OlbermannWatch.com "My Faves" Set
OlbermannWatch.com Favorited Photos from other Flickr Users
Got OlbyPhotos? See some on Flickr? DO NOT email us. Send us a FlickrMail instead. Include a link to the photo. If we like the photo you will see it displayed in the Olby Flickr Flood above.
New to Flickr? Sign up for a FREE Flickr account!
New to YouTube? Sign up for a FREE YouTube account!
|Subscribe to Olbermann Watch Mailing List|
|Visit this group|
"COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN" (8:00 P.M.-9:00 P.M. ET)
Host: Keith Olbermann
"Numbers Don't Lie, but Keith Does"
Olby did it again. He just can't help it. His Olbsession with Fox News has led him right into another whopper of a lie. But we're getting ahead of ourselves. Let's begin at the beginning.
You can always rely on Krazy Keith to slip some sort of fallacy or distortion into his opening spiel, and tonight he didn't disappoint:
Who is Robert Novak's source? Sources? Will he be revealing them Wednesday night?...And legalistically and journalistically, who told Novak he could give it, or them, up?
Olby had to really stretch to get a dig in on Novakio, and that's just what he did here. He went from a question ("Will he reveal his source?") to an unfounded assumption ("Who told him he could do so?"). He doesn't know if Novak will be revealing any names on Wednesday night. So where did Krazy get the idea that somebody told Novak he could do so? He made it up!
Yes, The Great Leak Case was the lead story on The Hour of Spin. KO noted that Novak said he still cannot reveal who his original source was. So what's with the bellowing about will Novak reveal something on Wednesday? Pure OlbyHype. Cue: David the Doctorer Shuster. He speculated about Richard Armitage being the unnamed leaker. Then it was time for the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann ratchet up the spin:
Bill Harlow [CIA] had to have known, uh, that Valerie Plame was under cover...
Good ol' Keith. Ever faithful to the talking points. Even Fitzgerald doesn't claim she was covert, so Olby uses the non-legal term "under cover".
Does the fact that he was a confirming source with Novak mean now that, that he, meaning Harlow, could face some kind of prosecution in this?
Now legally, the answer to that question is obvious. If Fitzgerald isn't prosecuting the original source because he found no crime to charge, how could be possibly prosecute a confirming source, someone who basically shook his head yes after the cat was already out of the bag? Why would Olby ask such a dumb question? Maybe to give The Doctorer a chance to ramp up the spin:
Bill Harlow has denied Bob Novak's account of their conversation, and that's significant because it casts questions about Bob Novak and his integrity.
Catch that? Harlow says one thing, Novak says another. That contradiction means Novak's integrity is in question, but not Harlow's. Judge Shuster has ruled that Novak's lying. Now you know why they call him Slippery. With all the long knives out for Novakio, we wonder why neither Slippery nor Krazy even touched on several salient disclosures in the column:
Next was Milbank, devoid of decorative duds. Dana made the odd statement that something bad happened but nobody is being prosecuted because "it's almost impossible to prove". Bzzzt! Wrong answer! Novak identified the prime leaker. Fitzgerald knew the name even before that. It's a snap to prove his identity in court. What makes prosecution impossible is that he couldn't find a law that made the leak a crime.
Some nattering ensued about whether Novak and the Bush administration got through this whole mess "unscathed", and Dana opined that any damage would be slight. You can just imagine KO's face falling as he spoke. Here he devoted night after night to flogging the story, even when there was no news reason to do so. His experts told him that there would be all these indictments, Karl Rove included. And he's left with...this? Oh, he is fortune's fool.
Say, what was Keith talking about anyhow when he said Novak might reveal something "on Wednesday"? You wouldn't know it by watching Countdown, because after that bit of hype at the top of the show, Olby never did explain what he was talking about. We'll tell you what KO wouldn't: it's Bob Novak's interviews on two Fox programs tomorrow evening (Special Report and Hannity & Colmes). Now why would Keith leave that out?
Mr Humility then just had to respond to all the emails he has been "inundated" with since the Monday show. People, he claimed, were saying that they didn't like the "new format" with KO turning the bulk of the show over to someone else. Right. Olby blamed it all on a "dinner reservation". What, the hotel wouldn't let him go up to the room after 9:00 pm?
#4: Terrorists attacks in India. Most inconvenient, since just yesterday Olby and his parrot were pooh-poohing the threat of terrorism. To avoid any embarrassment, KO rushed through this story in about 60 seconds, and let recycled video from NBC take it from there. Iraq and Afghanistan also got brief mentions, followed by oddball.
#3: It's attack the military time again. "Skinheads" are infiltrating the army by the "thousands", according to the notoriously unreliable Morris Dees. Olby treated the SLPC press release as if it were a scientific study, but Col Jack Jacobs was there to bring a little common sense to the table. He tried to explain the "law of large numbers" to Keith, who insisted that "even one moderately trained white supremicist" can do a lot of damage, citing Timothy McVeigh. The second-stupidest question of the night, and the Colonel did an admirable job keeping a straight face as he explained to Krazy Keith that our soldiers are not armed with fertilizer bombs. KO got Jacobs to admit that relaxing standards could cause problems down the line. More breaking news from Countdown.
#2: Baseball and Barry Bonds, Barbaro, Leann Rimes, Pink Ployd, and a slur against the great Jackie Chan. #1: The suicide explosion in New York.
In the "worst person" segment, Olby complained about a Fox spokesman quoted in the puff-piece Times article. After all, this spokesman used the same line ("train wreck") she used in May 2004. Then comes the Keith Olbermann Lie of the Night:
Since about that time our ratings are up about 26%, and Bill O'Reilly's are down 45%.
It's time for another Olbermann Reality Check. But it won't be easy. For some reason, the TVNewser archive of the May 2004 ratings cannot be found anywhere on his site. Maybe KO thought with that information not at hand he could get away with this latest falsehood. But we poked around and found the numbers Keith Olbermann doesn't want you to see:
May 2004 ratings:
The O'Reilly Factor: 1,894,000 viewers
Countdown: 319,000 viewers
June 2006 ratings:
The O'Reilly Factor: 2,141,000 viewers
Countdown: 286,000 viewers
For the OlbyPologists who refuse to admit his many lies, we'll make it perfectly clear:
O'Reilly (May 2004-June 2006):
Olbermann claimed: Down 45%
The truth: Up 13%
Olbermann (May 2004-June 2006):
Olbermann claimed: Up 26%
The truth: Down 10%
The infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann, caught in another lie. Which is sort of like spotting a hole in a piece of swiss cheese.