Posted on 09/19/2004 9:40:13 PM PDT by LibWhacker
After days of expressing confidence about the documents used in a "60 Minutes'' report that raised new questions about President Bush's National Guard service, CBS News officials have grave doubts about the authenticity of the material, network officials said last night.
Those officials, who asked not to be identified, said CBS News would most likely make an announcement as early as today that it had been deceived about the documents' origins, and that it was mounting an intensive news investigation of where they came from.
But these people cautioned that CBS News could still pull back from an announcement. Officials were meeting last night with Dan Rather, the anchor who presented the report, to go over the information it has collected about the documents one last time before making a final decision.
People at the network said it was now possible that officials would open a formal internal inquiry into how it moved forward with the report, which officials now say they are beginning to believe was too flawed to have gone on the air.
The report relied in large part on four memorandums purported to be from the personal file of Mr. Bush's squadron commander, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian, who died 20 years ago. The memos, dated from the early 1970's, said that Colonel Killian was under pressure to "sugar coat'' the record of the young Lieutenant Bush and that the officer had disobeyed a direct order to take a physical.
Mr. Rather and others at the network are said to still believe that the sentiment in the memos accurately reflected Mr. Killian's feelings, but that the documents' authenticity is now in grave doubt.
The developments last night marked a dramatic turn for CBS News, which for a week stood steadfastly by its Sept. 8 report as various document experts asserted that the typeface of the memos could have been produced only by a modern-day word processor, not Vietnam War-era typewriters.
The seemingly unflappable confidence of Mr. Rather and top news division officials in the documents allayed fears within the network and created doubt among some in the news media at large that those specialists were correct. CBS News officials had said they had reason to be certain that the documents indeed came from the personal file of Colonel Killian.
Sandy Genelius, a network spokeswoman, said last week, "We are confident about the chain of custody; we're confident in how we secured the documents.''
But officials decided yesterday that they would most likely have to declare that they were misled about the records' origin after Mr. Rather and a top network executive, Betsy West, met in Texas with a man who was said to have helped the news division obtain the memos, a former Guard officer named Bill Burkett.
Mr. Rather interviewed Mr. Burkett on camera this weekend, and several people close to the reporting process said his answers to Mr. Rather's questions led officials to conclude that their initial confidence that the memos came from Mr. Killian's own files was not warranted. These people indicated that Mr. Burkett had previously led the producer of the piece, Mary Mapes, to have the utmost confidence in the material.
It was unclear last night whether Mr. Burkett told Mr. Rather that he had been misled about the documents' provenance or that he had been the one who did the misleading.
In an e-mail message yesterday, Mr. Burkett declined to answer any questions about the documents.
Yesterday, Emily J. Will, a document specialist who inspected the records for CBS News and said last week that she had raised concerns about their authenticity with CBS News producers, confirmed a report in Newsweek that a producer had told her that the source of the documents had said they were obtained anonymously and through the mail.
During an interview last night she declined to name the producer who told her this but said that the producer had been in a position to know. CBS News officials have disputed her contention that she warned the network the night before the initial "60 Minutes'' report that it would face questions from documents experts.
In the coming days CBS News officials plan to focus on how the network moved ahead with the report when there were warning signs that the memorandums were not genuine.
Ms. Will is one of two documents experts consulted by the network who said they raised doubts about the material before the segment was broadcast. Another expert, Marcel B. Matley, said in interviews that he had only vouched for Colonel Killian's signatures on the records and not the authenticity of the records themselves. Mr. Matley said he could not rule out that the signatures were cut and pasted from official records pertaining to Colonel Killian.
In examining where the network went wrong, officials at CBS News were turning their attention to Ms. Mapes, one of their most respected producers, who was riding particularly high this year after breaking news about the Abu Ghraib prison scandal for the network.
In a telephone interview this weekend, Josh Howard, the executive producer of the "60 Minutes'' Wednesday edition, said he did not initially know who was Ms. Mapes' primary source for the documents but that he did not see any reason to doubt them. He said he believed Ms. Mapes and her team had appropriately answered all questions about the documents' authenticity and, he noted, no one seemed to be casting doubt upon the essential thrust of the report.
"The editorial story line was still intact, and still is, to this day,'' he said, "and the reporting that was done in it was by a person who has turned in decades of flawless reporting with no challenge to her credibility.''
He added, "We in management had no sense that the producing team wasn't completely comfortable with the results of the document analysis.''
Ms. Mapes has not responded to requests for comment.
Mr. Howard also said in the interview that the White House did not dispute the veracity of the documents when it was presented them on the morning of the report. That reaction, he said, was "the icing on the cake'' of the other reporting the network was conducting on the documents. White House officials have said they saw no reason to challenge documents that had been presented by a credible news organization.
Several people familiar with the situation said that they were girding for a particularly tough week for Mr. Rather and the news division should the network announce its new doubts.
One person close to the situation said the critical question would be, "Where was everybody's judgment on that last day?''
Yeah, I realize that. I spent a good couple of hours today writing to everyone and their mother. There was a good contact list on a thread floating around here. I still have more writing to do though. I'm actually mad at CBS because I really enjoy their Monday night comedy lineup. Oh well. Gotta follow the conscious.
Yea, and for all we know she could have been one of the skeptic's at CBS that was steamrolled by Rather, et.al.. We should wait and see what comes out.
Can't be. They're the ones who have always accused Bush of that. If they admit that they are stupid, then what were they doing slaming Bush for that?
