CBS producer called Kerry adviser

CNN ^ | 21SEP04 | CNN

[familyop]

Mapes suggested Lockhart contact retired officer Burkett

A campaign adviser for John Kerry told CNN he spoke with retired Texas National Guard officer Bill Burkett -- the man who CBS said provided them with disputed documents -- days before the "60 Minutes" piece aired and after a call from a CBS news producer, but....

[counterpunch]

Max Cleland's schedule on August 25 in Texas needs to be fully examined. Cleland tried to deliver a letter to President Bush around 1pm in Crawford, followed immediately by a short press conference. When did he leave Texas, where did he leave from, and what did he do in the time in between?

Only days prior to Cleland's impromptu visit to Texas, he began discussions with Bill Burkett, who is now known to be CBS's source for the forged documents.

Later the same day of Cleland's Texas trip, Burkett announced in a rant to President Bush on the progressive onlinejournal that, "I know from your files that we have now reassembled, the fact that you did not fulfill your oath, taken when you were commissioned to 'obey the orders of the officers appointed over you'."

What time was this rant posted?
Did Cleland help him write it?
Who is the "we" Burkett is referring to concerning the documents being "reassembled"?
Did Cleland help Burkett forge the documents on that day?

Crawford, Texas, where Cleland was at 1pm on August 25, is only 162 miles from Baird, Bill Burkett's home.

Did Cleland make a visit there that day?

Did someone in the Kerry campaign act as a middleman in passing along the information to CBS that Burkett had these documents?

Did someone in the Kerry campaign lobby CBS to use these documents or vouch for their authenticity?

CBS claimed that these documents came from "unimpeachable sources."
Other than Burkett, who are the other sources?
Why did CBS consider Burkett "unimpeachable"?
Was the journalistic fraud perpetrated by CBS so deep and corrupt that they actually relied on the sole testimony of a documented crazy person who had already been discredited on kook conspiracy theories involving Bush?
Or is it more reasonable to assume that CBS News would not put their credibility and even their careers on the line unless there was someone like Cleland or Barnes vouching for the documents as well who CBS is now protecting?

CBS must answer the question of how they learned that Burkett now had these memos. Did the discovery of these new documents play a part in Ben Barnes' decision that he was now ready to talk to 60 Minutes on air, after Mary Mapes had long been urging him to do so? Is there a connection between this sudden change of heart by Barnes just two days before CBS hit "pay dirt" with these forged documents?
Did Ben Barnes see these documents even before CBS did?

Here is some insight into the question:

Rumors about the memos had circulated in the Democratic Party and media circles for weeks; in fact, CBS had used their existence to help persuade Barnes to talk. He told Democratic friends before the "60 Minutes II" broadcast that if documents the network was hunting for were found—and were authentic—"the election is over."

But now we learn that Barnes decided to talk to CBS just a few days before CBS received the documents:

During the Republican National Convention in New York, Rather got a call from Ben Barnes, a onetime Texas lieutenant governor and veteran Democrat who has known the anchor, a former Houston TV reporter, for 30 years. Barnes said he was ready to say before the cameras that he had pulled strings to get Bush a coveted slot in the Texas Guard in 1968. Mapes had long been urging Barnes to tell his story.

On Friday, Sept. 3, the day after the convention ended, Mapes hit pay dirt. She told Howard her source had given her the documents.

This would mean that the Kerry campaign -- which Barnes is co-chair of -- got the documents first, then CBS received them a few days later.

[beyond the sea]

Mary Mapes -- The Malignant Match Maker of See BS

[HoustonTech]

Bump

[anton]

Isn't this obvious: Max Cleland is the so-called unimpeachable source. Rather was referring to him in his statement last week. The scapegoating of Burkett was just damage control.

[Jet Jaguar]

"CBS producer called Kerry adviser"

Stupid title.

I would call any CBS producer a Kerry advisor.

[afz400]

"Isn't this obvious: Max Cleland is the so-called unimpeachable source."
Cleland is a US government employee making 130k per year. Who in the government is protecting him from investigation?

[familyop]

"The scapegoating of Burkett was just damage control."

Yes. But Burkett is suing CBS. ...priceless!

[gridlock]

Time for CBS to have a major housecleaning. If they fired the ossified Left-Wing on-air talent and producers and replaced them with young, hungry, Center/Right personnel, and announced a major shift to the right (We Report/You Decide), they could have half the broadcast market sewed up by Election Day. Young and Center/Right is where the demographics are, anyway.

And those kids will work cheap!

[anton]

Good point.

[LS]

Today on "Fox and Friends," the "debate" featured Ellis Henichen (a hack, but a pleasant hack) and Monica Crowley (picture please). Monica was quite low key, smiling like the cat that ate the canary. Her only response to many of Ellis's comments was "we are just starting to unravel this web," and, of course, she tied it to Kerry without, well, tying it to Kerry.

My point is---and I' could be all wet---I think she, and many of the GOP insiders, KNOWS SOMETHING, that much more excrement is about to hit the rotating blades, and that she was perfectly willing to keep dragging this out.

Also, on Hannity and Colmes last night, they had Gordon van Sauter, former head of CBS news, who, while admitting terrible mistakes were made, refused STILL to admit that this was done out of bias or partisanship.

So CBS is in denial, and the Kerry campaign may only be in the opening stages of Rathergate.

[Brilliant]

The circle of conspiracy is complete.

[Brilliant]

I don't listen to anything Dan Rather says anymore, but according to FoxNews, Rather's apology was hedged. He basically stated that he still thinks the documents are real, but he can't prove it. And he defended his sources.

Sounds like a non-apology to me.

[Caipirabob]

Thanks for the posts, both of you. I think it's very telling how the administration seems to be sitting back and issuing reserved comments over the whole event while the media seems to be driving as compelled by bloggers.

It's the old "Don't interupt the enemy while he's making a mistake" routine. Must be pretty bad, even CNN came out and impaled the rats this morning.

PJ-Comix, I hope you washed your hands after visiting DUh!

[BillyCrockett]

Isn't it great to think of the Kerry Kamp dealing with a million locust coming at them from 360 degrees? Another word beginning with "K" Mr Kerry... Karma. What goes around, comes around.

[Jim Noble]

This will become very, very important.

[OldFriend]

Does anyone doubt that Rather coordinated his newscast with the DNC?

[Reo]

"Time for CBS to have a major housecleaning. If they fired the ossified Left-Wing on-air talent and producers and replaced them with young, hungry, Center/Right personnel, and announced a major shift to the right (We Report/You Decide), they could have half the broadcast market sewed up by Election Day."

Put Bernard Goldberg in Dan Rather's chair and I'd even watch CBS, (which I haven't done for decades).

[TomGuy]

Someone posted last evening that one PDF version of the documents showed a creation date of 02/06/04 (date recorded internally by PDF creation program).

If that is true, the documents have been 'around' for months.

Some reports last week from both CBS and DNC said they had the docs some 6 weeks before they were aired on 60 Minutes.

---

There are still more questions than answers about this whole thing.