Replies

If he had already created a video making these allegations, then why had he not volunteered to repeat them with Dan Rather earlier.

One of the first stories on this.
This is the first time Barnes has told his story publicly, but for years, the president has been hounded by questions about how he got in the National Guard.

They were claiming it was the first time he told it.

They were claiming it was the first time [Barnes] told it.

Good Lord. Barnes was telling it before the 2000 election, even though he had said the opposite when under oath in 1999. The story had already been fully discredited once.

I still can't conceive of how Cap'n Dan, the News Man, thought this was "news". Well, yes, I can. But...

Maybe Counterpunch is correct about Barnes lending credibility to the 60 Minute story but Barnes is too slick to get his hands dirty with anything like the memos.

More likely, Van Os was the "impeccable" source for the memos. He was former chairman of Travis County Democratic Party and most likely knew Robin Rather and her father. Max Cleland gets a phone call from Burkett that documents may exist and gives the go ahead for the "counterattack". Another conversation to confirm to docs are ready and then Cleland leaks to CBS. Mapes meets Burkett's lawyer, Van Os, who could assert attorney-client privilege if any questions are asked about the memos he does not want to answer. If he is the broker between Burkett and Cleland he could even assert attorney-client privilege with respect to any conversations with Cleland on behalf of Burkett.