Posted on 09/14/2004 7:38:25 PM PDT by ambrose
Secretary: Memos are forgeries
That's why we have juries ambrose. Sometimes the evidence is conflicting.
---"Another former Texas National Guard officer, Richard Via, also said that the documents were fakes but that their content reflected questions about Bush that were discussed at the time in the hangar at Ellington Air Force Base, where he had a desk next to Killian's. ---
I thought Killian shared an office and secretary with Harris.
This "case" would never make it to a jury.
Attempt to introduce these docs...
Objection: lacks foundation
Sustained...
Sec. starts to talk about what Killian "really" thought...
Objection: Hearsay
Sustained...
Defense moves to dismiss...
Granted...
Maybe CBS will find an old typewriter, type out all this stuff minus the errors found (so far) present it as the REAL original and then have somebody notice the paper has not yellowed over 30 years.
A "new" witnesses that can point by point verify the old lady including that as she says he locked CYA stuff away after having her type it...gee no..that doesn't sound..."convenient"...
No, I mean the exculpatory docs for Bush which are genuine. Hearsay is a problem, but then the testimony is that he said it reflecting his state of mind, and nothing more, for impeachment purposes, so in it goes.
To hell with the memos! I'd like to see the goddamned media focus on Bush's CURRENT record. (Which is only a continuation of his past record.)
Right. So CBS News presses ahead knowing that the documents... ...were forgeries? I don't think so. I bet for every one of the experts noted in the WP article, CBS has at least five stating that the documents are real.
There's nothing.. in the memos that is scandalous enough to warrant this level of hype over them being a possible forgery. So, what's all the fuss about?
If the documents are a forgery, only Karl Rove would have put those papers out there. It is consistent with his trickery. In the 2000 campaign, Rove put out braking news, the same day of the first debate, of a tape sent to him of Gore's debate strategy. No one ever saw the tape because it was all a lie placed by Karl Rove to steal news time away from the debate. Rove has played many of the same tricks in the past.
How do we know Karl Rove is not behind this ?
It's up to rove to prove he is not guilty of this Just like it's up to those that believe the docs are forged to prove they are forged.
There is NO evidence to collaborate forgery! That is why CBS is sticking to its story.
It sounds like some people in the unit have had it out for Bush for a long time, and they peddled their crap to someone who took their gripes and converted them to fake memos. Suppose my office mates and I start speculating, with no proof, that the secretary is banging the boss. Then suppose that several years later, we decide to gin up some fake documents that "prove" our speculation. That sounds a lot like what happened here.
I don't think CBS would ever run the story without the documents. Without the documents, you simply have various people saying this did or did not reflect Killian's opinions. I suspect the "swing voter" will not weigh the conflicting claims, but simply tune the story out entirely.
Ya, I already made that point. Somebody cooked the docs up to get CBS to run with it, maybe even knowing that in the end, while the memos would go down along with CBS, the issue would resurface, and something as a result might skake loose, that would make it all worthwhile. That's life in the media/political game.
And, I read that she isn't a George Bush fan......
posted on 09/14/2004 7:41:33 PM PDT by mattdono
That part is true.
but is telling the truth, despite her non-support of W.
3 posted on 09/14/2004 7:41:33 PM PDT by mattdono
This part is pure balony.
From what I have read, her responses are full of DNC talking point words and phrases.
She probably would not know the truth if it bit her on the hind end. Also, I bet that she would not recognize President Bush if he walked up to her.
This sounds just like the story that the dnc came up with after the '00 election.
About the senior citizens that did not know how to follow the arrows on a ballot but can keep up with 25 bingo cards during a bingo game.
The dnc and mainstream medis also forgot to mention that the ballot was designed by a democrat and a sample ballot was mailed to each voter weeks before the election so that the voters could familiarize themselves with the ballot.
In this day and age, people can count on but a few things.
But one thing you can count on is: This lady was better coached on what to say and how to word it than a professional athlete.
These sad DUers are a tad confused. I don't think the word they mean is collaborate but corroborate. It's also not Rove's burden of proof since he's nowhere involved in this whole mess...that's pure bizarro land delusion but then again so is the attitude of they must be real and I'm gonna by fingers in my ears and screams "la la la la" until it goes my way..
I read in another interview that the CBS document used terms that were not used by the National Guard. So it probably isn't a remake of the originals.
The TANG angle from the dumbocrats is a non-starter for voters. They have seen W as CIC and have no doubt that he is up to the job. In political campaigns, military service is always cited as a capability of leadership. Discussing service in that regard is a political discussion.
That really isn't what the CBS issue is about.
The CBS situation is a media issue. It is, in fact, a significant battle between the "old media" vs. "new media". This is a battle that has a great influence on politics, due to the unmitigated bias that we see each day.
The secretary can make commentary about Bush all she wants, that isn't going to have any effect on Bush.
BUT, the key here is that it is yet another nail in the quickly constructed CBS/Dan Rather coffin. It is important that we expose CBS for the frauds that they are.
We FREERERs have served notice: be fair or pay the consequence. And, this not only has a direct effect on CBS, but it will have an ancillary effect on the other media outlets (ABC, NBC, etc.).
While I am partial to the internet medium, Free Republic isn't necessarily going to replace the "old media", but it can drastically change how they operate. Free Repulic, and more generally the "blogosphere", will force the "old media" do actually do the job that it hasn't done for years. The "media wing of the democrat party" has covered for the leftists for years. Any legitimate reporting (showing the real agenda of the left) means that the left is done, as the American people utterly reject leftist dogma.
The issue is bigger than some old lady making comments about the current CIC. And, besides, Killian's son politely dismissed the old lady's anti-Bush comments.
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.