On the Hugh Hewitt Radio show Tuesday, Fox News anchor Bill O'Reilly lit into The Washington Post's Dana Milbank, calling him "a weasel, in my opinion, beneath contempt" and he couldn't understand how the Washington Post could employ him. Hewitt followed up by giving Milbank a chance to respond. The discussion centered on Milbank's contention that O'Reilly was nasty to President Obama during his interview on Super Bowl Sunday.

After the initial part of the interview, Hewitt started asking Milbank what he thought President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton were doing the evening of the Benghazi attack. But as it turns out Hewitt was just asking the questions to get Milbank to better understand his criticism of O'Reilly.

Hewitt: Well no, but that, the reason I did it, the reason I did it is because I interrupted you four or five times. And your beef with O’Reilly is that he interrupted the President. The President is the world champion filibusterer. He would have used ten minutes, wouldn’t he? Do you agree with me? He never answers a question ever in under five minutes if you let him.

Milbank: I have, look, and that’s a fair point, and I have, the same thing has happened to me and many other people. You know, but I think it’s a fair question do you want to be sitting there with the president of the United States, shaking your head and waving your pen and pointing your finger at him? I would submit that whoever that president is, you know, it could be President Bush and certainly to behave in that way, even as he was filibustering me. But it just seemed that you could ask the questions without the body language.

Hewitt: But Dana, this is a genuinely sincere question. When Vice President Cheney shot his hunting partner, you appeared on TV in an orange vest. Was Bill O’Reilly more disrespectful to the President than you were to the Vice President?

Milbank: Geez, I certainly didn’t go to interview the Vice President in an orange hat.

Hewitt: But I thought O’Reilly was perfectly respectful of the office. He was just, he was attempting to ask questions that weren’t being answered.

Milbank: And they’re, and we can, and you and your listeners, and me and my readers, we can have a different view of what is the proper level of respect there. But what we shouldn’t have a dispute about is if I said something that was factually wrong, I’d like to know what it is so I can correct it. But I don’t believe that he or anybody else has come up with anything. I mean, I suppose we can look at the 42 and say well, was that really an interruption or was that something else? I don’t know, but at least I’d like to hear if that’s what the argument is.

Hewitt: No, I think it was the word nasty. I think that he believes it was a very respectful interview, and you don’t. You thought it was combative. Did you think it was nasty?

Milbank: Yeah, I’m not sure that actually the word nasty was in my column, but certainly it was a combative interview.

Hewitt: Yeah, I just couldn’t disagree with you more, Dana.