CNN host left speechless as ex-Fox News analyst breaks confidentiality agreement & exposes Murdoch

[kpete]

Last edited Sun Dec 17, 2017, 02:58 PM - Edit history (2)

Appearing on CNN’s Reliable Sources, legal analyst Tamara Holder said since she was pushed out at Fox for reporting sexual assault she has been unable to find another media job and that she is not alone among other women who were forced out at the network.

“Fox News ruined people’s lives,” an impassioned Holder explained. “He (Murdoch) ruined my life. I don’t have a job in TV anymore because the place that he has secured down like Fort Knox allowed abusive predators to work. That is not nonsense, this is people’s lives. He said it wasn’t just Roger Ailes. Well, we don’t need to name names, we know it wasn’t just Roger. He said ‘nothing more since then’ — that’s a lie. We also know that Bill O’Reilly paid $30 million plus to somebody and, of course, they rehired him after that.”

“He says there are cases that amounted to flirting,” she continued. “Let me be clear. I had a man pull out his penis in his office and shove my head on it. That was not flirting. — that was criminal. That was not sexual harassment. I’m not the only case, there are women who can’t speak out.”

“Either Mr. Murdoch is a liar or he’s delusional and old and needs to get out,” she stated. “If you’re an investor, you need to decide, do you want your money with a man who has continued to lie to you for the past 20 years, your money, hundreds of millions of dollars of your money has gone to women over and over and over again. and we’ve been told that we have to shut up.”

“I want to be on TV talking about the things that — we want to talk about what we were paid to talk about on TV,” Holder continued. “For me, it was law. I had a sports show. But I’m stuck here, talking about this, because there are people like Rupert Murdoch who continue to deny that we were abused, that we were — our careers were destroyed, our lives were destroyed. And this is not political, this is people’s lives.”

Watch the video below via CNN:
https://www.rawstory.com/2017/12/watch-cnn-host-left-speechless-as-ex-fox-news-analyst-breaks-her-confidentiality-agreement-and-exposes-rupert-murdoch/

[2naSalit]

1. Oh my...

things are unraveling quickly aren't they?

[guillaumeb]

2. Rich investors are concerned mainly with return on investment.

All else is a cover for that greed.

[bitterross]

22. Exactly right. Investors don't give a crap about payouts. They are often deductible.

You are correct. The investors don't care about the reputation or the settlements until it affects their ROI. Until then, Mudoch can do as he pleases.

[Alice11111]

29. They have mega insurance policies to cover the money. They just want gag orders and damage control.

[ProfessorGAC]

31. That Makes No Financial Sense

First of all, EVERY expense is deductible. Companies don't pay taxes on revenue, they pay them on profits.

That said, ANYTHING that eats into the profits ends up diluting the growth rate of the shares and the size of the dividends.

So, these settlements do, in fact, see a reduction in ROIC and the tax deductability has nothing to do with it.

[bitterross]

33. The Accounting Tricks They Use Make the Difference

We're talking about Wall Street - the stock market. It doesn't have to make sense. It just has to meet revenue projections and projected earnings quarter after quarter. Remember the bust of 2008. Lots of things that made no good financial sense went on and yet the CEOs and investors made big bucks. Until the reckoning. Which they all managed to avoid.

Yes, all business expenses are deductible. All expenses go against revenue to increase or decrease income. But these corporate heads and investors only care about stock price. They use accounting tricks to meet earnings projections. Earning per share is what causes the rise or fall in stock price.

Now, earnings per share is a function of net income. Net income does take into account the expenses vs. revenue less taxes. If you are a "skilled" accountant you can jockey the numbers around in the accounts to easily cover these millions when you're talking about billions of dollars each quarter. And, as long as a case is in progress you can take some modest adjustments as contingencies along the way as a hedge on the income so that you lessen the hit at the end. All of these tricks allow the "skilled" accountant to hide and minimize the effect of the settlements while still meeting the targets Wall Street expects. Therefore, the CEOs and the investors reap their gains of the stock price, not off income. It really is two different things.

