Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dan Rather to Discuss Document Authenticity
Drudge Report ^ | September 10, 2004

Posted on 09/10/2004 1:49:38 PM PDT by RWR8189

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-174 next last
To: Crazieman

Well, Rather says the documents are "authentic"...what does that really mean??? All depends on what the definition of "is" is....here we go again.

Is there any reason why CBS could not be sued for liable, given their public assertion that they obtained the documents and know the source and they are not disclosing it?? Could they not be FORCED to provide that information in a court of law??? And what will the Bush administration's comments be about this????


101 posted on 09/10/2004 2:19:33 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: dawn53

Seriously, there was something nasty about that whole thing too.

I am still undecided on Abu Ghraib, but Memo thing is so plainly, obviously bogus. Even ABC and the Washington Post knows it.


102 posted on 09/10/2004 2:20:00 PM PDT by faithincowboys
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: toomanygrasshoppers
"I'm sure he will say "We stand behind our documents and our sources...blah blah blah" and then he will say that their sources are confidential and that 'you just have to trust us on this one' "


Agreed. After all, no one should question the "Great and Wonderful Dan".
Isn't this the equivalent of "don't you know who I am!"
103 posted on 09/10/2004 2:20:02 PM PDT by golfboy (character is doing what is right, when no one is looking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I think this is it: http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/doc10.gif

The problem with that argument about the superscript is that I don't think that's the same font as the Killian memos. That document definitely looks typewritten, while the Killian ones don't.

104 posted on 09/10/2004 2:21:07 PM PDT by NYCVirago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
Dan Rather to Discuss Document Authenticity

With who? The Federal Prosecutor for the Southern District of NY?

105 posted on 09/10/2004 2:22:26 PM PDT by montag813 (ue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

At the risk of repeating someone, Rather's discussion about the authenticity of the documents ought to take all of 2 seconds. He can simply say, "They weren't."


106 posted on 09/10/2004 2:23:12 PM PDT by MarDav
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #107 Removed by Moderator

To: DaveMSmith

Bwwaahhhhhh! ROFL!


108 posted on 09/10/2004 2:24:01 PM PDT by Integrityrocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

What time is it on? Anybody?


109 posted on 09/10/2004 2:24:23 PM PDT by OneTimeLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pontious

Whatever dude, smoke another


110 posted on 09/10/2004 2:24:46 PM PDT by MMkennedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: HardStarboard
I wrote them an e-mail demanding that they fire Rather

I heard that based on an email from someone calling themselves "HardStarboard," CBS plans to fire Dan Rather - way to go!

111 posted on 09/10/2004 2:25:11 PM PDT by SittinYonder (Tancredo and I wanna know what you believe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Dan - what's that there stain what's on yer blue dress... Ah think ya dun bin caught...


112 posted on 09/10/2004 2:25:30 PM PDT by badgerlandjim (Hillary Clinton is to politics as Helen Thomas is to beauty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

What time does this come on. It has been so long since I watched this tripe I forgot.


113 posted on 09/10/2004 2:25:36 PM PDT by Nov3 (They knifed babies, They raped girls, They forced children to drink their own urine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pontious

Has not addressed issues raised by forged documents? A troll with serious logic problems.


114 posted on 09/10/2004 2:26:31 PM PDT by don'tbedenied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: pompelmous

I've seen one doc and it's pretty suspicious.

There are several "th"'s all normal. But one particulary blurred one on the same document shows a small "th", but it looks to me like it's been whited out and the small "th" written in.

Pretty weird that it's the only "th" on the page and is different from all the other "th"s on the page.


115 posted on 09/10/2004 2:26:37 PM PDT by dawn53
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder
Rather's secret weapon? The lost memo:


116 posted on 09/10/2004 2:26:43 PM PDT by rocklobster11
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA

"Well, Rather says the documents are "authentic"...what does that really mean??? All depends on what the definition of "is" is....here we go again. "

They are authentic documents... the authenthically forged kind.


117 posted on 09/10/2004 2:27:06 PM PDT by Kirkwood (I think, therefore I am Republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA
Is there any reason why CBS could not be sued for liable, given their public assertion that they obtained the documents and know the source and they are not disclosing it?? Could they not be FORCED to provide that information in a court of law??? And what will the Bush administration's comments be about this????

While I understand sometimes reporters have sources that don't want to be known what could be the reason here? Were the documents obtained legally or stolen, where did they get them and when, who else has seen or heard of them and when? why did they wait until now to bring them up and not in 2000 or before?...the source needs to be on TV or the docs should not have been presented as genuine.

CBS also needs to have the family's point of view presented as they are the closest living relatives of the alleged author of the docs.

Rather is a fool and their is no fool like an old fool. He thinks the titanic will close its watertight doors and sail away like it didn't hit an iceberg, it will sink sooner or later hopefully taking him with it..

118 posted on 09/10/2004 2:27:47 PM PDT by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: NYCVirago

Yeah, that's the one I saw and there's only one "th" in superscript on the page...all the other "th"s are normal size.


119 posted on 09/10/2004 2:28:23 PM PDT by dawn53
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Humble predictions...

Rather will focus on the superscript "TH" and identify a typewriter of the time that could do it, ignoring whether or not a National Guard base would have such a machine. He'll also discuss how other machines of the time could support some of the other features that have come under scrutiny, but not discuss why somebody at the NG would go to such lengths to use features that were complex at the time.

He will complete ignore the issue of kerning, which seems to be the most damning.

He'll protect his sources and refuse to discuss where he got the memo and who his "experts" are who confirmed authenticity.

He'll drop a hint that this is all another VRWC.


120 posted on 09/10/2004 2:28:55 PM PDT by Akira (Experience is a hard teacher, but fools will have no other.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-174 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson