Letter to CBS Employees - results of Investigation

Internal Memo | January 10, 2005

[Seaplaner]

Ralph, I have the same question. Where is the sincere and heartfelt apology (and bigtime retraction) to President Dubya?

And also, where is the apology to the family of the National Guard officer in who's name the memos were fraudulently prepared and aired?

Hmmm?

[Seaplaner]

"Mary Mapes is terminated, effective immediately"

As nice as that sounds, I would not be surprised to find her working at NPR or some liberal media outfit within a few weeks.

She will be a hero to the perverse progressives who view fraudulent memos and lying as a sport, and getting caught as a minor penalty.

[Ciexyz]

I'm delighted that the Abu Ghraib lady is out on the street. Mary Mapes and the network had an ax to grind from the day they first began pushing the Abu Ghraib story down America's throats. We're still suffering from it...our soldiers are dying in Iraq trying to protect our freedoms, and people on the home front are still being forced to endure their daily media mention on Abu Ghraib.

[ChicagoRighty]

Mapes has been found to have said she wanted to "get Bush bad". She claimed, gleefully "this time, there is blood in the water."

[GOPJ]

Thanks for the ping.

[Randy Papadoo]

For Rather not to have gotten the ax immediately, there had to be a deal made between CBS and Thornberg et al. I am not a conspiracy theorist, and here's why I make that conclusion:

Rather knew absolutely everything there was to know about the unverifiability of those documents. He presented his report on 60 Minutes II, accompanied by some college professor (?), allegedly a documents expert.

In a very carefully rehearsed dialogue, Rather asked questions of this man, who continually replied in agreement with Rather, using the word "consistent" frequently. Everything was consistent with a military memo of that kind, the signature was consistent with Killian's known signature, but the expert was giving generalities only, nothing certain. At the end of this questioning by Rather, he put words in the expert's mouth by asking, "Then there's nothing you have found to indicate that these documents aren't completely authentic."
And the expert said "no", but not very emphatically. (And it later turned out that he was a fervent Kerry supporter.)

Right there, with that question, Rather attempted to turn a bunch of "consistencies" into "proof positive", and it wasn't even close to that. I was jumping up and down in angry rightousness over that. (I have 32 years of investigative experience, and saw the fraud taking place right in my face!)

I point out this circumstance to you: If Rather believed the documents were truly authentic, then why did he even have the expert on the program? An expert wouldn't have been needed, would he?

That proves that Rather absolutely knew the documents couldn't be authenticated, and thus he knew that when he used them to smear Bush on 60 Minutes II.

Rather got caught deliberately lying to his viewers. (Redundancy for emphasis.) Without even considering how busy he was and all the rest, Rather's dishonesty was more than enough to get him fired.

I wonder why Thornberg didn't make this finding and report it? CBS paid Thornberg for the investigation, Rather avoided the ax.

[antiRepublicrat]

Why is everyone being so harsh? This is the biggest "we were wrong" I've seen from any large organization in a long time. It's impressive to see a news organization say "the bottom line is that much of the September 8th broadcast was wrong, incomplete or unfair." I expected much more waffling and softer terms. I also expected them use Mapes as the scapegoat, but lots of heads rolled on this one with various firings and demotions.

As for Rather not being fired, some people are just too big to fire for their screw-ups. Look at Rumsfeld.

[ChicagoRighty]

>> Why is everyone being so harsh? This is the biggest "we were wrong" I've seen from any large organization in a long time.<<

My take is that is appears on its face that Rather gets a big 'pass' on the culpability.

Also, "bias" is ruled out, which is, seemingly, a stretch. We all know that they would not write down "we're all Democrats, so let's run a Bush-bashing story that is based on a forfeited document."

So I guess there would never be proof of political bias and that is just nutz.

[VMI70]

Thornburgh is a puke...always has been, always will be.

[antiRepublicrat]

My take is that is appears on its face that Rather gets a big 'pass' on the culpability.

