Leonard Pitts On Whether Fox News Treats Employees Differently Than Other News Groups

According to Wikipedia, Leonard Pitts, Jr. is an American commentator, journalist and novelist.  He is a nationally-syndicated columnist and winner of the 2004 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary.  Pitts wrote a column recently on the Bill O’Reilly controversy (and cover-up) about his exaggerations.

Pitts:

“Last month, when NBC News anchor Brian Williams’ career imploded as he was caught in a high-profile, self-aggrandizing lie, I suggested in this space that there would be much less angst or fallout if someone from Fox News were caught lying.”

Since then, Mother Jones ran a story questioning Bill O’Reilly’s claim to have been in the combat zone in the Falkland Islands while covering that war for CBS.   Other news organizations have reported other questionable assertions by O’Reilly, including the claim that O’Reilly was outside of the home of an associate of Lee Harvey Oswald when the associate shot himself.

O’Reilly dismissed Mother Jones as the “bottom rung of journalism in America,” and called the reporter David Corn a “liar,” an “irresponsible guttersnipe,” a “far-left zealot” and “dumb.”

Other instances of questionable claims include O’Reilly saying that he witnessed the execution of a group of American nuns in El Salvador that happened in 1980, even though O’Reilly apparently did not reach El Salvador until 1981, and he “saw photos” of the incident.

In his book, “Keep it Pithy,” O’Reilly states that he saw “Irish terrorists kill and maim their fellow citizens in Belfast with bombs.”  Fox News itself denied that comment, according to the Chicago Tribune.

O’Reilly has claimed he was “attacked by protesters” while covering the 1992 Los Angeles riots for “Inside Edition,” but former colleagues say he is exaggerating an incident where an angry man took a piece of rubble to a camera.

Brian Williams

“For one falsehood, Williams received a six-month suspension without pay. For a handful of apparent falsehoods, O’Reilly has received unstinting support from his bosses at Fox,” says Pitts.

Pitts claims that Fox “is not a real news-gathering organization but, rather, the propaganda arm of a right wing that grows ever more cult-like and detached from reality as time goes by,” and proof is that “O’Reilly is not fighting for his professional life.”

“(P)undits are entitled to their opinions. But that does not release them from the obligation to be factual,” writes Pitts.

It is telling that Fox recently responded to sharp questions about all this from MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow by sending her a statement noting that O’Reilly’s ratings are up despite the controversy.

“To act as if ratings answer, or even address, questions of credibility is to express contempt for the very notion of credibility. It suggests Fox’s full-body embrace of the old saying, often attributed to Barnum, about the birthrate of suckers,” he writes.

Pitts calls Fox “an alternate reality wherein birthers make sensible arguments,” and “death panels are real…,” and it tells viewers “what they want to hear.”

“Yes, he is apparently a serial fabulist. And yes, that would disqualify you from most newsrooms,” writes Pitts.

More:

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/contributors/2015/03/12/fox-news-bill-oreilly/70207198/

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-bill-oreilly-scandal-20150228-story.html

Bribery Scandal Puts Navy Admiral Movement On Hold

During a change of command and retirement ceremony at the U.S. Naval Academy in July, according to USA Today, Vice Adm. Mike Miller was ending a four-year tour as academy superintendent and retiring with honors after a 40-year career.

When the festivities ended, Miller wasn’t allowed to leave the service. Even though his official online biography reads “retired,” he’s still being carried on the Navy’s active-duty rolls — at a reduced two-star level. And although he has no specific job, he counts against the service’s allocated total of 219 admirals.

Defense officials said Miller is one of an estimated three dozen admirals under federal investigation for potential wrongdoing in the Glenn Defense Marine Asia (GDMA) case, also known as the “Fat Leonard” affair, after the nickname of the company’s leader, Leonard Glenn Francis.

Francis is in federal custody in San Diego and has admitted to numerous instances of bribery, influence peddling and corruption attempts. A number of naval officers and civilians already have been charged and some convicted, and the investigation, announced in mid-2013, is — by all accounts — showing no signs of slowing down.

Vice Adm. Ted Branch, the head of naval intelligence, and Rear Adm. Bruce Loveless, the director of intelligence operations are also caught up in the scandal.  Both officers were suspended by the Navy on Nov. 8, 2013, pending the outcome of the investigations.

Until investigations by the Department of Justice and the Navy are concluded, none of the officers under scrutiny can move on, either to resume their jobs or take up new ones. Replacements can’t take over, either.

However, the pyramidal U.S. military personnel system is predicated on an “up or out” structure, with active-duty personnel holding a specific job only for a certain period of time — usually 18 to 36 months.  After that, it’s time for whomever has that job to move on and for someone else to move in.

As officers move up the pyramid, fewer and fewer jobs are available, and only a few blockages can have effects far beyond that specific position.

In March 2014, Vice Admiral John Miller was named to become the next deputy chief of naval operations for Plans, Policy, and Operations at the Pentagon, and should have been relieved by now. But his replacement has not arrived — not even been announced — because that person is under investigation by the Justice Department in connection with GDMA.

“Others are in the same situation,” a defense official said Feb. 5.

A number of officers such as Mike Miller were planning to retire over the past year or more, but are being held over pending the results of the investigation.

“It becomes a lot more complicated to deal with folks once they’re outside the military,” said the defense official, explaining why Mike Miller is being held over. “The ability to handle it is a lot easier keeping them in uniform.”

The admirals affected break down into three groups, according to the official.

“There’s a group that have left jobs thinking they were going to retire and are waiting. There’s a group that are in jobs they would like to leave and move on to retirement, and a group that thought they were going to other jobs but because they’re somehow being reviewed they’re unable to do that.”

The Justice Department is not sharing many details of its investigation with the Navy, and the service is not clear precisely how many officers are under scrutiny.

“Folks don’t know if they’re not being moved because they’re under investigation or because they’re part of the daisy chain,” the defense official said.

GDMA is a “husbanding” company, a firm that handles a variety of arrangements for visiting ships — piloting and docking services, taxis and catering, customs and legal services, food and fueling arrangements and more.

Dozens of U.S. Navy warships and commands made arrangements with GDMA, along with most other navies operating in Asia.

It’s also clear the investigation goes back nearly a decade.

It appears an individual doesn’t necessarily have to be accused of wrongdoing to trigger an investigation into their behavior, defense officials said. Rather, simply having dealings with GDMA could start a probe.

In Mike Miller’s case, and potentially others as well, his initial reduction in rank and paygrade is not tied to the investigation but to Navy rules.

“The law required Vice Adm. Miller revert to his permanent grade of Rear Adm. (upper half) after 60 days from the date he was relieved as the Superintendent of the U.S. Naval Academy,” said Rear Adm. Dawn Cutler, chief of naval information.

Simply put, she said, if a three-star or four-star admiral isn’t approved for another appointment at the same or higher grade, or if the retirement at the senior level isn’t approved, the person drops back to the two-star level.

Miller’s retirement request, she added, “is under review.”