the obstruction of justice statute is the one with the most potential prison time.”

“There you’re talking about up to 20 years behind bars,” he added. “So these are not sort of minor crimes we’re talking about here. We’re talking about the potential for serious felonies with regard to all three of the crimes being investigated.”

But Abrams threw cold water on the idea that a Trump prosecution would be easy.

“The fundamental question is going to be intentionality,” he opined. “How much do they believe that they did this on purpose? Were they intentionally ignoring subpoenas? Were they literally destroying documents?”

Watch the video below from ABC.


Continue Reading


New Analysis Breaks Down GOP’s Flawed Response to the Mar-a-Lago Search



Republican lawmakers are reportedly at an impasse on whether or not they should be defending former President Donald Trump amid his latest flurry of legal woes. The party is also facing challenges with navigating some lawmakers’ critical assessments of law enforcement over the Trump investigation.

A new analysis is breaking down Republicans’ seemingly flawed response and how it underscores the cracks in the political party’s foundation.

According to Axios, the analysis comes shortly after documents released on Friday, August 12, offered details about the search which reportedly involved “highly classified materials believed stored in violation of the law at the ex-president’s private residence.”

Prior to the release of those documents, Republicans serving on the House Intelligence Committee participated in a press conference where they continued to criticize the investigation, describing it as being politically motivated.

Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) scrutinized the investigation deeming it a “complete abuse” of authority as she suggested it was being conducted because the former president is considered to be “Joe Biden’s most likeliest political opponent in 2024.”

However, some Republicans on the committee have offered a more leveled approach to the situation. Per The New York Times, “Trump allies have told top Republicans to tone down their criticism of the Justice Department ‘because it is possible that more damaging information related to the search will become public.'”

“It’s incumbent upon everybody to act in a way that’s becoming of the office they hold,” said Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), a former FBI agent, “And that’s not casting judgment on anything until you know all the facts.”

Others have attempted to defend the former president. Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) said, “You can say nuclear weapons, but there are things that are highly, highly classified, there are things that are not extremely classified.”

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) is now selling merchandise on her website in support of a call to “defund the FBI” while Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) tweeted, “I will support a complete dismantling and elimination of the democrat brown shirts known as the FBI.”


Image: Elise Stefanik with Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago via Facebook

Continue Reading


Trump Makes False Claims About Classified Documents – And Obama



Donald Trump is responding to news reports he is under FBI investigation for actions covered by the Espionage Act by making apparently false claims about his mishandling of classified documents and about former President Barack Obama.

“Number one, it was all declassified,” Trump says in a post on his Truth Social site, a claim legal experts say is incorrect. For any president to declassify documents, experts say, there is a process that involves actions being taken on each individual document. They also say the president does not have legal authority to declassify documents related to nuclear weapons.

“Number two,” Trump continues, “they didn’t need to ‘seize’ anything. They could have had it anytime they wanted without playing politics and breaking into Mar-a-Lago. It was in secured storage, with an additional lock put on as per their request.”

READ MORE: FBI Agents Searched Mar-a-Lago for ‘Classified Documents Relating to Nuclear Weapons’: Report

Again, according to reports, that too is false. DOJ issued a subpoena after the National Archives tried to get all the documents back and Trump still did not comply.

“They could have had it anytime they wanted—and that includes LONG ago,” he continues in a separate post on Truth Social. “ALL THEY HAD TO DO WAS ASK.”

Again, multiple reports say they did, numerous times.

READ MORE: DOJ Served Trump With Grand Jury Subpoena for Classified Documents Months Before FBI Raid: Report

None of his responses explain why he had at Mar-a-Lago what we now know were at least 35 cartons – 20 retrieved on Monday and 15 earlier this year – of items including confidential, classified, and top secret documents that were required by law to have been handed over to the National Archives.

“The bigger problem is,” Trump says, “what are they going to do with the 33 million pages of documents, many of which are classified, that President Obama took to Chicago?”

That is also false.

The National Archives on Friday issued a statement after Trump repeatedly spread the false claim that former President Barack Obama had 33 million documents in his possession.

“President Barack Hussein Obama kept 33 million pages of documents, much of them classified. How many of them pertained to nuclear? Word is, lots!” was one of Trump’s false attacks on his Truth Social site.

“The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) assumed exclusive legal and physical custody of Obama Presidential records when President Barack Obama left office in 2017, in accordance with the Presidential Records Act (PRA),” the Archives said in a statement posted to its website Friday.

“NARA moved approximately 30 million pages of unclassified records to a NARA facility in the Chicago area where they are maintained exclusively by NARA,” the Archives added. “Additionally, NARA maintains the classified Obama Presidential records in a NARA facility in the Washington, DC, area. As required by the PRA, former President Obama has no control over where and how NARA stores the Presidential records of his Administration.”

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.