Video: The obligatory freaky deaky “Letterman tells all” clip
posted at 10:13 am on October 2, 2009 by Allahpundit
He plays it for laughs all the way through, a fact some TV critics find “creepy” but which was really the only way he could have played it. Remember, this bit followed the opening monologue. How much more bizarre would it have been to segue from that to some harrowing retelling of a multimillion-dollar extortion plot? Besides, the humor’s a way of connecting with the public on a human level, which may be important depending upon just how terrible the details of those “terrible things” he did turn out to be.
I still don’t understand why he felt compelled to talk about this, especially at such length and especially if his misdeeds are nothing worse than having cheated on his wife with staffers. Not that that’s okay, but if every celebrity affair warranted a public confession they’d have to set up a new cable channel to broadcast them all. In fact, according to TMZ, his relationship with the staffer in question ended six years ago, before he married his then-girlfriend and she gave birth to their son. Is that really the makings of a $2 million extortion attempt? What else was in the package Dave received? See why piquing the public’s curiosity was such a bad idea?
Whatever other stuff’s going to come out, presumably it can’t be so terrible that Letterman will come to regret using a light touch in talking about it. Exit question: How excited do you think CBS is to have to cover a story about one of its employees blackmailing another of its employees over an affair with yet another of its employees?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Fine, which feminists? Give me a link. Provide some context, because without it you’re just setting up a straw man.
Proud Rino on October 2, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Stupid
PetLetterman Tricks.portlandon on October 2, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Dan Rather says he reported this Letterman abuse to the then CBS CEO, and to Katie Couric, in 1969 in his Microsoft Office 2007 Word document
Jeff from WI on October 2, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Here’s my obligatory ‘I don’t give a crap.’
I don’t give a crap.
SilverStar830 on October 2, 2009 at 11:02 AM
No doubt. His statement discussed the plurual. “relationships“, “staffers“.
aquaviva on October 2, 2009 at 11:02 AM
It’s been repeatedly decided in case law that a superior haveing a sexual relationship with a subordinate constitutes the creation of a hostile working environment for women. Other women can claim harrassment even if they weren’t the ones having the sex. I guess you have never been through any corporate sexual harrassment training or you would know this.
I have a good friend who lost a very high level corporate job because of this. He was married and was screwing his female assistant. Another professional female in the office filed a sexual harrassment claim against him and he was canned.
rockmom on October 2, 2009 at 11:03 AM
It’s called ‘heading then off at the pass’. He’s trying to blunt the oncoming hits. To reduce their impact. Basic defensive maneuver
oldernwiser on October 2, 2009 at 11:03 AM
Betcha he paid for a couple of abortions, like Rick Pitino. That may be what the blackmail was about, just like Pitino’s case.
rockmom on October 2, 2009 at 11:04 AM
There has to be much more than Sex to this story.
bridgetown on October 2, 2009 at 11:05 AM
Are you sure it says that? Creates a hostile environment for women, does it?
What if the superior is a woman and the subordinate is a man?
Are women only hurt in this situation?
Your bias is evident.
bileduct on October 2, 2009 at 11:05 AM
I guess it’s fair to assume CBS endorses and promotes sexual harassment. Most companies would fire an executive that is a serial sexual predator of his subordinates.
David in ATL on October 2, 2009 at 11:05 AM
Uh, no. He’s David Letterman, prince if not king of late night TV. He can “play it” any way he wants to, including issuing a true apology.
It’s not like there’s a precedent for confessing to your late show audience that you’re a sexual predator and that somebody successfully blackmailed you into admitting it.
Missy on October 2, 2009 at 11:05 AM
David Letterman, Chevy Chase, Garrison Keiller (sp?), Bill Maher (sp?), Dan Rather, Uncle Walt.
What an impressive bunch of progressive “men”.
BowHuntingTexas on October 2, 2009 at 11:06 AM
While I’ve grown tired of Letterman as he has turned from a funny talk show host into a bitter old man, he has done nothing illegal. Immoral? Hell yes, but not illegal. He cheated on his girlfriend, more than once. He wasn’t married yet, so he didn’t tarnish whatever sanctity of marriage he might have had. The only laws he has violated are rules within the CBS employee handbook. I’m sure there is a clause in there somewhere that says you can’t have sex with coworkers… or is there?
