A JUDGE IN TEXAS HAS CLEARED THE WAY FOR TOMI LAHREN TO FIND OUT
WHO LEAKED SOME UNSAVORY DETAILS ABOUT HER WHEN SHE WORKED
AT THE BLAZE.
THIS IS ALL PART OF A LARGER LAWSUIT.
TOMI LAHREN OF COURSE IS SUING THE BLAZE COME AND GLENN
BECK FOR ñ FOR WRONGFUL TERMINATION.
BECK IS COUNTERSUING, CLAIMING SHE WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO
WORK WITH.
AND APPARENTLY SOMEONE, WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S SOMEONE WHO
WORKED AT THE BLAZE, ALTHOUGH IT SEEMS LIKE IT, LEAKED A
STORY TO THE DAILY CALLER THAT INDICATED THAT TOMI LAHREN
WAS A REALLY DIFFICULT PERSON TO WORK WITH.
LET ME GIVE YOU THE DETAILS.
SO, THE DAILY CUP ñ A DAILY CALLER ARTICLE PUBLISHED LATE
LAST WEEK CLAIMED THAT LAHREN ACTED LIKE A DIVA DURING HER
EMPLOYMENT WITH THE BLAZE, INSISTING SHE TREATED STAFFERS
WITH CONTEMPT AND DISDAIN, EVEN MADE THEM HEAT UP HER BUTT
WARMING PAD."
HER LAWYER IS UPSET ABOUT THIS, AND SAYS THERE WAS A
NON-DISPARAGEMENT ORDERED BY THE JUDGE, AND IF THIS INDIVIDUAL
WORKS AT THE BLAZE, THEY WENT AGAINST THE JUDGE'S ORDERS.
SO AS A RESULT, THE JUDGE IS SAYING THAT GLENN BECK AND THE
BLAZE HAVE TO HAND IN EMAILS BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN
STAFF FROM THE BLAZE AND THE DAILY CALLER.
THE DAILY CALLER IS REFUSING TO HAND OVER ANY EMAILS AND TO
SAY WHO THEIR SOURCE IS.
THIS STORY IS REALLY INTERESTING, BECAUSE THERE
ARE BASICALLY TWO LAWS THAT ARE CONTRADICTING EACH OTHER.
IT HAPPENS FROM TIME TO TIME.
THE JUDGE DID SAY THAT THEY ARE UNDER COURT PROCEEDINGS, AND HE
DIDN'T WANT THEM TO DISPARAGE ONE ANOTHER, AND HE DID AN
OFFICIAL ORDER SO THAT ñ OF NON-DISPARAGEMENT IN PUBLIC.
AND CLEARLY SOMEONE AT THE BLAZE THROUGH TOMI LAHREN UNDER A BUS
BY LEAKING THESE STORIES TO THE DAILY CALLER.
ON THE OTHER HAND, WE HAVE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.
SO IF YOU GO TO A MEMBER OF THE PRESS AND SAY, GIVE ME YOUR
SOURCES BECAUSE I THINK IT MIGHT HAVE VIOLATED MY ORDER IN
THESE COURT PROCEEDINGS, WELL I THINK THAT'S A BIGGER
PROBLEM, AND I WOULD SAY THAT I HOPE THAT A JUDGE IN THAT
CASE WOULD GO, ALL RIGHT, BUT I CAN'T VIOLATE FREEDOM OF
THE PRESS, SO I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO ENFORCE THIS.
IF HE ACTUALLY FINDS OUT WHO DID IT, DO YOU KNOW THAT THE
GUY CAN GET SIX MONTHS IN JAIL?
NO NO NO.
I KNOW IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT BECAUSE THEY ARE
IN THE MIDDLE OF A COURT PROCEEDING AND THE JUDGE
MADE THAT ORDER, BUT IF YOU PUNISH PEOPLE BASED ON
LEAKS, THREE QUARTERS OF WASHINGTON WOULD BE IN JAIL.
RIGHT.
I THINK IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT TO UPHOLD
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, AND ONE OF THOSE CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS IS FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.
