****BREAKING****SOURCE: BILL BURKETT USES ABILENE KINKOS

WMCA-NY ^ | 9.15.2004

[KMC1]

~10:41pm~ EST JUST GOT OFF THE PHONE WITH ABILENE KINKOS: Bill Burkett has a standing account with the Kinkos in Abilene Texas, and while the lady who answered the phone would not be more specific she did say Burkett was in there last week - she waited on him on last (a week ago) Tuesday....

[Jalapeno]

I know this sounds too easy, but Kinkos has computers...computers that use Microsoft Word...though you are supposed to bring your own disk, there may still be images or remnants of these "files" on their machines if they were created there...(back ups, recent files, etc.).

[MindBender26]

U might also want to get this out to your ping list:

Story is "Bill Burkett had account at Kinkos." How much faxing, copying, etc. is he doing to have an ACCOUNT there?

Secondly, did Burkett send docs to CBS, or did he send them to Kerry campaign, which forwarded them to Rather?

[San Jacinto]

I have had a lot of dealings with disgruntled ex-military men as they seek government benefits. In cases where such a person is suffering from some ill-defined physical or mental condition some years after his military service and tries to relate his condition to something that happened in military service for the purpose of receiving VA benefits, I have observed a general pattern of behavior. Typically, these people show signs of paranoia and delusional thinking. They will go to great lengths to try to establish the necessary connection between the alleged malady and active military service to qualify for benefits.

I have heard stories that claimant was on a "secret mission" for which there is no record, that the veteran's Form DD-214 military service record have been mysteriously altered, that medals were awarded for heroism but never received, that military medical doctors have covered up for the VA, etc. The most amazing characteristic of such people is their tenacity and compulsion to get even. Without exception, the crusade to get the benefits which they see as well deserved becomes a life-long endeavor. Having been "wronged" themselves, they see no problem with forging records or falsely swearing to facts to support their claims. I have seen it over and over. Vindictiveness is too mild a word to describe the mind-set I have observed over and over again.

Burkett seems to fit the profile to a tee. He is not running a scam seeking to embarrass CBS; he is simply continuing his crusade to get even with those he blames for screwing him over years ago. Bush and TANG are his targets here--not CBS.

That Burkett could produce a sloppy, inept forgery is not surprising. The question I have are these: (1) Who suggested to Burkett that he would have to have "documents" to be taken seriously in his claims against Bush; and (2) Was it CBS hubris that caused them to gobble up these forgeries and put them on the air? In other words, did CBS actually recognize the memos as fakes (or at least strongly suspect it), yet went with to story to hurt Bush, thinking they could pull it off?

[motor_racer]

If the DNC is linked to this, it is a FAR larger issue than Watergate. Federal crimes - forgery of official government documents is no petty B and E.

"What did the Senator know, and when did he know it?"

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

Where is a copy of this doc? I want to call them myself.

Several reporters have already called. The Washington Post called well before this thread and published an article. So what purpose would it be for you to call and bother Kinkos?

[MindBender26]

> Can any civil action be taken to get at Kinko's records?

No. No one has any "standing." Possible exceptions might be Bush, Killian family and CBS.

However, Bush is a public person. Very tough to libel.

Killian family might have case, but any document discovery would be months if not years away.

CBS sue? No way.

Finally, the issue of forging of gmvt documents being a fed felony. Not going to fly either. Sorry, but no chain of custody, no CRIMINAL INTENT, etc.

There is another avenue however. A promise to a source to keep document source secret is a contract between news media and source. Implied contract is; if you give me true and valid information, I will not reveal from where I obtained information. However, if information is false, and source knew or should have known information was false, or in this case, forged, there is no enforceable contract to protect source.

It's an extension of Black Letter Law. You cannot make a contract to do an illegal act. (You cannot make a contract to rob a bank, for example. That's why many "palimony" suits fail. The supposed underlying agreement would amount to a contract for prostitution.)

