Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity Accused of Sexual Misconduct in New Lawsuit

[fredtoast]

(07-22-2020, 09:15 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Despite what many people think, just one unwanted advance is usually not enough to establish a "hostile work environment".

BTW don't go to work, start hitting on all the women, and then tell HR that your internet lawyer said it was okay.

All I am saying is that asking out a co-worker is not automatically "sexual harassment".  That does not mean it is a good idea.  Especially if you are a supervisor.  

[GMDino]

(07-22-2020, 01:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: BTW don't go to work, start hitting on all the women, and then tell HR that your internet lawyer said it was okay.

All I am saying is that asking out a co-worker is not automatically "sexual harassment".  That does not mean it is a good idea.  Especially if you are a supervisor.  

What about if "asking out" isn't "wanna get a drink" but is telling them your wife is out of town and you'd like them to come up to your hotel room where you will be all by yourself? 

[fredtoast]

(07-22-2020, 02:00 PM)GMDino Wrote: What about if "asking out" isn't "wanna get a drink" but is telling them your wife is out of town and you'd like them to come up to your hotel room where you will be all by yourself? 

It's complicated.  Especially because Carlson is a star.  Many people say there are special rules for them.  For example.  .  .   "When you are a star they let you do it.  You can do anything. Grab them by the p***y.  You can do anything."

[GMDino]

(07-22-2020, 02:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It's complicated.  Especially because Carlson is a star.  Many people say there are special rules for them.  For example.  .  .   "When you are a star they let you do it.  You can do anything. Grab them by the p***y.  You can do anything."

Very true.  

[fredtoast]

More stuff I am sure will be coming back up from Carlsons past



https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/12/tucker-carlson-sexist-rants-reveal-an-ugly-truth

Tucker Carlson, the Fox News commentator with a primetime show and a history of vitriolic racist rants, is in the news again after the media watchdog group Media Matters unearthed recordings of him from the mid-aughts, in which Carlson calls into a radio shock jock program to make a series of luridly sexist assertions and racist asides, palling around with a host who goes by the moniker “Bubba the Love Sponge”.

n the recordings, Carlson says women are “like dogs”, claiming: “They’re extremely primitive, they’re basic, they’re not that hard to understand.” He insists that women find misogynist degradation pleasurable and makes sexual, antagonistic comments about women he does and does not like.

He calls Arianna Huffington “a pig”, Justice Elena Kagan “ugly” and “unattractive”, and Martha Stewart’s daughter, TV host Alexis Stewart, “cunty”. He says he “wants to ****” Sarah Palin and called for the elimination of rape shield laws, provisions that make it illegal for defense attorneys in rape cases to bring up an accuser’s sexual history as a way to discredit her. He laughs at a story about a woman being choked and calls Paris Hilton and Britney Spears “the biggest white whores in America”, a phrase that seems to imply that there are other, bigger “whores” who are not white.

What might be more revealing about the recordings are Carlson’s frequent, repeated and apparently unsolicited defenses of Warren Jeffs, the leader of a fundamentalist Mormon sect that practiced polygamy and ritualized child molestation. “I should make the laws around here,” Carlson says when the conversation turns to Jeffs, who recorded himself raping a 12-year-old girl and telling her to “feel the spirit of God”. “Warren Jeffs would be out on the street.” He also suggests that polygamy should be legal, and calls the then-ongoing criminal charges against Jeffs – who is currently serving a life sentence – “bullshit”. Child marriage is different and less severe than stranger rape, Carlson asserts, because “the rapist made a lifelong commitment” to “take care of the person”.

In another exchange, Bubba and his cohost chide Carlson for sending his daughter to a boarding school, saying that she will probably be sexually experimenting there with other girls. “Well when she’s in a dormitory-type setting and these little girls start to experiment around,” Bubba begins. “If it weren’t my daughter I would love that scenario,” Carlson replies. In the same interview, he says that his daughter is 14.

But the best part was that Tucker refused to apologize for those comments. Like Trump, he obviously knew his supporters agreed with him. That is just the way "real men" talk. Check out his response. . . https://twitter.com/tuckercarlson/status/1104926022376583169

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-22-2020, 11:30 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It is not required that every detail is listed in the warrant. The complete evidence often includes hours of testimony from dozens of witnesses. Warrants would be several hundred pages if it was required to include all of that.

