Posted on 09/20/2004 8:54:24 AM PDT by TheGeezer
Edited on 09/20/2004 9:07:32 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Update by moderator:
EXCLUSIVE
STATEMENT FROM DAN RATHER:
Last week, amid increasing questions about the authenticity of documents used in support of a 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY story about President Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard, CBS News vowed to re-examine the documents in question—and their source—vigorously. And we promised that we would let the American public know what this examination turned up, whatever the outcome.
Now, after extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically. I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where—if I knew then what I know now—I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question.
But we did use the documents. We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry. It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism.
Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully.
Carville and Begala behind this?
Bravo! Couldn't have said it better!
I apologize for jumping into this so late and not reading the other responses first, but this sentence immediately leaped out at me. So CBS didn't get the documents directly from Burkett? Well, who is the source if it isn't Burkett? A birdie tells me that the source is Max Cleland. Incidentally, he also says to take the Eagles tonight and give the three points.
Guess Greenfield's conveniently forgetten that he works for the network that was in bed with Saddamn.
Which is why they had the handwriting "expert" (forgot his name) vouch for the "authenticity" of the signature, misleading viewers into believing he was vouching for the authenticity of the entire document, not to mention also misleading viewers by not saying the document was not a copy, therefore the signature could of course be Killian's. Unbelievable.
Then, I recall, even after Buckheads post, the "expert" was on the next nite and Dan posed the question, "did you know you would come under attack for this" (not verbatim), to which the expert replied yes.
Further proof of Dan's attempt to continue to mislead the public even after questions about the documents were raised.
Ho ho ho ha ha ha, The only people who believe this live on the two left coasts and in Chicago.
Hey Dan,
Thank you very little, you're welcome even less!!
Now apologize to the President!!!
So next they will probably interview him and he will say he made the documents up but the content is true. Sigh.
I've seen articles reference 3,4, and 5 years.
And don't forget the Ma Richards attempt too.
Well, except for the kind of favoritism CBS shows when it comes to Democrats and other extremist liberals.
For legal reasons, it would be foolish for Burkett to admit that he was the forger. I still believe he was, but also believed he was vouched for in the highest ranks of the DNC.
With respect, I don't think Cleland sat there and two-fingered typed those things. Although I do think he's dumb enough to go down with the ship if he's asked.
I still think Burkett shopped them to the Kerry campaign. They would not turn down a gem such as this. So, they determine there might be problems - what to do? So, they just turn them over to CBS for them to decide if can use or not. CBS sends to the Whitehouse, ignores suspicions of experts and runs them.
Somewhere in there, CBS or the Kerry Campaign might have told Burkett they needed proof (or developed the proof themselves, took to Burkett to verify looked ok and then the documents faxed to CBS).
How did CBS know to get in touch with Burkett? They wouldn't have known Burkett from Adam's house cat. All roads lead to Max Cleland IMHO.
Could be .. Didn't Carville try pushing a bogus story back in the 92 election??
So was Burkett the "unimpeachable" source? If so, then CBS's credibility MUST suffer tremendously, for stating such a partisan hack is "unimpeachable". If he is not the unimpeachable source, then their credibilty must suffer even more.
Mr. President, please refuse to answer any press questions from CBS for the remainder of your two terms as President.
Which source? I want the bloody typist.
Carville, Begala and Rather behind this is my guess.
We know you are sorry, Dan, and we know you are also sorry you got caught, but we know too, that you have no regret or remorse for trying to destroy the reputation of President Bush, based on obviousely bogus documents.
We know, Dan Rather, that you are genuinely sorry to the point of tears, that your little scam failed to sink Bush and raise the scum you support to the top.
You have been outed before the whole world, and your partiality in favor of the looney left and it's candidate and agenda, is public knowledge. Maybe you can put a paper bag over your head and appear as the unknown anchor.
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.