As an extension, you cannot make a contract to promote a forgery. There was a benefit to the source (they wanted Bush attacked) and they issued a forgery to do that. CBS has no responsibility to protect that source of the forgeries, In fact, as a news organization, it has a duty to tell the whole story and reveal the source, and their apparent motives.

Of course, good effing luck with that.....

[San Jacinto]

Good work all! However, the story here remains CBS. Any bozo can forge documents against the President. The press should have enough investigative brains to see through crude forgeries.

Bears repeating.

[struggle]

OWNED!

[longtermmemmory]

This is a distraction. The DNC/Kerry put the papers into the hands of the media.

He is the expendable fool who will cover for the people who used his insanity.

[OXENinFLA]

Now this is even funnier after finding out that they WERE from a Kinko's!!!

[longtermmemmory]

The disemination of the forgeries to distort a presidential election does have criminal potential.

The real fact is that CBS has no first amendment protection to conceal the source of the forgeries. (1st year law student will confirm that)


If anyone wants to do some research http://www.findlaw.com

[OXENinFLA]

SNARF...

[longtermmemmory]

Congressional subpoenas work fine.

A criminal search warrant works fine.

[maica]

The question I have are these: (1) Who suggested to Burkett that he would have to have "documents" to be taken seriously in his claims against Bush; and (2) Was it CBS hubris that caused them to gobble up these forgeries and put them on the air? In other words, did CBS actually recognize the memos as fakes (or at least strongly suspect it), yet went with to story to hurt Bush, thinking they could pull it off?

A) DNC

B)Of course, CBS realized that they were forgeries. The claim that they were working on the story for four years, means that the charges of missing the physical, etc were made in October, 2000 but there was no "proof" at that time. The four years were spent looking for the "proof."

With this year's election getting closer, it was imperative that documents be "found". After all, the charge was "true." "Everyone knows that Bush missed his flight physical" "He has to answer the charge" "It was probably because he was using coke" "After all Kitty Kelley has "proof" that he did. Etc, Etc.

#####

I am sure that Rather himself was using a typewriter when he was a reporter in the 70s. Even he would know that these docs were not done on a trypwriter.

[Big Giant Head]

Comment to Dan Rather: Never, EVER, play poker with Dubya.

BWAHAHAHAHAAAA!

[TRY ONE]

Thanks, appreciate the ping!

[dirtboy]

"KMC1 is an RNC Operative"

Yeah, it sure is a shock that a conservative activism site would have ... brace yourself ... REPUBLICAN posters ... and that some of them would be ... you'd better be sitting down for this ... REPUBLICAN ACTIVISTS!

If that doesn't discredit the entire blogsphere and return the MSM to its former eminence and glory, I don't know what does...

[smiley]

How's 'bout Sean Hannity footin' the food bill at Ruth's Steakhouse for y'all!

[Common Tator]

You leave out the FCC and its regulation enforcement power. If the FCC decides to investigate the matter.. They have the power to compel Kinkos and anyone else to testify.

The FCC is quasi judicial branch of government. They can be the accuser, pfosecutor, jury, and judge all in one agency.

You are discussing a civil case. That is not where the game will be played. This is a case of potential wrong doing by a Radio and TV station Licensee who has liceneses worth billions of dollars. And if Janet Jackson's breast justified an FCC case, then what do you think the Powell will do with this. The Communications act and the Rules and Regulations of the FCC are clear. CBS is in violation. They can be in trouble big time.

CBS would have fewer rights before the FCC than the accused in the Spanish inquisition. If Michael Powell and the FCC decide to go after them CBS could be toast. This as was established in the Red Lion VS FCC case.. The commision has the right to revoke CBS's broadcast licenses.

[Leatherneck_MT]

It appears Rather fell for some sort of Con, and is now between a rock and a hard place.

The real problem with this for Danny boy is that HE is the alleged professional here.

HE should have checked more thoroughly

HE should have done all the legwork

HE should have known the difference between MS Word and a 1970's style typewritten page.

HE did none of those things because he was so bound and determined that these memos were true.

The Professional was scooped by amateurs and will end up paying the price of his failure.

Sic Semper Tyrannus