After O'Reilly claims no high-profile conservatives criticized lawyers for defending terrorists, Morris does just that

So there you have it teabaggers, Liz and Morris are nobodies! O'Reilly said it after all and you never question anything coming from that clowns pie hole. On this one I happen to agree.

Bill O'Reilly, will you ever Learn?
On "The Factor" will the Truth ever get its Turn?
You're not half as good as Keith Olbermann, it must really Burn.
Covet your ratings Bill-O, Cause it ain't Journalistic Integrity that allows you to Earn.

Speak truth to power.


Mr. News

Apparently O'Reilly doesn't consider Carlson, Doocy and Kilmeade to be "journalists".

On that, we agree.

Er, is Bill Kristol not a high-profile conservative? Or, for that matter, Liz Cheney, who's on a Sunday talk show practically every other week defending her father's post-fascist ideas of "justice."

Monica Crowley claiming that defense attorneys sympathize with terrorists is exactly the kind of criticism of attorneys that Cheney and Kristol are pushing. Likewise, Andrew McCarthy's bit in the National Review is just as nasty a smear as the "Al-Qaeda Seven" bit. People don't represent terrorist suspects because they're secretly plotting to destroy America; they recognize an America where terrorists don't have a fair trial is no longer America.

Finally, calling Gitmo detainees "jihadists" is vastly misleading: they aren't all guilty of terrorism, and many that are guilty of crimes aren't related to terrorism. There are/were scores of innocent Gitmo detainees that were scooped up simply for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and they deserve their day in court to prove their innocence. The only way this system can work is if EVERYONE is allowed a day in court to try to prove their innocence. This isn't to say that military tribunals are necessarily a bad thing: I think there's a valid case that a civil court technicality could release a dangerous terrorist, whereas a military court could still establish guilt in a way that external observers would find legitimate and fair. But to deny people court at all is totalitarianism, plain and simple.

Face it, Bill: this is pure witch-hunting at its very worst, just like the HUAC-McCarthyite plague which threatened American democracy in the 50's. Your attempt to frame this as a right-versus-left issue, while failing to condemn Cheney and Kristol, makes you part of the problem. Even by your low, low standards, you should be ashamed.

Good lord, the ACLU must make Morris and the other idiots over at Faux News tear their hair out, they represent (defend) neo-nazis, the KKK, Jews, Mormons and a whole host of characters, so that begs the question where do their sympathies really lie?
My guess is with the Constitution and the 6th Amendment, something Liz Cheney and the rest of the neocons are unfamiliar with (they stop reading after the 2nd Amendment)

Billo's been a little peculiar lately. IMO Glenn Beck has shaken things up at FOX a bit and rivalries are now the new order there.

This strikes me as a bit of "score settling" on the part of O'Reilly. I believe I've heard O'Reilly say that Dick Cheney is not crazy about him...so Billo disses his daughter. All the other buffoons who advanced the story that DOJ lawyers were AlQaeda sympathizers...Billo is merely showing them he's superior to them.

I definitely think O'Reilly is purposely dissing some of his colleagues here.

HillBilly talked about journalists at FNC like they actually had some.

Good one, HillBilly. Good one.