Posted on 09/17/2004 10:38:02 AM PDT by blogblogginaway
An article on Wednesday about disputed memos obtained by CBS News that cast doubt on aspects of President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard truncated a quotation from David Van Os, a lawyer for Bill Burkett, a retired National Guard officer whom Newsweek called a source of the memos. Asked what role Mr. Burkett had in raising questions about Mr. Bush's military service, Mr. Van Os posed a hypothetical chain of events in which someone - not Mr. Burkett, he said - reconstructed documents that the preparer believed existed in 1972 or 1973. Mr. Van Os then asked "what difference would even that make'' to the "factual reality of where was George W. Bush at the times in question and what was he doing?''
The article also misidentified the position held by Mr. Bush's father in the early 1970's. (That error also occurred on Saturday, Sunday and Tuesday in articles about the memos.) The elder Mr. Bush was ambassador to the United Nations from 1971 to January 1973, and chairman of the Republican National Committee from 1973 to 1974. He was no longer a Texas congressman. (Go to Sept. 15 Article),
An article on Tuesday about the dispute over memos relating to President Bush's National Guard service misidentified the setting in which Bill Glennon, an I.B.M. typewriter specialist, examined them. He viewed copies on his computer at home, not at CBS.
BTTT. Playin' straight for the moment...
This is informed speculation, but it would seem to fit the orgins and intent of the faked CBS documentation. We know now that probable author Burkett has a Bush military records obsession, producer Mapes has looked high and low for such records for five years and reporter Rather, we can assume, badly wanted the career-capping story. These disparate movtivations came together in the form of an unholy trinity which convinced itself that records unavailable (either because destroyed or non-existent)would actually reveal the "outrageous" nature of President Bush's Guard service. It is but a small step to forgery (or worse) for those whose who cannot distinguish the intensity of their labors from futility and their beliefs from the truth.
But besides that, they got it right LOL
Who cares what this liberal blogger rag does. Why do they even bother with corrections.
Van Os is running for Texas Supreme Court!!!!!
is there a pink elephant in the room? these are little itty bitty corrections compared to the very large one that needs to be made standing over there in the corner. but then again, only conservatives seem to have the ability to see this pink elephant!
Why won't Kerry release his records by signing the 180 release?? Apparently there are 36 pages he refuses the Navy to put out, yet CBS and Dan Rather have it in their craw that the President, who has signed the 180 document for release has all his papers out there. I think we need to make this the ISSUE and help CBS along with their decent into the garbage can..
i had a dream that there were certain documents. imagine my surprise when the custodians denied their very existence! I painstakingly recreated them so that they were like those in my dream. how can anybody claim that the truth is otherwise? I got's documents! OK, they're not perfect, but they're the only ones around...
Think I might get in trouble if I present that check to a bank.
Well said, but you left out the political motives of Dan Rather and CBS News. This story is not entirely one of ambition, it has the smell of very partisan politics to it as well.
I think this is a backhanded dig at CBS to who refuses to make corrections!
Please note the following:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1218362/posts - Texas Democratic Women's group meets in Kinkos where forged memos faxed from.
Rachel van Os is a supporter of the Texas Democratic Women's group: http://www.1tex.net/demo/bcdw.htm
Rachel van Os is David van Os's wife: http://www.vanosforsupremecourt.com/dvo_photo_album_family.htm
Okay, this is all flimsy - guilt by association type of thing, I admit it. It stands a perfectly reasonable chance of being coincidence.
Like we did?
And we're "partisan political operatives in pajamas?"
Yeah, let's hope it's "career capping."
In the meantime, The Kerry Spot on NRO has an excellent piece on what must be done to keep the ball rolling RE: getting rid of Rather, Mapes, et. al.
It looks like Rather found his career-capping story, How I fabricate the news that I report. A fitting end to his career.
.... Mr. Van Os posed a hypothetical chain of events in which someone - not Mr. Burkett, he said - reconstructed documents that the preparer believed existed in 1972 or 1973. Mr. Van Os then asked "what difference would even that make'' to the "factual reality of where was George W. Bush at the times in question and what was he doing?''
Are Texas law degrees one of the prizes in Cracker Jacks?
Just wondering.
WHO CARES what these sleaze bags do. We KNOW what they're up to.
Just this: If the person FORGED the documents to a national audience, no one would, or should believe their lying story.
I think the documents were done in 2003 for Michael Moore. Their existence was widely rumored; finally CBS tracked down the source and got them.
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.