Image 01 Image 03

Former Fox News Host Andrea Tantaros Sues Network For Sexual Harassment

Former Fox News Host Andrea Tantaros Sues Network For Sexual Harassment

“A sex-fueled, Playboy Mansion-like cult, steeped in intimidation, indecency, and misogyny.”

Former Fox News Host, Andrea Tantaros, filed a sexual harassment complaint against the network Monday.

The complaint went full scorched Earth, accusing Former Fox News CEO, Roger Ailes, Fox News Host Bill O’Reilly, and former Senator Scott Brown of making unwanted advances.

Fox News has said they cannot comment on pending litigation, but the entire ordeal is a nasty “he said, she said” affair. Tantaros’ legal troubles began earlier this year when Fox News accused her of breach of contract for writing a book without first obtaining the network’s approval. Tantaros alleges the network is using the book kerfuffle to silence her sexual harassment complaints, and the network contends she’s attempting to draw attention away from the alleged breach of contract.

From Buzzfeed:

Tantaros went public with sexual harassment allegations against Ailes in early August, claiming he made sexually charged comments on her appearance and asked her to “turn around” so he could get a look at her.

In the lawsuit, Tantaros’s attorney Judd Burstein describes Fox News as a “a sex-fueled, Playboy Mansion-like cult, steeped in intimidation, indecency, and misogyny” and describes Ailes as a “sexual predator” who “did not act alone.” Tantaros alleges Ailes retaliated against her for rebuffing his advances by removing her from The Five and ordering the Fox News media relations department to turn against her.

Fox News says the network does not comment on pending litigation. A source with knowledge of the legal proceedings told BuzzFeed News earlier in August that Tantaros was removed from Fox News air over a contract dispute involving her book.

The lawsuit names several men who Tantaros claims made unwanted sexual comments or advances toward her, including O’Reilly, Brown, Fox News correspondent John Roberts, on-air guest Ben Collins, and actor Dean Cain. None of these men, however, are named as defendants in the case.

Tantaros claims O’Reilly began sexually harassing her in February 2016, when he invited her out to Long Island where it would be “very private.”

From the lawsuit: “O’Reilly (‘O’Reilly’), whom Tantaros had considered to be a good friend and a person from whom she sought career guidance, started sexually harassing her by, inter alia, (a) asking her to come to stay with him on Long Island where it would be ‘very private,’ and (b) telling her on more than one occasion that he could ‘see [her] as a wild girl,’ and that he believed that she had a ‘wild side.’”

Tantaros claims Fox News executive vice president Dianne Brandi informed her that she would no longer appear on the O’Reilly Factor after her complaints.

Brown has denied the allegations.

Tantaros’ account of the alleged Brown harassment:

“On or about August 18, 2015, former Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown appeared on Outnumbered. Brown made a number of sexually inappropriate comments to Tantaros on set, including, and in a suggestive manner, that Tantaros ‘would be fun to go to a nightclub with.’ After the show was over, Brown snuck up behind Tantaros while she was purchasing lunch and put his hands on her lower waist. She immediately pulled back, telling Brown to ‘stop.’ Tantaros then immediately met with Shine to complain, asking him to ensure that Brown would never be booked on the show again. Shine said that he would talk to Scott. Thereafter, Shine and Scott ignored Tantaros’s complaint, and continued to book Brown on Outnumbered.”

And Brown’s statement from Massachusetts news outlet, WMUR:

Brown said in a statement that Tantaro’s claims are false and he just learned about the allegations.

“For the record, her statement about our limited on air, green room interactions are false. There were never any circumstances of any kind whatsoever in which I had any interaction with her or any other employee at Fox, outside the studio,” Brown said in a statement to WMUR. “If there was ever a chance encounter at a restaurant, or public place, all interactions were professional and cordial. All interactions and contacts were in the studio in NYC and always in full view of all staff, personnel and talent.”

Brown went on to say, “In the three years I gave been working there, I treat all people there the same, whether they be male or female.”

Brown added he looks forward to making a witness statement in the case.