And beyond all that, the much bigger question is -- drum roll please -- WHO WANTS A DUMB*SS BRINGING THEM THE NEWS?
actually impeachable also goes to credibility or criminality, both may be applicable here:
1 a: to bring an accusation against b : to charge with a crime or misdemeanor; specifically : to charge (a public official) before a competent tribunal with misconduct in office
2 : to cast doubt on; especially : to challenge the credibility or validity of impeach the testimony of a witness 3
3 : to remove from office especially for misconduct
And how long will it take before MM plays the victim card herself, one wonders? (Quick, it's in the liberal playbook somewhere, ... ;-)
This gang that couldn't shoot straight are filthy, immoral pigs.
Lijahsbubbe: What a crock! This Clinton-speak, Alice Through the Looking Glass, bizarro statement is too much.
__________________________________________________________________
Oh, but last week, Danny boy said CBS had "investigated thoroughly" and had special experts who verified the authenticity of these forged documents. And the CBS spokeswoman said they had utmost confidence in the "chain of custody" for these forged docs.
And now CBS is saying they're gonna find out where these memos came from even though they said they already investigated thoroughly and had utmost confidence in the "chain of custody." And those special experts who verified the authenticity of the memos? Well, actually, they didn't. In fact, two of these special experts said they did just the opposite. But CBS says they're lying. How can that be?
Hey, I'm a pretty confused guy. My head is spinnin. I think I better lie down for awhile. Maybe I need to see the doctor.
Oh, my head! It's spinning, spinning....
Hahahahahhahaha yeah hahahaha me too hahahoo hoohoo heeehee... hey, I hope they don't toss me in the same rubber room as Burkett. You know, the crazy guy that channeled dead Killian's feelings to Danny boy? Yeah, that guy.
Relax, step away from the computer. You've contracted severe lib-spin-itis. Listen to Rush for three hours, read articles by Charles Krauthammer, William Kristol, and Michael Reagan, and you'll be fine. ;)
Oh, don't forget, the 86 year old typist knew about Mr. Killian's "feelings" too.
That old 70s song, Feelings, just popped into my head.
Feelings, wo wo wo feeeeeelings, wo wo wo feeeeeelings, again in my heart. Anyone remember that one?
I got more words for them. Want to hear them? Ok, you twisted my arm.
Amateurs
Phonies
Snots
POS's
Incompetents
Fools
Weasels
Laughing stocks
Cheats
You're kind. I've got a few words for them, but I don't want to get banned.
It wasn't an accident that one of the speeches referred to a soldier at Walter Reed who was in horrible shape and said he was going to get rehabilitated and go back and join his buddies in Iraq.
At the end of the day…
And at 2:00 AM, it is the end of the day (you guys are ruining my life…I see an article, begin to read and then I’m hooked) but at the end of the day…a few things matter the most.
1. Whether or nor Rather stays, he’s a joke.
2. Ratings will be higher this week…most Americans love to watch a guy squirm
3. Heads will roll and any predictions are pure speculation at this point.
4. In spite of what we know, it’s going to be difficult to tie the DNC to the actual story. While this may be disappointing, it will clear this crap out of the way and the SwiftVets are going to be loud and clear again.
But more important than anything are the lessons I have learned watching, joining and then become an activist for this cause I truly believe in.
I was watching a FOX rerun this evening. There was a piece on polls…why the discrepancies, what to believe and what not to believe.
In part of the story, the reporter (I’m sorry I don’t remember his name) was commenting about the silliness of some questions such as “who would you like to have a beer with” or “who would you like to have over for dinner”.
As ridiculous as these questions are, I came up with a pretty quick answer. I would choose Buckhead. More than President Bush, over Danny boy (as much as it would be fun to watch him squirm), I would choose Buckhead.
He’s obviously a bright guy, but probably not the smartest guy around. No offense Buck, but given time, lot’s of folks would eventually see the problems with the memos.
I would choose him for his courage and conviction. He noticed a problem and whatever reservations he may have had about his safety and anonymity, the truth and getting it to the general public was more important.
It is that process- measuring personal risk against the need for the truth that once made great journalist. What wonderful lessons Dan Rather could learn from Buckhead.
I have three sons…two who will vote for the first time this election. If I had my choice of whom to introduce and influence them out of all parties involved…I choose Buck.
Congratulations Buckhead. I’m proud to be a part of a group of men and women such as you. We all are.
Goodnight all.
And I got another "MISLED" over here in case you need a spare, CBS! Yeah, come a little closer so you can get a good look at my "MISLED."
A year ago we got a call wanting to make us a Nielsen household. They were extremely upset when we turned them down.
They even called back, trying to convince us what an honor it was to work for them for free. Barf.
Oh, yes. They do owe the man their abject apology, don't they? They just smeared his reputation in front of 285,000,000 people, didn't they? You suppose they feel sorry they did that? Yeah, I know. Neither do I. I don't think George is gonna hold his breath waiting for their apology.
"Righto, Danny. Just take a number over there by the donut tray. It'll be a couple of weeks or so before they call yours. So just kick back, get fat, and watch the pro's."
The pro's in PJs that is!! :)
Six words: Connie Chung On The Comeback Trail
This story has been useful.
I was at a table passing out Bush campaign goodies and some young fellow comes up and says he likes Bush and going to vote for him, but Cheney likes war too much.
So, I said, "Well, you know Dan Rather lies. I think the news media have lied about Cheney, too. (Light comes into the fellow's eyes) Cheney isn't like that at all, I told him.
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.