Dan Rather, when did you stop beating your wife?
http://www.madkane.com/wwwboard/messages/3286.html
“One report describes Robin Rather as an environmentalist and "a likely candidate for Austin Mayor in 2006." Another report states that she lives in the same congressional district as the former Texas lieutenant governor and heavyweight Democratic contributor Ben Barnes. He is the man behind most of the charges about President Bush's service record. Potential mayoral candidates and heavyweight campaign contributors tend to mingle. And according to that second report, Robin Rather and Barnes worked together on Democratic party fundraisers--perhaps including that March 2001 event described above.
Dan Rather refuses to disclose the provenance of the forgeries, and CBS claims that they came from Lt. Col. Jerry Killian's "personal" files, which his widow and son deny. So where did they come from? And why is Dan Rather stonewalling--despite the terrible risk both to himself and to CBS News?
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
Did the documents come from Barnes? If so, how did they make their way to Dan Rather? Was Robin Rather the conduit, either for Barnes or for some unknown party? If so, then Dan Rather's seemingly inexplicable conduct suddenly makes sense. If the disclosure of certain facts could be expected to cause his daughter severe damage, what father would not risk everything he had to attempt to insulate her?
Rather's logic is that I'm in a hole, so let me shovel out some more dirt. Yeah, that will fix the problem.
If Rather goes down, it will be closer to 02NOV04. The idea being that if W is in the lead, a shakeup will distract some voters.
fox really needs to have a national nightly news broadcast on their affilliates. Simply run the first half hour of brit hume's show!
If so, then Senator Kerry's poll numbers would be 15 points lower than they are -- which means he would be completely out of it -- if the media reported the news straight. But, with the liberal media spinning the news his way, Kerry is still in the running.
[Full rack of Sarcasm torpedoes ARMED. FIRE!]
What if I have a grainy wrinkled fax of a Photoshop
picture of RatherStupid(TM) giving a Lewinski
to a llama?
And then claim all of the tin-foil hobos I
interviewed ("what's the frequency, Kenneth")
authenticated the picture?
And then--oops--other people are able to
recreate the picture on Photoshop, but I claim
that the photo could have been taken with
the (notoriously authenticatable--just ask UFO nuts)
Polaroid?
And I don't have the originals?
And I won't name my source?
And then impugn the motives of those questioning
these faxes, saying I won't succumb to pressure from
well-financed partisans?
And then--gasp--it turns out that every person
I asked about the story who disagreed, I didn't
use? Or that I lied to them about what they
were verifying? Mis-describing the pictures over
the phone, pretending they were eyewitness notes
instead of a fax of a Photoshop document?
And then--shudder--it turns out that those I DID
quote from, back off from their claims, except for
one 86 year old woman who used to be Rather's
typist tell me she heard other journalists
saying he sucked Donkey D*cks? And she still
says my photo is fake, because I used a Llama,
and not a Donkey, in the picture? But she
knows "these kind of thoughts went around" the
newsroom, and did I know that he was a knee-jerk
liberal, too?
And after all this comes out, I then bleat that
since RatherLazy(TM) is not answering the charges
it only makes them more likely to be true?
Will, say, PETA buy into it? No? Aren't they interested
in ANIMAL RIGHTS?
How close-minded are YOU, anyway?
THE ABOVE IS A FAIRLY 'ACCURATE' 'coroboration' of
the rigorous logic and analysis of RatherDumb(TM) and CBS.
[Full rack of Sarcasm torpedoes ARMED. FIRE!]
What if I have a grainy wrinkled fax of a Photoshop
picture of RatherStupid(TM) giving a Lewinski
to a llama?
And then claim all of the tin-foil hobos I
interviewed ("what's the frequency, Kenneth")
authenticated the picture?
And then--oops--other people are able to
recreate the picture on Photoshop, but I claim
that the photo could have been taken with
the (notoriously authenticatable--just ask UFO nuts)
Polaroid?
And I don't have the originals?
And I won't name my source?
And then impugn the motives of those questioning
these faxes, saying I won't succumb to pressure from
well-financed partisans?
And then--gasp--it turns out that every person
I asked about the story who disagreed, I didn't
use? Or that I lied to them about what they
were verifying? Mis-describing the pictures over
the phone, pretending they were eyewitness notes
instead of a fax of a Photoshop document?
And then--shudder--it turns out that those I DID
quote from, back off from their claims, except for
one 86 year old woman who used to be Rather's
typist tell me she heard other journalists
saying he sucked Donkey D*cks? And she still
says my photo is fake, because I used a Llama,
and not a Donkey, in the picture? But she
knows "these kind of thoughts went around" the
newsroom, and did I know that he was a knee-jerk
liberal, too?
And after all this comes out, I then bleat that
since RatherLazy(TM) is not answering the charges
it only makes them more likely to be true?
Will, say, PETA buy into it? No? Aren't they interested
in ANIMAL RIGHTS?
How close-minded are YOU, anyway?
THE ABOVE IS A FAIRLY 'ACCURATE' 'coroboration' of
the rigorous logic and analysis of RatherDumb(TM) and CBS.