[ProfessorGAC]

35. I Think You're Wrong

And your whole explanation (which i didn't need as i've been working with corporate accountants for 40+ years) has nothing to do with my statement.

And earnings per share is not the only determinant, because small misses on earnings on a low trading volume stock has a lot smaller proportional effect on stock price. Higher volumes cause traders and trading bots to react more aggressively. Hence EPS cannot be a FUNCTION of net income, any more than it is a function of volume.

And, you JUST explained why i'm right in your 2nd and 3rd to last sentences.

[bitterross]

36. Okay, if I'm wrong. Please explain it.

I did my best, based on my limited understanding. It sounds like you have a lot more accounting experience than I do so I will defer to you once you explain how these investors and CEOs continue to reap large gains despite these settlements.

They are certainly minimizing the impact of them somehow.

[ProfessorGAC]

37. Because. . .

. . .the overall profitability is high enough to absorb the settlements as an expense.

The settlements, even those like the O'Liely $30MM settlement, is not that much for a multibillion dollar company, especially if, and we don't know if yes or not, the settlement is set up as an annuity paid out over, say, 10 years. Now if revenues are $15 million at operating margins of 18%, with all other absorbed overhead of 6%, there is 12% EBIT. (Earning before interest and taxes.)

Figure the overall cost of capital is around 3.8% and the company is leverage 1:3, or $4 billion debt to $12 billion equity. The interest rate, also not taxable, $152 million annually. Now, some of the principal has to be paid off per year, but this leaves about $1.56 billion earnings before taxes.

Assume a dividend distribution of around 50% (fraction of dividend paid is highly variable by industry, particularly if the industry is capital intensive, like a large manufacturing firm). So, we're distributing around $780 million.

To keep life simple, let's envision there are 390 million shares outstanding at $40 per share. The dividend would be $2 per share (5% and EPS would be $4 or 10%.

Both of these are overstated because i didn't take taxes yet. So, after taxes (EAIT) we're looking at $1.60 of after tax dividends and $3.20 earnings.

So, we take a $30 million all at once settlement and the pay out is now based upon 80% of $750 million vs. 80% of $780 million. The earnings hit is 1/26th, or about 12 cents per share. If the settlement is a 5 year pay out, the earnings are only affected by 2.4 cents per share.

No magic accounting tricks needed.

On top of all that, as another poster mentioned, these firms may pay for liability insurance with riders to cover these issues. Yes, premiums are high, but those are a constant buried in the expense ledger anyway. So, if the insurance covers some percentage of this, and even if premiums get negatively affected (up) they impact on earnings gets smaller and smaller.

These settlements are small potatoes to many of these companies and don't require any skirting of the law of acceptable accounting practices to make their effect negligible on earnings. The PR is a FAR bigger issue than the impact of what Wall Street thinks.

[CrispyQ]

3. Great point, here:

“Either Mr. Murdoch is a liar or he’s delusional and old and needs to get out,” she stated. “If you’re an investor, you need to decide, do you want your money with a man who has continued to lie to you for the past 20 years, your money, hundreds of millions of dollars of your money has gone to women over and over and over again. and we’ve been told that we have to shut up.”

[IluvPitties]

4. So why isn't this being reported by right wingers?

That's why I'm saying that there is a political double standard to this issue and we on the left need to be very vigilant about it.

[lindysalsagal]

5. I DVR Brian Stelter every week. Cuts through the spin and BS. Good man, Brian.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

27. Better than most on CNN.

[MaryMagdaline]

6. Wow - that says it all

For better or for worse the enablers are finding out that the confidentiality agreements will be broken and it will be interesting to see if the courts will go out of their way to help Fox News and others stifle the plaintiffs

[bucolic_frolic]

19. confidentiality agreements

Sure I took business law, but ... confidentiality agreements to coverup criminality almost sounds like conspiracy ... or bribery

'you don't tell them about such and such, now here's your check and be a good girl and go home.'

[ffr]

7. Doesn't matter. Sinclair Group is going to make Fox sound like Muppets

They're already embedded in the media market as we speak.

[Blue_true]

8. Holder was a proud conservative before she saw why harassment laws exist.

While she should have not faced what she did, I am sure that she gave a lot of hostile "legal input" about women's and minority rights.