 

In fact there are often strategical reasons for not including every single piece of evidence in the warrant. Cases are often settled because the defendant does not want all the details to become public.

I am aware of this and everything you say is true.  What it doesn't explain is the complete lack of detail in the Carlson case, e.g. what was actually said that me is "blatantly obvious" he was hitting on her, as opposed to the Hannity case, in which specific statements were referenced and the other case, that has an immense amount of evidence and detail.

[fredtoast]

(07-22-2020, 02:47 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I am aware of this and everything you say is true.  What it doesn't explain is the complete lack of detail in the Carlson case, e.g. what was actually said that me is "blatantly obvious" he was hitting on her, as opposed to the Hannity case, in which specific statements were referenced and the other case, that has an immense amount of evidence and detail.

Perhaps the exact words Carlson used were so repulsive and offensive that he will settle instead of having them made public.  Sponsors have been bailing on him before all this came out.  Over 50% of his show is paid for by one sponsor,(the "My Pillow" guy who is in love with Trump), and apparently that is unheard of in the industry.

Or maybe he just made some vague comments.
 
I don't know, but just because the exact details are not in the complaint does not mean they don't exist.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-22-2020, 04:48 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Perhaps the exact words Carlson used were so repulsive and offensive that he will settle instead of having them made public.

Unlike the highly palatable details of the Henry case?

 

Quote:Sponsors have been bailing on him before all this came out.  Over 50% of his show is paid for by one sponsor,(the "My Pillow" guy who is in love with Trump), and apparently that is unheard of in the industry.

He has the highest rated show in cable news history, he'll always have sponsors with those types of numbers.

Quote:Or maybe he just made some vague comments.
 
I don't know, but just because the exact details are not in the complaint does not mean they don't exist.

On this we agree.  I just find it odd that you don't see the stark contrast in the level of detail between Carlson's allegation and the other two.  It's glaringly obvious IMO.

[fredtoast]

(07-22-2020, 04:52 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: He has the highest rated show in cable news history, he'll always have sponsors with those types of numbers.

From April 5 2017  https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/tv-ratings-bill-oreilly-audience-grows-scandal-991498

On Tuesday, O'Reilly Factor topped all of cable news with an average 628,000 adults 25-54 (cable news' targeted demo) and 3.76 million viewers. That's an audience increase of 20 percent from last Tuesday.




Trivia question:  How many sponsors did The O'Reilly Factor have two weeks later?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-22-2020, 05:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: From April 5 2017  https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/tv-ratings-bill-oreilly-audience-grows-scandal-991498

On Tuesday, O'Reilly Factor topped all of cable news with an average 628,000 adults 25-54 (cable news' targeted demo) and 3.76 million viewers. That's an audience increase of 20 percent from last Tuesday.




Trivia question:  How many sponsors did The O'Reilly Factor have two weeks later?

Now you're equating Carlson's allegations to the myriad, and actually detailed, allegations against O'Reilly over the course of years?

[fredtoast]

(07-22-2020, 05:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Now you're equating Carlson's allegations to the myriad, and actually detailed, allegations against O'Reilly over the course of years?

No.  Not at all.  I am just pointing out that high ratings don't mean sponsors won't bail when the shit gets too nasty.

If ratings were all that matter then sponsors would not already be abandoning him.

I have a feeling these quotes from back in the day with "Bubba the Love Sponge" are going to resurface.  Combine that with the nasty racists and misogynistic rants of his former lead writer and you have a pretty toxic brew.

[GMDino]

FOX apparently hired investigators to do their own investigation and are starting to shoot holes in some of the "facts" of the case against some of the named Plaintiffs including Hannity and Carlson.  Probably why they do investigations and interviews and such and we don't assume guilt or innocence.

https://www.mediaite.com/news/holes-emerge-in-cathy-areus-lawsuit-against-fox-news-hosts-tucker-carlson-sean-hannity/

Quote:Claim against Sean Hannity

In the lawsuit, Areu claims, she was a “relatively regular” guest on Hannity’s prime-time show until March 8, 2018. “On that day, Mr. Hannity, on set and in front of the entire studio crew – and completely unsolicited – threw $100 on the set desk,” the suit claimed. “He then began calling out to the men in the room and demanding that someone take Ms. Areu out on a date for drinks at Del Friscos. He repeatedly yelled, ‘who wants to take her on a date?’ ‘Take her on a date to Del Friscos.’”