SO I GET IT, YOU DON'T WANT TO DONATE ñ SAYING NEGATIVE THINGS
ABOUT EACH OTHER IN THE MIDDLE OF COURT PROCEEDINGS, I TOTALLY
GET THAT, BUT I WOULD ARGUE THAT'S A RELATIVELY LOW
PRIORITY COMPARED TO FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.
BY THE WAY, I THINK TOMI LAHREN AND HER LAWYER PLAYED THIS
COMPONENT OF THE LAWSUIT ALL WRONG.
IF YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT YOUR BUTT WARMER,
DON'T MAKE IT A BIG DEAL IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS CASE.
I DON'T EVEN THINK IT'S A BIG DEAL.
WHAT SHE A DIVA?
PROBABLY, MAYBE, BUT WHO CARES?
THAT'S TO BE EXPECTED.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT EVERYONE ON AREAS LIKE THAT, BUT I
DON'T KNOW, WHO CARES?
BUT I WOULD WANT TO BURY THIS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, AS OPPOSED TO
MAKING A BIG DEAL ABOUT IT, AND THEN MAKING SURE THAT EVERYBODY
IS COVERING IT ON THEIR NEWS SHOW.
AND BUTT PADS, MAN, I TOTALLY GET IT, SOMETIMES DUDES CRANK UP
THE ACLU NEED TO WARM YOUR BUTT.
WHEN THE STORY FIRST CAME OUT I PURPOSEFULLY DIDN'T COVERED ON
THE SHOW, BUT NOW IT'S RELEVANT BECAUSE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IS
INVOLVED, AND IT'S BECOME THIS WEIRDLY IMPORTANT NATIONAL STORY
NOW.
THE REASON I DIDN'T RING IT UP IN THE BEGINNING WAS BECAUSE
IT'S OBVIOUS THAT THEY ARE THROWING HER ON ñ UNDER THE BUS,
AND THE MOST YOU HAVE ON HER IS THAT SHE WANTED BUTT WARMERS?
WHO CARES?
THE GUYS WHO ARE LEAKING IT ARE PETTY, AND APPARENTLY DON'T
HAVE VERY GOOD DIRT ON HER, AND IF YOU ARE BEING LEAKED
AGAINST, STUFF HAPPENS.
I REMEMBER WHEN I WAS LEAVING MSNBC, THEY STARTED LEAKING
MY RATINGS FROM JANUARY.
IT WAS JUNE.
I'M LIKE, WHAT?
BUT IN JANUARY THERE WAS ALL THESE HUGE NEWS EVENTS,
THAT WAS ONE OF THE FEW MONTHS THAT CNN BB IN THE RATINGS.
BY THE TIME IT WAS JUNE, I WAS DOUBLING CNN ON MOST NIGHTS.
I WAS BEATING CNN AND HLN COMBINED.
SO WHEN I SAW IN THE PRESS THAT MSNBC MANAGEMENT WAS
LEAKING RATINGS FROM FIVE MONTHS EARLIER, I'M LIKE, OH, THEY
ARE COMING TO GET ME.
BUT I DIDN'T SUE, I DIDN'T TRY TO PUT THEM IN PRISON, I
JUST TOLD MY SIDE OF THE STORY, AND THAT'S IT.
I WOULDN'T EVEN ADDRESS IT.
ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE AN OPINIONATED WOMAN,
REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOUR IDEOLOGY IS, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO
ATTACK YOU AND THEY ARE GOING TO DO IT VICIOUSLY.
IF PEOPLE ACCUSE ME OF WANTING TO HAVE HEATED BUTT
WARMERS, I WOULD BE LIKE, THAT'S PROBABLY THE MILDEST
ACCUSATION I'VE EVER DEALT WITH.
LUCKILY THERE AREN'T DIVAS ñ WE DON'T GET PAID ENOUGH HERE TO BE
DIVAS, BUT IF YOU GO TO TELEVISION, AND I DON'T KNOW
WHAT THEY ARE PAYING AT THE BLAZE, BECAUSE THE BLAZE IS
NAMED AFTER THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT THEY ARE BURNING.
