** BREAKING: Fox announces Bolling has been suspended **

Is Eric Bolling the right’s answer to Anthony Weiner, or the latest victim of a smear campaign that will stop at nothing to remove all opposing voices? 

Thanks to our media friends, the Fox News Channel personality has already been tried and convicted in the court of public opinion. The charge: Allegedly sending “d-ck pics” via text to co-workers.

Co-host of The Specialists, a new program airing on the network, Bolling was slammed with allegations similar to those launched against other current and former Fox employees. Published at the Huffington Post, it uses the same tactics we’ve seen often, utilizing anonymous sources and wild stories of a graphic sexual nature.

At the New York Daily News, Bolling is already as good as guilty, via a headline proclaiming him as “the latest fool to sext women unwanted pics of his tool”. Major networks tripped over each other to cover the latest potentially-embarrassing Fox fiasco.

Through his attorney, he’s denied the allegations.

How strong is the case against him?

In his favor:

– Huffington Post is a partisan organization determined to collect conservative scalps. It also has a sensationalistic reputation and provides relatively little in the way of strong journalism. Can it be believed?

– Though HuffPo cites “a dozen sources” (then “14” further down), not one is on the record. Given the large payouts offered to others with similar complaints inside Fox, this seems hard to believe. With new management, it’s difficult to imagine any repercussions from stepping forward. It’s actually more likely to make someone termination-proof (the publication claims a confidentiality agreement stands in their way). So who are these people?

– The texts were allegedly sent “several years ago”, but the story fails to provide a date.

– There’s no indication the texts were preserved for use as evidence.

– Though the women who received the texts believe the phone number was his, it doesn’t seem 100% clear: “The women, who are Bolling’s current and former Fox colleagues, concluded the message was from him because they recognized his number from previous work-related and informal interactions.”

– Why didn’t those affected come forward last year, when Fox was rocked by sexual harrassment scandals? There was no reason to hold back.

Working against him:

– The ridiculous statement made by his attorney, which in its terrible wording falls far short of an outright denial: “Mr. Bolling recalls no such inappropriate communications, does not believe he sent any such communications, and will vigorously pursue his legal remedies for any false and defamatory accusations that are made.”

He “recalls no” such messages? It should be EASY to remember whether a person has sent X-rated texts to co-workers. Memories should be clear.

With Fox having made the decision to suspend Bolling, it’s interesting to see what will emerge next.

If evidence appears, it will be all over for him. If not, who knows?

Comments