Greta Van Susteren's reasoning:
- If Roger Ailes were a sexual harasser, then he would have sexually harassed me;
- Roger Ailes didn't sexually harass me; therefore,
- Roger Ailes is not a sexual harasser.
The inference is valid in the sense of being truth-preserving (i.e., the conclusion follows logically from the premises), but the first premise is false. Roger Ailes wouldn't have sexually harassed Greta Van Susteren even if he were a sexual harasser. I'm going to stop right there.