“If I am asked to make a witness statement of some sort, I look forward to that opportunity,” Brown said in the statement. “In addition, I don’t go to clubs. Not how I speak. I would suggest you view the shows. There were never any issues that I was aware of and my schedule never changed. In fact, I have worked more this year than any other year.”

Also named in the complaint? Internet “sock puppets”. Yes, really. From the NYT:

Ms. Tantaros also claimed in the lawsuit that she was the subject of humiliating posts by pseudonymous accounts on Twitter known as “sock puppets” that she says were instigated by the Fox News publicity department.

Ailes resigned as CEO of Fox News in July amid rumors he was asked to vacate his position over a bevy of sexual harassment allegations.

Full complaint here:

Tantaros Complaint by Legal Insurrection on Scribd

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



I remember a few weeks back, Rush went on for several minutes in vouching in the most sober terms for the rectitude of Roger Ailes.

Rush was wrong, as with T-rump.

    Prejudging a legal dispute and/or claiming to know things one cannot is evidence of a significant pre-existing bias that calls the reliability of what is offered into question.

      Same questions…

      Answer this…

      1. is Ailes out at Fox?

      2. is there an eight-figure settlement reported for the prime litigant in this matter?

      3. has that report been credibly disputed?

        Irrespective, it is not conclusive as to the Carlson case, and the Tanteros case will stand on its own.

        I don’t presume to know, and hardly care. I suspect you care, but do you know?

        Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | August 23, 2016 at 7:47 pm

        Eight figures and being booted seems pretty flucking “conclusive” to me.

        Was I there? No. I wasn’t there when OJ killed his ex-wife, either.

    Estragon in reply to Ragspierre. | August 23, 2016 at 11:45 pm

    Ailes was almost certainly guilty of most if not all of the previous allegations.

    Tantaros’ is completely new, she is trying to use the others as cover. All that’s missing from this circus is Gloria Allred.

    If her suspension had anything to do with the allegations against Ailes by others, she would likely have been on the forefront of the complainants instead of attempting to hitch a ride on their coattails.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Ragspierre. | August 24, 2016 at 1:30 pm

    Rush is wrong a lot. Neither his lack of perspective nor this article have anything to do with Trump…you are obsessed.

OnlyRightDissentAllowed | August 23, 2016 at 5:39 pm

Regulations, we don’t need no stinkin’ regulations.

    Tort law is not “regulations”, ya moron.

    And, it’s been a theory of mine that tort law is a free market/little “d” democratic response to issues as they develop in society.

    No “regulator” could do it as well.

      OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to Ragspierre. | August 23, 2016 at 7:18 pm

      1st of all, would you stop with the moron name calling. All you are doing is being rude and crude. You are one of the few people on this site I respect – that predates your T-rump stand.

      2nd, I understand the difference between regulations and torts. You know that. The comment was a joke and I was making the point that there is a reason for regulations. If every person who is wronged needed to file suit, a lot of wrongs wouldn’t be righted. Not everything gets handled on a contingency basis and not everyone has the resources to hire an attorney. In addition, more and more class action is also being precluded. It almost seems the women at Fox News are a class – at least the bleach blonds in heels below a certain age and weight. Do you think they will be certified? I guess Maddow couldn’t get a job there even if she made a career move and became a conservative.

      3rd, Libertarians do believe that torts are an alternative to regulations – that and trespass. However, it seems that FOX has a strict arbitration clause that Gretchen Carlson’s attorneys tried to get around by suing Ailes personally. I don’t know if that held up or that they just got the publicity that her NDA prohibited. I remember people on this site saying she had stupid lawyers. The stupid lawyers brought Fox News to its knees (no pun intended), and exposed a cesspool. I would call that pretty good lawyering.

      4th, “No “regulator” could do it as well.” Funny, because I can swim in the Hudson River because of regulations. We also have organizations that police the polluters. But they report to the NY DEP who drops the hammer. DEP will go to court if necessary, but they usually don’t have to. GE had to be sued. So both are necessary until we get to libertarian small ‘d’ heaven.

It’s always interesting to see how cases like this go from claims “Wild orgies! Coke on the tables!” to unsubstantiated statements “Somebody got caught naked in the copy room! A reporter was busted for doing coke!” to actual events that get documented “Couple in copy room caught kissing. Secretary kept a bottle of Motrin in her desk for headaches.”

