Nothing in the story about Rather's quote of an unimpeachable source. This is hogwash, if the Post wants to do CBS propaganda then that is just their part of the fraternity of the MSM. The source is Burkett and only an idiot or a partisan would refer to him as an unimpeachable source. The Boston Globe and Newsweek had Burkett nailed as a crazy obsessive Bush hater without a shred of credibility on which to base a major story. From this article CBS is attempting to appear that they were in a hurry, which they were. They were in hurry to take down a sitting President with what could constitute a political drive by. But once the source is known which is undoubtedly the crazy man Burkett, this version does not play at all. I guess this is some substance for the apologists in the MSM to hang onto for the Sunday talk shows. I will take Scaroborough and Buchanan who properly throwing around the term criminal conspiracy when then were not heaping abject ridicule on Crazy Dan. In this article, I do not believe I saw the word forgery or the word criminal or the word conspiracy. Earth to Washington Post, there is some criminal liability here. It is okay to bring in those terms even if you are talking about your MSM brothers.
"The source is Burkett and only an idiot or a partisan would refer to him as an unimpeachable source"
True..and no doubt one of the reasons why Rather will never admit the documents are fake..To do so would be to reveal the source (and therefore the fact that Rather is an "idiot")