Hello friends.
I respect all the counter points made to my statement, but I do believe this wasn't a completely authentic encounter.
As an aside, I don't think O'Reilly should have argued this incident as strongly as he did for opposition to illegal immigration. There are far stronger points to be used, and the danger is when you use single incidents, and subpoints like these to make the case for a fundamental principle, you actually end up weakening your case to those who might not have that much knowledge about the situation, and can be swayed either way. He shouldn't have taken this particular argument so far in my opinion.