Until we know more about the women, we can only assume, and that’s never good. He’s a man in power, did he approach the staffers, or did they approach him (a la Lewisnki)?
At the end of the day Letterman is a creepy guy. He is also a massive hypocrite due to his career of making fun of others for their discretions. Pot, meet kettle.
cannonball on October 2, 2009 at 11:06 AM
Even before Dave’s statement, several staffers mentioned they were really surprised this hadn’t come out sooner, since he’s evidently a little infamous at the office for his affairs. His nonchalance and laughs about it show he’s rather proud of it all. Not the extortion part, but the “I think I’m a pimp” part.
I_C on October 2, 2009 at 11:07 AM
Blackmailer is a CBS News producer. Now that’s funny.
exception on October 2, 2009 at 11:07 AM
Want some answer to your question? Here it is.
I think CBS is elated. Finally, CBS is the talk of the town. CBS will expect high ratings just because of this.
As for the ethical aspects of it all, NADA. CBS doesn’t even think about it. CBS management is unperturbed. Why? CBS is an unethical media outfit through and through. Letterman fits well with CBS, in fact.
TheAlamos on October 2, 2009 at 11:07 AM
If he is admitting to this in public,…what is not NOT admitting too?
It’s time to send in O’Keefe & Giles. (Oh yeah, Ms. Giles, be sure to take Mace )
portlandon on October 2, 2009 at 11:07 AM
Not buying it.
No one would think they could blackmail Letterman just on the mere fact he had consensual sex with his employees without them even complaining. Heck, everyone already knew he did this sort of thing. It’s a so-what moment.
The blackmail tidbit must be something shocking even to the low morale compassed elite.
LeeSeneca on October 2, 2009 at 11:07 AM
1. Corporate policy is not the same thing as the law.
2. What cases?
3. Of course, an interoffice affair could (imaginably) create a hostile work environment for other employees. That doesn’t mean that relationships between bosses and subordinates are per se illegal.
You can get fired for things you did that are not illegal.
Proud Rino on October 2, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Dude, even if you’re cynical enough to think this is a ploy, it’s ratings gold! Are you kidding me? Letterman’s ratings will go way up next week.
YYZ on October 2, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Yawn.
perroviejo on October 2, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Pedophiles, statutory rape, sexual harassment, it’s all good at CBS.
Jeff from WI on October 2, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Exactly. CREME A LA CREME.
Yuck!
TheAlamos on October 2, 2009 at 11:08 AM
For the exit question…No problem, it’s ‘All in the Family’.
Karma, she is a bitch. More popcorn anyone?
ZeeMI on October 2, 2009 at 11:09 AM
Yeah, no kidding. Men can be sexually harassed too.
Proud Rino on October 2, 2009 at 11:09 AM
It couldn’t be because he was in a no win situation right? Letterman’s despicable behavior was either going to be exposed by the screenplay or by a jury trial.
Why didn’t Letterman just tell his family the truth and take the threat of blackmail off the table?
Because now, a despicable pervert whose reputation was sullied by his attack on Sarah Palin’s under age daughter, looks like a hero for removing a extortionist from our midst’s. Lets simply ignore the fact that the guy lucked onto some information that he would never be privy to again. Had Letterman exposed his despicable behavior himself, the blackmailer would probably never been heard from again.
Letterman didn’t do this to protect society. He is trying to save his failing career.
csdeven on October 2, 2009 at 11:09 AM
Concubine Bossing System
Jeff from WI on October 2, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Can you lay the crap on any thicker?
bileduct on October 2, 2009 at 11:14 AM
He’s in full PR mode. It’s better, for him, to frame the conversation and control how this incident becomes public.
It’s better to open about what transpired rather than trying hide it and make every effort to make it go away.
Get the information out there so the buzz about it wears off sooner.
eanax on October 2, 2009 at 11:15 AM
You win the Internet today, sir. Well done.
Proud Rino on October 2, 2009 at 11:15 AM
I had an argument with an old friend over Letterman’s jokes about Palin. His last email to me was along the lines of “Letterman is known for his integrity, thus he couldn’t have deliberately cracked jokes about Willow Palin.” Wonder how that integrity is working out for ol’ Dave now.