[grantcart]

14. Really? citation please

I don't know anything about her but this is how she characterized her time at Fox

http://tamaraholder.com/#

For almost a decade, Holder provided political, legal, and sports analysis on FOX News. Standing strong against conservative bombast, she served as a powerful progressive voice, never backing down despite having a minority opinion on the conservative network. She is known for her fair, educated, and spirited commentary.

While at FOX News, Holder merged her passion for sports and social justice, breaking ground as creator and host of Sports Court, the network’s only sports show. She confronted polarizing political, legal, and social issues in the world of sports with a guest lineup of legendary athletes, journalists, politicians, and fellow legal minds.

Recognized by The Chicago Sun Times as “One of 50 People who Make Chicago a Better Place,” Holder focused her law practice on civil rights and criminal defense, protecting the rights of the wronged and helping countless clients clear their criminal records through pardon and expungement. Upon the invitation of Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr., she founded the pro bono Rainbow PUSH Expungement Clinic where she devoted countless hours to public service in Chicago’s most poverty-stricken neighborhoods, as well as obtaining a congressional hearing on improper employment practices and testifying as an expert witness in another hearing.

[Hekate]

25. Thanks, grantcart

[stonecutter357]

9. K&R

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

10. If only there was a way that Crypt Keeper goat fucked and his

douchebag sons were forced out. I know it's not probable but a guy can dream.

[Stuart G]

11. K and R

[LittleGirl]

12. I love her words

"HIre us back! We're sitting at home, dying inside."

OMG, I can so relate to this. I hope this video goes viral.

[Bradical79]

39. Yeah, there's some that (like her) who really should get hired

Others though... one of the sad things about Fox News is the number of unqualified women they hired, just based off looks and/or ability to do nothing but follow script. There's a lot of people who have been on Fox News who really had no buisiness being in news media at all. May have left a lot of people trapped. Fox News is mostly a propaganda network, not a news media outlet. It will taint anyone who ever participated, from a profession standpoint. For most, anywhere else is going to be a step down, like local Sinclair group stations.

[Achilleaze]

13. republican sexual predators spew so many lies

the republicans are the party of lies.

[SeaDoo77]

15. Can The Murdochs Be Prosecuted?

I think so.

[MrPurple]

16. Don't settlements usually come with gag orders/nondisclosure agreements?

If she's breaking the terms of her settlement, she risks having to give the money back, so kudos to her for the bold move of talking out. I guess even if there is a NDA, Fox might choose not to pursue it because that would get lots of press.

[ProudLib72]

18. She made this very clear in the beginning

There was an NDA with a provision that the terms were moot should Murdoch malign her, which he did. She's the legal expert, so I give her the benefit of the doubt on this one.

[demmiblue]

17. K&R

[Orange Free State]

20. Hope it wasnt Ailes....

....because the very thought of that puts me right off my lunch. On the other hand he had probably not even seen his penis in decades by that time, so maybe it was someone else. Ugh.

[7962]

21. Dayuuuum!!!!! nt

[mountain grammy]

23. And this is exactly who

Americans have followed to a culture of misogyny sexism. Fox News helped create our dysfunctional society. Are we Rome yet?

[Skittles]

24. I would have bitten it clean off

I am NOT kidding

[Hekate]

26. Heh

[Kablooie]

28. God, I wish this could start a tsunami of women revealing the insides of Fox News

so that they become known as the Fox rape channel.

[Honeycombe8]

30. She needs to name him. nt

[zentrum]

32. The rich Right Wing

……does not care about anybody. They ruin and or hurt the lives of anyone who is not in their immediate tribe.

They hurt all of us by destroying the concept of truth. Which is one of the pillars of true evil, according to Hannah Arendt.

I feel sympathy for her as assaulted women yet—she was working at FOX. You lie down with dogs, you wake up with fleas. She'd still be doing their dirty work but not this.

[spanone]

34. K&R...

[ksoze]

38. Brian was smart enough to let her talk.

Once he saw her going, he ot of the ay and let her rip.