Here's my problem with Burkett being the source.
WHY...WHY would CBS cover-up and stone wall to protect Burkett?
They could just say the guy is a "kook" and "disgruntled" (which are true) and say he played a hoax on them and they fell for it. We're sorry...never happen again...blah, blah, blah.
It does not make sense to me that CBS and Dapper Dan are willing to "sink the ship" and go down with it themselves, to protect this guy.
There had to be some other involvement by somebody higher up the Dem food chain for them to risk this kind of embarrassment.
Exactly.
Best guess is that Burkett is connected to the Kerry campaign, and that the DNC major principles were made aware fo what was occuring. CBS is protecting Kerry/DNC. It's a matter of proving it that will be the difficulty.
Certain organizations may be willing to take down CBS. They may be willing to take down Burkett. Taking down the DNC is another matter.
"WHY...WHY would CBS cover-up and stone wall to protect Burkett?"
Maybe the fax from Abeline went to someone Rather wants to protect, AND then to CBS?
Lost within a short time will be the name Saddam; for like Osama, he was never the purpose of this campaign. Never in the history of the world has a great society survived whenever its focus was allowed to magnetize to its most powerful. And here we will clearly have in view that there is little value accorded to the innocent 3-year-old Iraqi girl who will today be playing in the streets, or the 19-year-old soldier who will launch the missile that will kill her. What do you do? Watching the sunrise on a beautiful morning, I used to feel hope. Before my illness, I felt exhilaration at the prospects of the day. After my illness, I felt hope that I might work hard to live. Now I feel sickness that today another massive group of people, held worthless by this anointed king, will be trampled upon like grapes. But their blood will not be rendered into wine. It will be spilled into the sands of this desert or another, or on the streets of Washington, or in the halls of the US Congress, or in the courts.
Rest of the screed is here.
It's quite long and disjointed, but gives you a view into his mind.
I agree 100%. Rather has made these comments about the quality of the source, which he surely must know would ultimately (like, within a week) be outed, or at least authoritatively guessed. Isn't it a bit too neat that this guy is a nutcase--and far more ominously--dead-ender?
Maybe if they betray a "source," even a phony one, they fear they will never be trusted by any future "sources" to protect their anonymity?
Two words: legal liability.
They're not just protecting their co-conspirator Burkett...they're protecting their own assets (no pun) from a civil suit by the Killians. $$$$