I am tempted to email my friend and ask him, but I think silence is more effective.
Missy on October 2, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Is it just me, or is Allahpundit slowly turning into Bill O’Reilly?
Sharke on October 2, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Calling on CRR6 to provide the legal background for this information. He is a law student and should be willing to provide excellent references and opinion on the background and legal opinions on sexual harassment.
CBP on October 2, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Dave who?
publiuspen on October 2, 2009 at 11:18 AM
It’s always nice when the trolls back each other up.
Jim Treacher on October 2, 2009 at 11:19 AM
No doubt. His statement discussed the plurual. “relationships“, “staffers“.
aquaviva on October 2, 2009 at 11:02 AM
I_C on October 2, 2009 at 11:19 AM
I. Did not. Have sex. With that. Woman.
Oh, wait…
GrannyDee on October 2, 2009 at 11:22 AM
Strange thing to do to your loyal audience.
Jim-Rose on October 2, 2009 at 11:24 AM
Chicago Olympics DOA!!
Jeff from WI on October 2, 2009 at 11:27 AM
Here’s a creepy pic:
http://www.cbs.com/late_night/late_show/images/content/newsletter/lsnl_5q_dave_stephanie.jpg
OxyCon on October 2, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Shouldn’t CBS be held liable for this?
Is Letterman a sexual predator?
Did he promise his female subordinates performance bonuses, or did he just make it a condition for continued employment?
What did he do to them? The Bill Clinton squirt? Anal?
There are many questions to be answered.
jay12 on October 2, 2009 at 11:33 AM
Kind of a stunner coming on the heels of his “Sarah Palin top ten list” a few days earlier.
I could have lived without the vision of his skinny arse and some twenty-something ‘ho’ getting it on in the green room. Eewwwww!
hopefloats on October 2, 2009 at 11:37 AM
Sordid, sick, sadistic, scummy, slimy.
Anymore S descriptives for this?
capejasmine on October 2, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Anonymous, peripheral bloggers who enjoy protections of their privacy while celebrating the egregious violation of someone else’s privacy FTW!
crr6 on October 2, 2009 at 11:45 AM
“Most companies would fire an executive that is a serial sexual predator of his subordinates.”
You mean kinda like A sitting President getting it on with his young intern?
Of course, that assumes we won’t go to a deposition arguing about the definition of “getting it on” or “tax” <– ooops, wrong president.
WitchDoctor on October 2, 2009 at 11:46 AM
crr6 is an odd name. Is that French?
Jim Treacher on October 2, 2009 at 11:52 AM
Give me a break.
When you work for someone & they pressure you in any way shape or form for sexual favors, that IS sexual harassment.
Perhaps the women really needed their jobs & could not afford any problems in the workplace that would get them fired.
I don’t care if they do say it was consenual.
That is not the point.
This man used his position of power to get sex from people working for him.
That is something to be outraged about, even if it was a Republican or conservative.
Badger40 on October 2, 2009 at 11:53 AM
When a Republican fools around, it’s fair game for people like Letterman to beat into the ground on national TV. When Letterman fools around, it becomes an issue of privacy.
Jim Treacher on October 2, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Well actually, he admitted it publicly and joked about it. Sooooo….
yeah.
crr6 on October 2, 2009 at 12:08 PM
Thou shalt not use thy Rod on thy Staff……..
joe btfsplk on October 2, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Why is he still on TV? He is an immoral, slimy, unfunny old man. He is the epitome of the far left in this country. He should be on the “save Roman” petition.
whatzit2u on October 2, 2009 at 12:15 PM
Absolutely. But he could have accomplished the same thing without getting the authorities involved. But Letterman saw the opportunity to look like an upstanding moral citizen if he helped get an extortionist off the streets.
God knows this guy certainly would luck onto this kind of damaging information about a very rich public person in the future and would certainly blackmail them too. God bless Letterman for protecting us from this guy at the expense of his privacy! Letterman solidifies his place as a classy guy!
