Bill O’Reilly Dragged His Wife Down The Stairs

Quote

According to a source familiar with the facts of the case, a court-appointed forensic examiner testified at a closed hearing that O’Reilly’s daughter claimed to have witnessed her father dragging McPhilmy down a staircase by her neck, apparently unaware that the daughter was watching. The precise date of the alleged incident is unclear, but appears to have occurred before the couple separated in 2010. The same source indicated that the daughter, who is 16 years old, told the forensic examiner about the incident within the past year.

O’Reilly claimed in August: “The reason there is so much violence and chaos in the black precincts is the disintegration of the African-American family.”

The article is a great read as it talks about a couple of other things old Billo did to his wife.

Linky
My favorite is when he tried to get his ex excommunicated from the Catholic Church.
If ya can't trust "gawker" as a reliable source, who can ya trust? HAHA

In all seriousness, if he did do something like that, appropriate charges should be filed.
Before 2010? Was it 2003,4,5,6,7,8,9? I once saw Frankenstein under my bed as a 7 year old. Swear to God! or to a certified divorce atty. appointed Forensic Examiner!

This reminds me of when Barack Obama was running for Senator and fought to unseal the divorce records of his opponent, Jack Ryan. There were allegations in the divorce that Jack took his wife to sex clubs, but never any allegations that either slept with anyone else. The Ryan's both fought to keep the records sealed as they did not want their children to know everything that was discussed in court related to their divorce. But, Obama prevailed and the information was released and Jack Ryan dropped out of the race.

There are reasons why divorce records are sealed as allegations can be made without any proof. If these are then released, reputations can be harmed forever without proof. I find it ironic, that O'reilly and Ryan divorce records can be released to the public, but not President Obama's school records or our Secretary of State emails.



Obama wins Senate seat releasing opponent's divorce records
Quote

Originally posted by: jphelan
If these are then released, reputations can be harmed forever without proof.


Kinda like when people make up financial statistics about Bill Clinton's charity.
Hmmm. What the Clinton Foundation claims and what the tax returns show, are two completely separate things. Are you suggesting that the tax returns are wrong, because God forbid that the Clintons would ever lie?
Quote

Originally posted by: jphelan
This reminds me of when Barack Obama was running for Senator and fought to unseal the divorce records of his opponent, Jack Ryan. There were allegations in the divorce that Jack took his wife to sex clubs, but never any allegations that either slept with anyone else. The Ryan's both fought to keep the records sealed as they did not want their children to know everything that was discussed in court related to their divorce. But, Obama prevailed and the information was released and Jack Ryan dropped out of the race.

There are reasons why divorce records are sealed as allegations can be made without any proof. If these are then released, reputations can be harmed forever without proof. I find it ironic, that O'reilly and Ryan divorce records can be released to the public, but not President Obama's school records or our Secretary of State emails.



Obama wins Senate seat releasing opponent's divorce records
The word "Obama" doesn't even appear in the article you linked to. But I guess that's just you being you.

Quote

Originally posted by: Roulette Man
Hmmm. What the Clinton Foundation claims and what the tax returns show, are two completely separate things. Are you suggesting that the tax returns are wrong, because God forbid that the Clintons would ever lie?


I understand the tax returns are wrong and are being refiled. If someone on these boards stated that fact then their commentary would be accurate.

But the criticism on these boards was something else. People here suggested less than 15% of money donated to the charity was going to the actual charity. That was a smearing lie wasn't it?



Apologizing for the Clintons is a new low.
Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now