Real life is almost always more boring than lawsuits make it sound.

Wrap it up boys, feminism has won.

    OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to Dejectedhead. | August 23, 2016 at 7:27 pm

    I am guessing you don’t have a wife or a daughter.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Dejectedhead. | August 23, 2016 at 8:30 pm

    It wins until a tire needs changing, a cartridge in a leaky bathroom faucet needs changing, or a garage door spring snaps.

      Dejectedhead in reply to The Friendly Grizzly. | August 23, 2016 at 8:54 pm

      Then they just get a man to do it. How’s that not a win for them?

      OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to The Friendly Grizzly. | August 23, 2016 at 11:47 pm

      You have got to be kidding. You think Roger Ailes changes a tire or a cartridge in a leaky bathroom faucet or a garage door spring?

      You don’t think there are women who can do that? Maybe not Fox News bimbos who can’t afford to break a nail. The irony of this whole story is that even Megyn Kelly kept her mouth shut in public and stuck to the party line. These are the women who are mouthpieces of the conservative movement and they were all getting harassed. Now they speak up and you are going to trust them on other issues?

      It doesn’t matter whether they are lying. Either way they are untrustworthy.

People scream 24/7 how the media can’t be trusted, yet the first babe who steps forth and says: “He said something nasty to me! BooHoo”, get’s a big splash of sympathy….just a little twisted reasoning with that.

With such a pretty “Monica Lewinsky” smile, I would want to see the DNA results from any overt claims or stains. Other than that, she’s just seeking a big payday.

    Ragspierre in reply to C. Lashown. | August 23, 2016 at 6:37 pm

    Answer this…

    1. is Ailes out at Fox?

    2. is there an eight-figure settlement reported for the prime litigant in this matter?

    3. has that report been credibly disputed?

I don’t understand how someone so well spoken and as bright as Andrea can suddenly be trying to sue FOX. I loved seeing her very logical and sound reasoning that she exhibited on the show ‘Outnumbered’. Disappointing to hear that she is involved in this. She is probably one the network’s best contributors and hosts. So sorry to see this.

If it’s flagrant, it’s not a he said – she said. There’s emails, recorded conversations, other artifacts and often video.

If no flagrant behavior exists in the artifacts, then it’s simply a “she said” and it will be run 24/7 by the other outlets to smear Fox in the run up to the election.

    Dejectedhead in reply to Andy. | August 23, 2016 at 7:12 pm

    The thing that disturbs me the most about it is that what is being cited as sexual harassment can basically be seen as friendly conversation. If a man comments to a woman at work that she seems like she has a ‘wild side’or would be fun at a nigh club…does that really amount to sexual harassment? O’Reilly is a good friend and mentor, if he invites you to spend time with him…suddenly that’s sexual harassment?

    I see no way around these types of interactions while men and women work together in general.

    There doesn’t even seem to be any Quid Pro Quo going on.

      Ragspierre in reply to Dejectedhead. | August 23, 2016 at 7:17 pm

      I’ve had a simple rule that has served me well.

      I don’t go to LUNCH with a female colleague without another person present.

      I DAMN sure don’t suggest that a female colleague come see me “where we can be very private”. PARTLY because some of them would…

        Dejectedhead in reply to Ragspierre. | August 23, 2016 at 8:03 pm

        That says a lot about treating women the same as men though. They get treated differently, which is maybe a common sense point that should get talked about.

        I have a simple rule too.

        Co-Workers aren’t my friends.

      OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to Dejectedhead. | August 23, 2016 at 7:30 pm

      It is all in how you say it – and how often you say it.

I agree with Dejectedhead up to a point. If the putting of the hand on the waste type stuff is accurate then that’s not acceptable behavior. Casual conversation is fine and yes it can either be misinterpreted or go off the rails depending on the people involved. Some of this though, just some, seems like a bit much. If I worked with a woman like this and were single, there is zero percent chance I would not politely ask her out. Is that sexual harassment or just natural human interaction? That said, O’Reilly always struck me as a waist grabber

    Dejectedhead in reply to Vadermitch. | August 23, 2016 at 8:13 pm

    She said Scott Brown grabbed her waist, not O’Reilly. O’Reilly was her friend and mentor that invited her to Long Island.