/s
csdeven on October 2, 2009 at 12:16 PM
You first.
csdeven on October 2, 2009 at 12:20 PM
I’m not the one celebrating extortion dear. You and your friends are.
crr6 on October 2, 2009 at 12:21 PM
Blackmailing would not exist if people abstained from behavior that would embarrass them. So in reality, Letterman is only protecting those like him. You act as if Letterman saved you from this blackmailers clutches.
Interesting.
csdeven on October 2, 2009 at 12:24 PM
So it’s private because he joked about it on national TV. As clearheaded as ever, c!
Jim Treacher on October 2, 2009 at 12:30 PM
No one is celebrating extortion. We are just not stupid enough to think a classless $hitbag like Letterman did this for any other reason than to try and look like an upstanding citizen.
csdeven on October 2, 2009 at 12:31 PM
legality was never an issue. strawman burnt…..next!
Fighton03 on October 2, 2009 at 12:31 PM
provide evidence supporting this statement.
Fighton03 on October 2, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Maybe someone has said this already, but Dave said “women” in his confessional. I think that means there was more than one.
John on October 2, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Further proof that wimpy, nasty, bucktoothed Liberals with or without power are disgusting hypocrites. He doesn’t like women…knocked up his dopey girlfriend and waited yonkers to marry her and now loves to use chicks for his sex kicks. Oh yes, you Liberals are just Knights in shining armour!
Ladies, if he ain’t marrying you after two years of bennies and pervs, he doesn’t respect you. So much for feminism…the biggest scam on planet! LOL!
Gob on October 2, 2009 at 12:37 PM
also, one of the headlines said something to the effect of “Letterman blackmailed INTO confessing”…interesting choice of words.
Fighton03 on October 2, 2009 at 12:41 PM
Hey Dave, are the personal attack jokes quite so funny now?
R Square on October 2, 2009 at 12:43 PM
I see you haven’t met crr6. Providing evidence for his assertions isn’t really his gig.
Jim Treacher on October 2, 2009 at 12:44 PM
Dave’s Stunt to Boost Ratings. Of course CBS will play along since their ratings are in the toilet also!
BigMike252 on October 2, 2009 at 12:45 PM
Polanskied=Not a big deal.
Dave should thank his lucky stars he’s not a banker or insurance CEO.
R Square on October 2, 2009 at 12:48 PM
I hope none of these staffers (why do you suppose they’re called THAT?) won prizes playing the “Know Your Cuts of Meat” game.
TugboatPhil on October 2, 2009 at 12:54 PM
Who cares? Couple this with Rather having to pay lawyers for having his lawsuit thrown out and it’s a fabulous day to watch the So Called American Media (SCAM) eat it’s own.
Oh yeah, and “The Ego Has Landed” ~ who’s up for a trip to Copenhagen to take some pictures of the epic site?
Branch Rickey on October 2, 2009 at 12:55 PM
Only thing I can think about is the phrase
“dirty old man”
xax on October 2, 2009 at 1:06 PM
This was part of a tangential discussion. Reading comprehension fail. Next!
Proud Rino on October 2, 2009 at 1:13 PM
your tangent. Logic fail.
Fighton03 on October 2, 2009 at 1:21 PM
Did the blackmailer have a blew stained dress?
chickasaw42 on October 2, 2009 at 1:23 PM
Oh I know. I’ve run over crr a few times. I usually just cut to the chase with it now.
Fighton03 on October 2, 2009 at 1:24 PM
Nope. Reading comp-oh, what’s the point.
Proud Rino on October 2, 2009 at 1:37 PM
two things, asked from the standpoint of not having seen the clip and not going to see the clip:
Are there whips, chains, assless chaps and zippered hoods involved? Did Dave bring out The Gimp?
Is one or more of the Late Show staffers in question a dude. kttawwt, mind you. Just sayin’
Mike D. on October 2, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Sexual harassment is secondary to the moral issue of Letterman’s actions. It’s also a civil penalty, not a crime and therefore further from the topic. Your continuation down that topic as a main thrust is a diversion from the main issue of his actions. Since no allegation of harassment has been made yet it is merely a potential civil action that may or may not be brought and as such has no relevance to the main thrust of this topic.
Fighton03 on October 2, 2009 at 1:42 PM
He’s a freaky deaky thing in and of himself. I can’t imagine what kind of woman would be attracted to him. ewwwww.
scalleywag on October 2, 2009 at 1:44 PM
So that means when a right leaning person does this, you have no cause to mention it ever again.
