Consider how the omission of one word from the headline was enough to make me gasp in astonishment when I read it the first time today. For all we know, maybe she did.After Blowing Through 3 Attorneys, Former Fox Host Andrea Tantaros is Now Representing Herself https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/after ... spartandhp
I wonder what happened. I surmise that it was around the same time that Bill O'Rielly went on what would become a permanent vacation and then found the cylinders on the metaphorical locks changed upon his return.
What caused this? What could the headline mean?
1. Did one side or the other declare in favor of an unorthodox, currently non-GAAP means of remuneration for the legal services provided?
2. She was formerly a fox but is no more? I wonder who if anyone thinks that exact thing, but I can't easily grasp it, not unless it was an optical illusion. I am sure many men and women, and both (couples who like 3ways), would declare that she can eat crackers in their beds any night, day, or both of the year. Then she should do commercials for Ritz.
One line of speculation: The article makes it sound like she was impossible to work with, and so much so that they decided to bolt, even though the case was as juicy as a watermelon from a legal damages standpoint, and something a lot of attorneys would like to combat just on general principle.
Another line of speculation, the one which makes the most sense to me, is that fatigue is setting in all over the place and that combines with other things to make the law firms in question not want to involve themselves in what they may consider to be a potential barrel of trouble, one not at all certain to add to their bottom lines and reputations. Hopefully all of the events like this may signal the beginning of a change to that.
Thirdly, why would Ms. Tantaros make up something like that, in this environment? The idea that she is trying to use it to sell an as yet unwritten book is preposterous.
It sounds to me like a lot of people might think that Ms. Tantaros is an attorney herself, which is not the case. I think she has been a radio reporter, ghostwriter, propagandist, and translator in the past. Perhaps viewers confuse her with Kimberly Guilfoyle, another of the few brunette Fox anchors and the mildly obnoxious co-host of a couple of shows which featured Ms. Tantaros, who places lower on the obnoxiousological continuum and is an equally effective interviewer and articulate commentator putting forward the worn-out and uninspired predominating ideology of Fox, or at least she was.