    Ragspierre got to the point of it though. We’re supposed to treat women differently at work. All us male workers know that sexual harassment claims are a one way street.

    In America, equal treatment means selective treatment. Workplace laws are meant to make the workplace sterile, not a place where you make friends and relationships with the opposite sex.


You mean Shep Smith isn’t on that list?

“…including, and in a suggestive manner, that Tantaros ‘would be fun to go to a nightclub with.’ After the show was over, Brown snuck up behind Tantaros while she was purchasing lunch and put his hands on her lower waist. ”

That’s it, Andrea? That’s all you’ve got? I used to respect your analyses, but now you can just go away. I’m sick of caving to male-hating, feminist narcissists.

Well, I guess Kimberly Guilfoyle, Dana Perino, et al. really know how to put out.

That the best you got, Rags? Hell, you’d trip and probably roll 80 meters before you could your fat ass up. Your “war isn’t what it once was.” Hopefully your keyboard has survived your “war.” LOL

You’re over the hill, Rags. Might as well admit it.

What a Peach!!!
Oh, my bad…

This just points out the gulf between men and women in the workplace. Women want the full privileges of their jobs but want protection that a man will never have. If you go into the arena then be prepared for the fights that go with the territory. If you want to be free from all insults or hits then become a teacher at an all girls school. Get tough or get out!

    OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to inspectorudy. | August 23, 2016 at 11:51 pm

    Why do you assume they have a choice? Well, I guess they can get married. That is a safe bet until it isn’t.

    BTW, were you ever told to bend over if you want to keep your job? You are smug SOB.

      Talk about being a smug SOB, take a look in the mirror! You have no idea what my life is like and I don’t give a s**t what yours is like. I have been in the military and did things I would never do and was humiliated in the process. I didn’t have the venue to complain and get help like the snowflakes today. My wife was a flight attendant who put up with so much crap from passengers that it would make a grown man weep. But she had the guts to do her job and not whine after every flight. Most men are put into situations in their jobs that are demeaning to them or they are humiliated by their superiors at one time or another and have no recourse to stop it but to quit. Women have the secret weapon that they can always declare “Sexual” harassment and that is the golden ticket. The next time you get your a$$ in a crack at work try the “Unwanted microaggression” and see how far it gets you.

OnlyRightDissentAllowed | August 23, 2016 at 11:58 pm

I am constantly amazed at how obtuse the bulk of the people are on this site. You people should celebrate the Taliban. They sure know how to keep women in their place. If one gets out of line and wants to go to school, they splash battery acid in her face.

Yes women deserve protection from that because it is a situation that few men will ever experience. Considering the constant bitchiness on this site, I think most of you already feel you need protection from an unfair world.

    You must be into your cups. Everyone is obtuse and followers of the Taliban in your eyes. Yes, disagreeing with a sexual harassment claim is akin to throwing acid in a woman’s face in your view. It makes no sense and the magnitude of that tangent is absurd.

    You don’t listen to reason, you don’t even feign an attempt at it. You’re all pettiness and toxicity. To top it off you act like it’s for a just cause. You’re not some saintly white knight OnlyRightDissentAllowed, you’re just a cookie cutter mash up of all things liberal. You’re the ugly strawman that liberals pretend doesn’t really exist.

    you hit the ERA sign across the street.

    good then I didn’t waste any bullets

    What, you think all women should be barefoot and pregnant?

    No, I encourage women to wear shoes.

    Most long-winded straw man I’ve ever seen.

      healthguyfsu in reply to healthguyfsu. | August 24, 2016 at 1:38 pm

      Also, the only liberals that would frequent a site like this are the ones that can’t even get along with their fellow moonbats.

Andrea alleges FOXNews is punishing her with the book publishing infraction to try to shut her up on her sexual harassment claims. But I think she’s using the sexual harassment claims to try to pressure FOXNews to overlook her violation of her employment contract.