This evidently also means that according to you we are never to point out hypocrisy.
When left leaning persons commit these acts, they are absolved when they ‘confess’ & apologize.
When right leaners do the same, they must be purged & persectued to the fullest extent that the media can muster.
This is why we are outraged: this man is a glowing hypocrite.
I don’t glory in his failure.
He has only reaped what he has sowed.
And it is worth talking about.
Badger40 on October 2, 2009 at 1:48 PM
Me niether.
But then I have self respect.
You couldn’t name a price for me to sell my soul.
Others already have their price in mind when the situation arises.
Badger40 on October 2, 2009 at 1:49 PM
It was creepy, and he said “women.” There are more, obviously.
It rather tells the core principles and where that Palin creepy joke came from.
I frankly don’t see how he’ll pull off any jokes anymore without making the audience uncomfortable. They may laugh, but it’s not really funny.
AnninCA on October 2, 2009 at 1:51 PM
When ‘right leaning’ people do this they usually lose their support base, are removed from office, pilloried (by their own group), until some form of atonement follows the apology.
With the left, not so much.
Fighton03 on October 2, 2009 at 1:51 PM
sorry badger, somehow I felt the need to agree through paraphrasing
Fighton03 on October 2, 2009 at 1:52 PM
Do you notice the use of the word “you”, when he mentions “terrible, terrible things.”
Johan Klaus on October 2, 2009 at 2:00 PM
Tell that to a women scorned.
Johan Klaus on October 2, 2009 at 2:03 PM
He announced it only because the DA scheduled a press conference today.
The news was out.
AnninCA on October 2, 2009 at 2:04 PM
who knew that women were lining up to have sex with letterman? the dude is beyond fug.
anna on October 2, 2009 at 2:12 PM
Read this thread for a start. Last night’s is even worse.
crr6 on October 2, 2009 at 2:19 PM
Do you need a divan to faint on?
Jim Treacher on October 2, 2009 at 2:28 PM
I have, your conclusion is unsupported. Please provide said support.
Fighton03 on October 2, 2009 at 2:34 PM
Seeing as it would have come out one way or another because his privacy was violated he didn’t have too much of a choice other than to attack it head on. But he did it gracefully, and with humor.
As for your repeated assertions that Letterman “isn’t the victim here”, why don’t you tell that to the Special Prosecution Bureau?
You seriously need a reality check, scum.
crr6 on October 2, 2009 at 2:36 PM
Of course you would think that. You can lead a horse to water…
If people aren’t celebrating the extortion…what exactly are they doing?
crr6 on October 2, 2009 at 2:37 PM
You think when you confuse your audience so they don’t know whether to laugh or clap or be silent that it’s “graceful?”
OK. It just was creepy to a lot of people, particularly given his persistent mocking of Palin’s objecting to his sexual joke about her daughter and other Hollywood elitists defending Polanski’s rape.
He’ll never be able to even flirt again without making someone wince.
AnninCA on October 2, 2009 at 2:40 PM
Treacher to the Special Prosectution Bureau in NYC:
“Listen guys, Letterman isn’t really the victim in this criminal extortion case, because well, he made fun of Sarah Palin.
crr6 on October 2, 2009 at 2:42 PM
Very excited if it gets ratings
He could play it right up to lawsuit time
entagor on October 2, 2009 at 2:42 PM
The screen play’s working title:
I Know Who You Did Last Summer
Laura in Maryland on October 2, 2009 at 2:44 PM
comprehension fail. This glorifies and excuses a blackmailer or simply removes a victim status?
Fighton03 on October 2, 2009 at 2:46 PM
It’s YOUR assertion you defend it.
Fighton03 on October 2, 2009 at 2:46 PM
I’m trying to remember your concern for the privacy of Mark Sanford, Mark Foley, the Palins, or anybody else Letterman has harangued over the years.
Now that’s funny!
Yes, poor David Letterman. All he did was stick it to a few subordinates behind his longtime live-in girlfriend’s back, and people want to make an issue of it. Boo-hoo.
Temper, temper.
Jim Treacher on October 2, 2009 at 2:46 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »