Concerning the scandal surrounding CBS's use of forged documents, the way the matter unfolded leads me to the clear conclusion that DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe was either involved in the fraud, or, at the very least, knew about the fraud prior to CBS airing its hit piece.
Consider:
The CBS broadcast was on Wednesday, September 8, 2004. On Friday, September 10, 2004, the Washington Times quoted McAuliffe as denying all involvement in the forging and leaking of the memos to CBS. McAuliffe went on to state, concerning the forged memos, that: quote:
"If I were an aspiring young journalist, I think I would ask Karl Rove that question."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/nati...11417-2610r.htm
As McAuliffe's pointing a finger at Rove was reported in the September 10, 2004, edition of the Washington Times, this means his comments came no later than Thursday, September 9, 2004, just one day after CBS's broadcast. Does that make sense to anyone?
The first allegations that the documents were fakes came from conservative Internet sites, specifically a poster on Free Republic. As of Thursday, September 9th, the rumors that the documents were fakes were just that - rumors. Yet, McAuliffe's response, in my opinion, was an acknowledgement that the documents were fakes. What would you expect a major party chairman to say under these circumstances.
I would think that a dignified person would say something to the effect of, "I saw the CBS broadcast and found it very interesting. As to the authenticity of the documents, I trust that CBS did a thorough investigation into them before their broadcast. I would assume that CBS will defend their reporting." Now, for McAuliffe, I would expect a response to the effect of, "These rumors come from rightwing nut balls on the Internet and I will trust the credibility of a great institution such as CBS over these nut balls any day!" Yet, McAuliffe's response was, keeping the timing in mind, in my opinion an acknowledgment that he knew the documents were fakes. What if the documents had ultimately proved to be real? McAuliffe's pointing a finger at Rove would have looked incredibly silly.
McAuliffe, in my opinion, knew that the documents were fakes when he made his finger-pointing comments at Rove. And, the only way that McAuliffe could know so early on that the documents were fakes would be if he was either involved with the manufacturing and leaking of the documents to CBS, or if he at least had knowledge that the documents were fakes prior to CBS airing them.
Thoughts?
Mia T,
Personally, I think you are a genius and I find your posts FANTASTIC. Believe me, you have far more supporters than you do critics here...Keep up the great work, my friend. You are very much appreciated.