I think Andrea greatly understates the importance of her violating her written employment contract in publishing her book. Quite a few of the FOXNews hosts have written books – which is why this issue is explicitly dealt with in the employment contract. Andrea is an attorney, for God’s sake! She’s known for probably two years that she was going to write the book. And she failed to notify her employer. That is not a small deal. She screwed up here big time.

An employment contract specifies what the employee can and cannot do – and it lays out consequences and disciplinary actions that will occur if the employed violates the contract. Often, the language includes demotion, penalties, “up to and including termination.”

Another clue is to look at the way her case is written. It’s not written like a lawsuit – it’s written like a lurid gossip rag. I suspect that she held the sexual-harassment accusations as a threat to try to decrease disciplinary actions against herself. It didn’t work, so her attorney filed this lawsuit to embarrass FOXNews.

It seems weird to name specific people as sexual harassers, yet not file the suit against them. I really like Andrea, and I’m so puzzled at how she, of all people, was negligent in following her own employment contract. She will never get her job back.

Is it possible to think Andrea Tantaros is both scorching hot and was wronged?

I have not been following this. Nor do I intend to. I have no dog in this fight.

But I would like to meet the person, man or woman or questioning, that is under the impression that Andrea Tantaros didn’t get her job because she’s a girl. And a lovely one. And as far as I can tell a very intelligent and articulate one.

But like Hooters I doubt Fox was interviewing a lot of guys for the position.

It’s just sort of weird, the idea of sexual harrassment. The only reason she has the job is because somebody noticed she’s a girl.

And, no, no, I don’t disrespect women. I’m a realist. If you get the job because you’ve got a nice lower and upper unit, female type, Mark 1, Mod 0, suck it up.

I cancelled my cable about ten years ago, partly because of this garbage.

I know I’m courting trouble, but if sex is the selling point, well then. Sex is front and center. When one is making bank on being a sex object then one should not complain about being a sex object. I don’t mean to say that she should put up with being maltreated.

How do I say this. If I owned an oil company and hired Andrea Tantaros as a geologist I’d expect her to find oil. And if I started harassing her I’d expect her to complain.

But if I hired her to wear short skirts and high heels I would not expect her to complain if I talk about her wardrobe or legs. It is part of the territory.

But then I am not in that business for a reason.

    hvlee in reply to Arminius. | August 24, 2016 at 9:01 am

    Tantaros’ complaints sound like things an adult woman should be able to brush off. Sounds like the Carlson suit – get in trouble and yell harassment.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | August 24, 2016 at 10:32 am

About a year ago Tantaros posted some photos of herself on Instagram. She is on the beach. In one she is wearing a pink bikini. She’s playing in the sand. Her hair is wet and unkempt. She’s looking askance. It’s quite seductive. In another she is wearing a black, skimpy one piece bathing suit held together with small strips of fabric and she is wearing an oversized sun hat with the words “Do Not Disturb” on the hat’s bill. When she posted it to Instagram she included the word “incognito” because her face is completely obstructed. The “Do Not Disturb” appears to refer to her very ample and revealing cleavage.

Presumably, she posted the provocative photos to promote herself and to draw attention to her physical beauty. Which is fine. She’s trading on her natural attributes. Just like horse jockeys trade on the fact that they are small diminutive people and NBA centers trade on the fact that they are exceptionally tall and athletic.

I find it hard to believe that someone who promotes her sexuality online with provocative and revealing photos thinks she’s been sexually harassed by Roger Ailes asking her to turn around.

The blog below has the photos. I think the headline is wrong, though. As I remember it, she actively used twitter to promote her Instagram account. In other words, she wanted them to be seen (if my recollection is accurate).

    You are correct. Sexuality is the secret weapon that attractive women use to get doors opened for them and then want you to not notice it once they have made it. I think women are God’s gift to us men but they do have some characteristics that are less than honest. In many ways, SOME women are like politicians in that they say or do almost anything to get elected and then ignore the people that elected them once they are in. One thing we know for sure is that cnn and msnbc will NEVER have a sexual harassment suit filed against them by an employee!

huh the Dean Cain mention just sounds odd.
we’ll see, not going to try to claim I know if true or not. time will tell.

If it was such a cess pool why did Tantaros and Carlson work there so long?