XPost: alt.politics.usa, alt.tv.oreilly-factor, rec.arts.tv
XPost: alt.politics.media, alt.politics.journalism

O'REILLY: FACTOR "Follow-Up" segment tonight. National Press still
very upset about the Trump victory.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RICHARD ENGEL, NBC NEWS: Assuming, and that's what we're talking
about, that he does win, people I'm speaking to think it's
absolutely catastrophic. That it's catastrophic for the United
States. That it's catastrophic for our position in the world. It
emboldens our enemies and adversaries, it makes our allies terrified
that we're not going to be their allies anymore. Most people think
that this type of scenario happens.

(END VIDEO CLIP)


O'REILLY: That man, Richard Engel, NBC News correspondent not a
commentator.

Joining us from Washington, associate editor of "The Washington
Post" Bob Woodward. I know you are an old school guy and you don't
think that hard news reporters should comment with their opinion but
we saw that with Martha Raddatz to some extent on ABC News. We saw
it with Engle on ABC News. I could give you 20 other examples. So
what do you think is going on?

BOB WOODWARD, WASHINGTON POST ASSOCIATE EDITOR: Well, I think in the
case of Richard Engel, who is really one of the best foreign
correspondents anywhere in the world for any U.S. or even foreign
broadcast service, it seems like he might, when he said people he
was talking to presumably those would be foreign government
officials who are officials here. So I don't think that particular
segment crossed the line at all.

All right. Well, I disagree with you because if he is going to do
that, he has to put a name on it, okay, number one. You don't do
anonymous sources because anybody can make that up. Number two, he
has got a history, you know Mr. Engel of left wing utterances. And
number three, he should be a commentator. He could still be a
reporter. He could still send people into the field if they have a
commentator label. Best example on this network is Geraldo. Geraldo
gets sent to all the war zones but he is a commentator and we let
everybody know that. Wouldn't that be a fair solution to this kind
of stuff?

WOODWARD: Well, I don't -- listen, this guy goes on the scene in
places that are very dangerous, you and I are sitting in our chairs,
so I have watched him and I think he is really terrific reporter,
one of the best. But the larger point you make, there are people who
were despondent in the dumps about Trump winning and I think it
showed and I think --

O'REILLY: It did. There is no doubt it showed. But I said that about
Martha Raddatz whom I have known for many years, an excellent
reporter. Excellent reporter. Okay? But she is on there and she is
ticking off the -- hey, if you are a Trump voter, this is what you
are voting for, you know? And ends up with the "Access Hollywood"
tape. You know, come on. You can't be doing that unless you do it to
both sides. All right?

WOODWARD: Yes. I think you have got to get in the middle.

O'REILLY: Yes. You got to do it to both sides. But what I'm trying
to get at with you is, when you came up, when you're a young
reporter at "The Washington Post" under Ben Bradley, they were
strict rules Woodward, they were strict rules. All right? And when I
came up, CBS and ABC, I couldn't give my opinion in the piece, which
killed me but I didn't, all right? Those rules are gone.

WOODWARD: Yes. But under Bradley, the rule one was, don't go on
television. In rule two was no gloating. And he had it right. And I
think we need to get back to --

O'REILLY: You're not going to get it. It's not going to happen.
Newspapers are dying. They are going out of business. They got to be provocative. What about -- what about and I'm -- Chris Wallace was
interviewed in the "New York Times" today and he said to his credit,
and I got Wallace on tomorrow, hey, you guys, you didn't cover this
Trump thing fairly. And you are even -- your editor said you didn't
cover it fairly. You were out to get them. That's what you were out
to do. What about that?

WOODWARD: I think there is some evidence of that. No question. But
if you talk to the Hillary Clinton people they think as it pertains
to "The Washington Post" that we were out to get her.

O'REILLY: How and what possible way could you have been out to get
her? I read your coverage. All do you is report the facts.

WOODWARD: Yes. But we stuck to the email issue, which is important.
There are still unanswered questions in all of that.

O'REILLY: So, how is that unfair?

WOODWARD: No. But I'm telling you people.

O'REILLY: Well, anybody can whine about anything. But facts are
facts. I'm trying to do this as a journalist even though I'm a
commentator with facts.

WOODWARD: Yes.

O'REILLY: I mean, if you have a Wikileaks thing coming out every day
and it has provocative stuff about Hillary Clinton's main guy, John
Podesta, you have got to report it. You can't say well, you know, we
have got too many of them and we are not going to report them
anymore. It's ridiculous.

WOODWARD: Of course. And you've stick to the facts. But as we all
know what facts are you going to pick? Where are you going to do a
major story and we stuck on the Hillary Clinton email story. If you
go back even a couple of years, the Clinton Foundation.

O'REILLY: Yes. But those are all legitimate story.

WOODWARD: Yes. It is. But people are angry about that.

O'REILLY: I think you guys should have done more on the foundation.
I think that if you did you would find a hell of a lot more than has
already been in print. Now, let's look ahead.

WOODWARD: I agree with you that on that.

O'REILLY: Yes, you can do it, Woodward. I mean, you are not over the
hill yet. You're getting there. You are almost at the summit but
you're not over it. You should do it. All right.

WOODWARD: Thank you.

O'REILLY: You're welcome.

WOODWARD: It's nice to have another assignment editor in my life.

O'REILLY: Sure. Any time you need advice you know who to call. I
think the post and the other newspapers are going to go after Trump
as president. They are going to be unmerciful. I don't see any
difference between the candidate and president. He is still going to
hammer them. Am I wrong?

WOODWARD: Well, I think it's a matter of what are the facts and
what's going on? Now, what's occurring this love fest between Obama
and Trump is not something you would expect unless you realize.

O'REILLY: They have to.

WOODWARD: Sure. Well, it's in the interest of both, particularly
Obama, because he -- the last thing he wants to do is have 10 weeks
of fighting and tension with Trump and --

O'REILLY: He wants -- Obama wants --

WOODWARD: I think Trump -- you know, how long this will last, we'll
see, but I think it's a really important thing. I think what Hillary
Clinton's concession speech.

O'REILLY: Yes, yes.

WOODWARD: The best speech. Well, it was. And let's give her credit.
Even you, I bet.

O'REILLY: Look, I'm just glad that Secretary Clinton can take a
break right now. But I will tell you what, Barack Obama is the
smoothest, coolest cat there has ever been in the White House. And
he is going to be classy right until the inauguration. And then he
is going to go out and make a gazillion dollars. That's what's going
to happen.

Hey, Bob, always good to talk to you.

WOODWARD: Thank you.

O'REILLY: Thanks very much. Thanks for being a good sport, too.


--
It's now time for healing, and for fixing the damage the Democrats
did to America.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)