Areu “was completely mortified,” the lawsuit added, “and made clear that she was incredibly uncomfortable with Mr. Hannity’s misogynistic behavior by quietly pleading with one of her friends in the room to accept the money so that the humiliation would end. Thankfully, none of the staff cooperated with Mr. Hannity, even after he repeatedly chided one particular male employee for being ‘afraid to take out a beautiful woman.'”


Emails provided by Fox News and reviewed by Mediaite, appear to show that the male friend Areu referenced actually came to the set that evening at Areu’s invitation.


“Is it ok for me to bring a guest?” Areu apparently wrote in an email to a staffer earlier that day, referring to the guest as “Alex.” She added, “He’s my good luck charm. He does yoga. Very calming. I run. I’m nuts,” before signing the email with a winking face and her name.


The staffer replied: “Haha of course! No problem at all – will add him to the security list,” signing the email with a smiling face.


According to Fox News, which hired an outside firm to investigate Areu’s allegations, Hannity offered Areu and her friend $100 to get drinks next door at Del Friscos after the appearance.


Areu then apparently sent two emails thanking Hannity and his staff. The first, at 10:37 in the evening, said: “Thanks so much for having me on. Way too much fun.”


The second, sent at 6:39 the next morning, included a picture of the martini she said she bought at Del Frisco’s. “Please thank Sean for a fun evening,” Areu wrote. “He shouldn’t have! … but We did exactly as he and Alex’s had bet. Down to the pineapple martini.”
[img=882x1126]https://am12.mediaite.com/med/cnt/uploads/2020/07/Cathy-Areu-Email-2-1.png[/img]
Areu’s lawsuit claimed that she believes the incident resulted in her being barred from future appearances: “After this incident, and Ms. Areu’s failure to ‘play along,’ Ms. Areu was hardly ever, if ever at all, invited back to appear on ‘Hannity’ on Fox News Channel.”

According to Fox News, its records indicate Areu appeared on Hannity a total of nine times between the date of the alleged incident, March 8, 2018, and July 3, 2019. Of that number, Fox said, five appearances took place in the four months directly after the incident. A search by Mediaite confirmed that Areu appeared repeatedly on the show following the alleged incident, both with Hannity and with guest hosts.


The network claimed that on one of those subsequent appearances, Areu thanked Hannity again for the drinks, and he again gave her and the same friend money for another round of drinks.


Claim against Tucker Carlson
Additional inconsistencies involve Areu’s claim that she was harassed during her “final 2018 appearance” on Carlson’s program. “Following the show, Mr. Carlson changed on set into his leather jacket for the annual Christmas party that he told Ms. Areu he would only be attending for approximately 10 minutes,” the suit stated.
Reporters including The Spectator’s Amber Athey quickly noted Areu’s final 2018 appearance with Carlson took place on November 30 of that year, while the network’s annual Christmas party took place on December 10. Areu did not appear on the December 10 episode of Tucker Carlson Tonight. Additionally, she appeared on a December 28 edition of the program, guest-hosted that night by Mark Steyn.


While that final interview was archived on film website IMDB, an attorney for Areu, Michael Willemin, told Mediaite his client had no recollection of it. He also said the Christmas party Areu was referencing must have been a smaller holiday event held for Carlson’s staff rather than the company-wide event.


“The incident with Tucker Carlson actually occurred on Nov. 30, not Dec. 10,” Willemin said. “Ms. Areu misrecollected that the incident occurred in December because it occurred following a winter/Christmas segment. It is entirely possible that she appeared on Dec. 28, although she doesn’t have a specific recollection of that and if she did appear, it was not in Mr. Carlson’s physical presence.”


That claim leads to another issue. “Following the show,” Areu asserts in her lawsuit, “Mr. Carlson, hardly making any effort to hide his intentions, began telling Ms. Areu that he would be alone in New York City that night, and specifically said that he would be staying alone in his hotel room without any wife or kids.”


A source familiar with the event told Mediaite that Carlson’s wife did attend the Tucker Carlson Tonight Christmas party. Fox News also told Mediaite that Carlson hosted the entire party for his show’s staff alongside his wife, who stayed in the hotel with him that evening.


“She didn’t go to the party so she can’t say who was there, but certainly stands by what he told her,” Areu’s attorney said.


Areu’s claim that she was harassed by Carlson also relies on insight into the Fox News host’s frame of mind: “Without question, Mr. Carlson was probing to see whether Ms. Areu was interested in a sexual relationship,” the suit said. Areu’s public comments about Carlson since the alleged incident have also been warm. In one 2019 post on Twitter, Areu wrote that Carlson “has always been polite to me.”


“Ms. Areu awkwardly sidestepped Mr. Carlson’s advances and declined to spend the night at his hotel,” the lawsuit continued. “Mr. Carlson promptly retaliated against Ms. Areu, who was featured on his show only three times in 2019 and has not appeared once in 2020.”

Fox told Mediaite that company records indicate Areu appeared on Carlson’s show four times in the four months following the incident, the same number of times she appeared on the show in the four months preceding it. “There is zero evidence of retaliation,” the network claimed. The network also said there were eyewitnesses to Carlson and Areu’s conversation who would contradict her account.


Claims against Gianno Caldwell, Howard Kurtz
Areu’s lawsuit named several individuals in addition to Hannity and Carlson: MediaBuzz anchor Howard Kurtz; Fox analyst Gianno Caldwell; and former daytime anchor Ed Henry, whom the network fired on July 1 over a sexual misconduct allegation made by another woman.


According to the suit, after seeing a picture of Caldwell with Ann Coulter, Areu requested Caldwell introduce them — only to receive an invitation from Caldwell to have lunch. She said she ignored the message, following up with another request for an introduction. Caldwell responded, she says, by telling her to buy him lunch, what she described as setting a “price to meet Ms. Coulter.”


Fox said in a statement Areu had asked Caldwell “many times for advice on how to obtain a contract like Caldwell’s with Fox News” and that he had assisted her “as a professional courtesy.” The network also quoted texts to Mediaite where Areu allegedly continued texting after Caldwell declined her “aggressive” attempts to obtain Coulter’s contact information, eventually following up in a message to Caldwell, “I am [sic] meet her another way. Or not. It’s all good.”


Finally, Areu said she sought to meet Kurtz to talk about strategies for winning full-time employment at Fox News, and that Kurtz — who lives in Washington, D.C. — offered to meet Areu in his hotel lobby on a day he was in New York City, texting: “I’m just at my hotel making calls. Can you come to the Muse lobby at 7:15?”


Areu said she refused, and countered with a request for Kurtz to have dinner with Areu and her friend. Kurtz declined, and made a further comment that led her to presume he was seeking to meet “only if she were alone and at his hotel for sexual reasons.”


Kurtz, according to Areu’s lawsuit, said “in sum and substance” that she was “the only woman here who won’t come to my hotel room.”


Fox said Kurtz made his availability clear, telling her in an email before the text exchange, “I may just have a little time to chat in the hotel lobby.” When Kurtz declined to attend a dinner with Areu and her friend, Fox said, Areu became particularly aggressive, writing by text message: “What? I’ll be right there. I’m totally available right now!!!!!!” The company said she followed up by emailing Kurtz: “What’s your room number? What name are you under? What’s your cell? I’m coming over. We can do it the easy way, or the hard way.” Kurtz did not reply to those messages.


The issues with Areu’s claims may be a disservice to Areu’s co-plaintiff, Jennifer Eckhart, a former producer who alleges, among other things, that she was violently raped by Ed Henry. Eckhart included in the suit graphic and abusive text messages she apparently received from Henry, who has been fired from the network. Areu also claimed to have received inappropriate texts from the former Fox News anchor. Henry, in a statement issued by his lawyer, claimed his relationship with Eckhart was consensual.


Fox declined to address either woman’s allegations against Henry, and did not specifically challenge those claims in their statements responding to the lawsuit.

The concerns about Areu’s allegations do not necessarily disprove her case, but in a court of law, they could certainly make it far more difficult for her to win.


“When the plaintiff’s allegations can be easily refuted by dates or other facts, those allegations lose credibility,” said David Warrington, a litigator at Kutak Rock in Washington, D.C. “That loss of credibility can have a cumulative effect.”

[fredtoast]

(07-22-2020, 09:15 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Despite what many people think, just one unwanted advance is usually not enough to establish a "hostile work environment".  But the problem Tucker faces is that he was in a position to effect her job opportunities and she alleges those were effected by her refusal.  In cases where there is an implied quid pro quo of sex for job opportunities then just one declined advance is enough.  So i would have to see the actual records of how often she was on his show before and after.  if there is a big difference Tucker will have to come up with a good explanation.

Yep.


Fox told Mediaite that company records indicate Areu appeared on Carlson’s show four times in the four months following the incident, the same number of times she appeared on the show in the four months preceding it.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-24-2020, 09:55 AM)GMDino Wrote: FOX apparently hired investigators to do their own investigation and are starting to shoot holes in some of the "facts" of the case against some of the named Plaintiffs including Hannity and Carlson.  Probably why they do investigations and interviews and such and we don't assume guilt or innocence.

https://www.mediaite.com/news/holes-emerge-in-cathy-areus-lawsuit-against-fox-news-hosts-tucker-carlson-sean-hannity/

(07-24-2020, 10:14 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Yep.


Fox told Mediaite that company records indicate Areu appeared on Carlson’s show four times in the four months following the incident, the same number of times she appeared on the show in the four months preceding it.

Starting to look like SSF was right the whole time.  :andy:

[GMDino]

(07-24-2020, 12:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Starting to look like SSF was right the whole time.  :andy:

SSF complained about the lack of details.  The rest of us said there will be an investigation.  And right now there is still an investigation.  

Let's not rush to judgement.

Thanks for your input though.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-24-2020, 12:38 PM)GMDino Wrote: SSF complained about the lack of details.  The rest of us said there will be an investigation.  And right now there is still an investigation.  

Let's not rush to judgement.

Thanks for your input though.

Partially correct.  I pointed out the complete lack of detail in the allegations against Carlson, especially in contrast to the extreme level of detail in the Henry allegations, and stated that made the allegation look extremely suspect.  Others took great pains to point out that I was wrong and why.  While you did state that we should not rush to judgment other posters were not as even keeled in this regard.  So you'll forgive me for pointing out that my initial position, based on logic and common sense, is proving to be the correct one.

You are also very welcome.

[GMDino]

(07-24-2020, 12:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Partially correct.  I pointed out the complete lack of detail in the allegations against Carlson, especially in contrast to the extreme level of detail in the Henry allegations, and stated that made the allegation look extremely suspect.  Others took great pains to point out that I was wrong and why.  While you did state that we should not rush to judgment other posters were not as even keeled in this regard.  So you'll forgive me for pointing out that my initial position, based on logic and common sense, is proving to be the correct one.

You are also very welcome.

ssf saying he was right is like water being wet.  

But all seriousness aside that is why we discuss these things.  Stories change, new details are added.  And we will wait for the results.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-24-2020, 12:47 PM)GMDino Wrote: ssf saying he was right is like water being wet.    

Both assertions are correct?

Quote:But all seriousness aside that is why we discuss these things.  Stories change, new details are added.  And we will wait for the results.

Absolutely. One need only read this entire thread to see this exact process at play.

[fredtoast]

(07-24-2020, 12:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Partially correct.  I pointed out the complete lack of detail in the allegations against Carlson, especially in contrast to the extreme level of detail in the Henry allegations, and stated that made the allegation look extremely suspect.  Others took great pains to point out that I was wrong and why.  While you did state that we should not rush to judgment other posters were not as even keeled in this regard.  So you'll forgive me for pointing out that my initial position, based on logic and common sense, is proving to be the correct one.

"Lack of details" had nothing to do with her story falling apart. In fact it was the details she provided that made her story fall apart.  If you try to judge the validity of a case based on the amount pf details in the complaint you will be wrong as often as you are correct.

And no one here said Carlson was clearly guilty.  

I was THE ONLY ONE who said that the number of appearances on the show before and after the alleged incident would provide the answer.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-24-2020, 04:38 PM)fredtoast Wrote: "Lack of details" had nothing to do with her story falling apart. In fact it was the details she provided that made her story fall apart.  If you try to judge the validity of a case based on the amount pf details in the complaint you will be wrong as often as you are correct.

Who said it made it fall apart?  Lack of detail is what made me doubt the validity of the allegation.

Quote:And no one here said Carlson was clearly guilty.  

Who said anyone did?

Quote:I was THE ONLY ONE who said that the number of appearances on the show before and after the alleged incident would provide the answer.

Not, "the answer".  She could have never been on the show again and still been making the whole thing up.  It's certainly a key piece of information, but it's not the proverbial silver bullet.  Still, congrats and all.