THEY JUST CREATED THIS ENTIRE BONFIRE WITH GLENN BECK AND
OTHER INVESTORS MONEY, NOTHING LOSES SO MUCH MONEY IT'S
RIDICULOUS, SO WHO KNOWS, MAYBE THEY OVERPAY THERE, BUT A
TELEVISION WHERE THEY DO OVERPAY, OH, SO MANY DIVAS.
ALL THE HOSTS ARE LIKE, PLEASE I DO DECLARE.
SO I'M SURE THE PEOPLE ON CABLE NEWS ARE LIKE, SHE ONLY HAD
BUTT WARMERS?
PROBABLY.
WE DO HAVE A FUN POLL FOR YOU GUYS.
WHO'S OVERALL AT FAULT FOR THE PROBLEMS AT THE BLAZE?
TOMI LAHREN FOR TRYING TO GET THE SPOTLIGHT, OR GLENN BECK
FOR GETTING ANNOYED THAT SHE HAS THE SPOTLIGHT AND FIRING HER FOR
HAVING ONE REASONABLE POSITION, THE PRO-CHOICE POSITION?
I DON'T KNOW WHICH WAY TO GO HERE, BECAUSE SHE'S SUCH A
HYPOCRITE, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND HE'S SUCH A HYPOCRITE.
THEY BOTH WANT THE SPOTLIGHT, IT'S SO UNBEARABLE.
I'M GONNA VOTE RIGHT NOW.
IF YOU WANT TO VOTE, TYTNETWORK.COM/BLAZE.
I'M CURIOUS HOW YOU ARE GOING TO VOTE.
I HAVEN'T MADE UP MY MIND YET.
ARE YOU CRAZY?
GLENN BECK IS AT FAULT.
AM I CRAZY RIGHT NOW?
FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.
THINK ABOUT IT.
SHE GETS FIRED FOR SAYING SHE'S PRO-CHOICE, WHICH IS
RIDICULOUS, SHE'S NOT ALLOWED TO MOVE IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION
FOR EVEN HALF A SECOND WITHOUT YOU LOSING YOUR MIND OVER IT?
AND ON TOP OF THAT, HERE'S WHAT THE LAWSUIT IS REALLY
ABOUT: THEY ARE REFUSING TO TERMINATE HER CONTRACT, BUT
THEY ARE ALSO REFUSING TO LET HER GO ON AIR.
YOU KNOW ME, I'M NOT A TOMI LAHREN FAN, I DISAGREE WITH
HER ON ALMOST EVERYTHING, SO IT'S NOT LIKE I WANT HER TO
BE ON THERE, BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT I WANT.
SHE SHOULD BE ON AIR.
THAT'S A CORPORATE MEDIA MOVE, THAT'S WHAT AN AUNT ñ
MSNBC DID TO ASHLEY BANFIELD, THEY LITERALLY MOVED HER
OFFICE INTO A CLOSET, THEY WOULDN'T LET HER ON AIR.
IT'S A SUPER CHEESY MOVE, AND I HEAR YOU, I THINK I'M GOING
TO VOTE WITH YOU, BUT THERE IS A HUGE BUT THERE.
TOMI LAHREN BEFORE SEEMS TO INDICATE THAT SHE WAS PRO-LIFE,
AND THEN SHE GOES ON THE VIEW AND SAYS ALL THE SUDDEN SHE'S
PRO-CHOICE, PLAYING UP TO THAT CROWD, PROBABLY ANGLING FOR
ANOTHER JOB.
SO GLENN BECK, WHETHER YOU ARE BELIEVING HIM OR NOT IS
SAYING, I DON'T MIND IF YOU ARE PRO-CHOICE, I MIND IF YOU
ARE A TOTAL LIAR.
PRETENDING TO BE PRO-CHOICE AT ONE POINT, PRO-LIFE AND ANOTHER.
BUT I THINK YOU ARE RIGHT, THE HEART OF THIS MATTER IS GLENN
BECK BEING BITTERMAN.
WHY IS EVERYONE TALKING ABOUT TOMI LAHREN AND NOT ME?
SHE SAYS SHE'S PRO-CHOICE, FIRE HER.
DON'T LET HER GO ON AIR, SHE'S GOING TO COMPETE AGAINST ME.