He got it in the report too. And making the biggest name in your organization step down (I doubt it was voluntary) isn't a pass to me.

So I guess there would never be proof of political bias and that is just nutz.

Although we're interested in the reason for the bias, the report concentrated on what went wrong in the organization and how to fix it. It was a practical document in its purpose, and I can see there's no need to find out the personal motives for the employees doing what they did. We know it anyway.

[ChicagoRighty]

>> And making the biggest name in your organization step down (I doubt it was voluntary) isn't a pass to me.<<

But it was one of those wishy-washy acts of 'stepping down'. For the majority of folks, he is retiring of his volition.

>> I can see there's no need to find out the personal motives for the employees doing what they did. We know it anyway. <<

You and I may 'know it', but to at least make a mention in the report, a hint (besides 'myopic zeal', which could be for anything and suggested that it was for making a deadline or to be first) would put a stake in the sand for the masses that spend not one one hundredth of the amount of time as you and I do on the issue... the voters, their viewers.

Bottom line is that a major network's new department knowingly tampered with an election and got caught... but not a mention of it in the report.

[suekas]

I have always found Peter Jennings, to be the worst of the lot. Right after 9/11, I read on FREE REPUBLIC, that Jennings refused to use the name "Reagan", when reporting about Reagan National airport. I found this hard to believe, especially given the general emotions felt, after the 9/11 attacks. I watched the ABC news with Peter Jennings, a few weeks, after 9/11, when it was announced, that the airport was going to be reopened. Sure enough, he kept referring to it, as National Airport, in Washington D.C.
I watched the news again, a week later, on the day the airport actually opened. Jennings and another reporter, were smugly, smirking, as though they had a private joke...both kept referring to the airport as "National Airport", in stead of Reagan National Airport.
I've rarely watched the ABC news, since.

[infowarrior]

But CBS and Moonves now claim that CBS was trying to fix the election for Kerry but that there was no political agenda behind it? The claim is so utterly bizarre as to call into question not only Moonves competence and integrity, but the integrity of the investigative panel as well.

Actually, it doesn't call into their integrity, which in my opinion is nonexistent at any rate, but it does call into question their very sanity...

the infowarrior

[Ciexyz]

Thanks to Mary Mapes, Abu Ghraib will go on forever. Another accused is currently on trial. Then there will be appeals.

All this, because of a media campaign to get Bush on Iraq. They zeroed in on one problem, and we'll hear about it ad nauseum for years.

[lawdog]

FYI...

Back when Richard Thornburgh ran for the U.S. Senate, and lost, Thornburgh left behind an unpaid bill of almost $170,000 owed to Karl Rove & Co. for services in conducting a direct mail campaign. It is clear that the authorized campaign committee—the "Thornburgh for Senate Committee"—had hired Rove & Co. and that it was liable. Unfortunately, the committee was broke. So Rove sued Thornburgh personally, seeking to hold Thornburg personally liable on the debt.

P.S. Thornburgh counter sued Rove...no love lost there.

[GOPologist]

BTW, CBS, where is the apology to President Bush.

Also, CBS, your henchlady has been chasing this this 1999; she has not been looking to crucify the President????????

You, CBS, are hogwash!!!

[MamaLucci]

Very interesting, thanks.

[ScholarWarrior]

Gotta read her "statement". Hubris. Pure and simple.

They should be eviscerated.

[MindBender26]

One of the largely unknown facts about PJ is that in his personal life, he has at times made Slick look like a choir boy.

[Phrostie]

The Panel found that Dan Rather was pushed to the limit in the week before the September 8th broadcast. He was finishing up the anchoring job at the 2004 Republican Convention and was covering Hurricane Frances in Florida.

OK Dan, But were you pushed to the limit for the entire five years that you were trying to 'get' this story? Didn't your failure to uncover anything tell you anything? You are supposed to be a veteran journalist Dan, why are you hiding behind this rookie's excuse?