Posted on 09/21/2004 9:21:43 PM PDT by neverdem
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Whoever, having devised any scheme or artifice to defraud transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. " U.S. Criminal Code, Chapter 63, Section 1343.
WASHINGTON At the root of what is today treated as an embarrassing blunder by duped CBS journalists may turn out to be a felony by its faithless sources.
Some person or persons conceived a scheme to create a series of false Texas Air National Guard documents and append a photocopied signature to one of them. The perpetrator then helped cause the fraudulent file to be transmitted by means of television communication to millions of voters for the purpose of influencing a federal election.
That was no mere "dirty trick"; it could be a violation of the U.S. criminal code. If the artifice had not been revealed by sharp-eyed bloggers, a national election could have been swung by a blatant falsehood.
Who was the forger? Did others conspire with him or her to present a seeming government document - with knowledge of its falsity and with intent to defraud, which is a felony in Texas? Who was to benefit and how?
CBS News belatedly apologized and agreed to appoint independent examiners. That's a start.
The government and the courts have no business forcing journalists to reveal sources. But no ethic requires a journalist to protect a source who lied. Accordingly, Dan Rather went to the Texas ranch of his source and telecast Bill Burkett's admission of having falsely "thrown out the name" of someone who gave him the false evidence. Burkett now claims his real source was some hard-to-find mystery woman.
What benefit did the Bush-hating Burkett gain from CBS in return for his fake documents? One plausible answer: he got coveted access to someone high up in the Kerry campaign.
We learned last week that Burkett had reached Kerry's convention introducer, former Senator Max Cleland, to plead for access to higher-ups so as to launch a "counterattack." Cleland confirms getting the call and says he told him to try the D.N.C., (where Terry McAuliffe, as former prosecutor Joseph DiGenova noted on MSNBC, carefully denied a role only in the preparation of the documents).
When his call to headquarters was not returned, Burkett then asked Mary Mapes, the CBS producer, to help him gain the top-level Kerry access he so highly valued.
Only days before the telecast, Mapes or some other "60 Minutes" staff member delivered the goods: their "unimpeachable" source was paid off with a call from Joe Lockhart, the Clinton press aide newly hired to strip nuance out of Kerry's message. With the number supplied by CBS, Lockhart called Burkett. We don't know what was said, but the call from on high was payoff in itself.
What should CBS do now? First, release Rather's interview with Burkett in its entirety; viewers are entitled to the outtakes now. Next, let Mary Mapes, at the center of all this, speak to reporters. Third, expend some Viacom resources to track down the possible original sources, including the man whose name Burkett says he "threw out" to mislead CBS.
Appointing independent reviewers should not be a device to duck all others' questions; that's Kofi Annan's trick to stonewall his oil-for-food scandal. But lacking the power of a grand jury's subpoena or testimony under oath, victimized CBS cannot put real heat on the perpetrator or conspirators. We have hard evidence of crimes by low-level operatives here - from wire fraud to forgery - as well as the potential of high-level political involvement. Is no prosecutor prepared to enforce the law?
Conservatives should stop slavering over Dan Rather's scalp, and liberals should stop pretending that noble ends justify fake-evidence means. Both should focus on the lesson of the early 70's: from third-rate burglaries to fourth-rate forgeries, nobody gets away with trying to corrupt American elections.
The material that might help move things along has already been developed as part of the Free Republic CBS Memo Forgery Project.
The result includes material for use with:
* station renewal jackets or the like
* discussions with MSM
* etc.
A key part is the Conclusion and Recommendation shown below which is downloadable as page 11 and 12 of the MSWord document here or as a pdf .
This key section is reproduced below, but actually looks much better in the downloadable MSWord document above:
IT IS THE CONCLUSION OF THE PROJECT THAT:
CBS DID NOT EXERCISE REASONABLE PRUDENCE IN PUBLICATION OF THE FORGED MEMOS ON 60MINUTES
In addition to the many items detailed in the Project Report, the following were immediate red flags:
1. The superscript "th" in the 04 May and in the 18 August Memos would have been a clear forgery indicator to anyone familiar with a manual typewriter, the only equipment available in 1972.
2. The layout of the documents including proportional spacing should have caused any staff member to try to replicate the memos in Microsoft Word default settings. A simple overlay held up to the window would have revealed the forgery.
3. The use of the "0" in the 04 May and in the 01 August Memo dates and the lack of a distribution list for the these purported orders would have led anyone with past military experience, even at the private level, to know that the documents were not valid.
4. The use of a validator with no admitted typographic expertise. Moreover, that validator was instructed to validate only one Memo signature from a photocopy, despite that validator's own previously published statements that a photocopy could not be used to determine signature veracity.
IT IS THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PROJECT THAT CBS AND 60MINUTES:
a. Issue a clear and unambiguous public apology to the American Public and to President Bush:
- on CBS News and on 60Minutes
- on the CBS web site
b. Terminate or accept the resignation(s) of those CBS person(s) asserting the authenticity of Documents on CBS News and on 60 Minutes.
c. Post on the CBS web site the source(s) of the forged memos and a chronology of the events relating to this matter specifically including contacts in electronic, telephonic, or written form with any 527, DNC, or Kerry Campaign employees, representatives, or agents. Also, immediately take steps to preserve all such notes and records.
d. Produce within 14 days a follow-up CBS 60Minutes presentation detailing the facts and circumstances relating to the acquisition and use on 60Minutes, CBS News, and the CBS web site of the forged documents.
e. As the forging and use of forged military documents, especially during a national election, is a serious and possibly criminal issue: formally notify the U.S. Justice Department, the Federal Election Commission, and the Federal Communications Commission of the details concerning the acquisition and use of the Documents and fully cooperate with any subsequent investigation(s) and, if appropriate, any prosecution(s).
.
Depending on what you want to use it for there are also an attachable:
* Main CBS Memo Forgery Report (pages 1 to 10)
* Executive Summary (pages 18 to 20)
* Technical Appendix MSWord Overlay on a forged CBS Memo (pages 14 to 16)
If you feel strongly, you can always replace the IT IS THE CONCLUSION OF THE PROJECT THAT:
and IT IS THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PROJECT with something stronger but then you need to sign it as it becomes your opinion or conclusion and not that of the Free Republic CBS Memo Forgery Project.
BTW, the original thread where this was reported is here if you would like to see the background.
No bad we don't follow Roman custom. If they commit suicide their heirs will inherit their estates. If they makes us do the dirty work, their estates are forfeited to the State.
Agreed. Turn up the heat 'til the birds start singing. It's all fun and games 'til a stint in the big house looms large. As an extra added benefit this conspiracy dominates the airwaves through to the election and Bush rides a landslide back to the WH. The dems can then choose to drag this out to the next election or get it over with.
IMO, CBS and Rather will not tell the truth, not without being forced to do so by threat of criminal prosecution. And even then, I wouldn't put it past them to lie anyway. They're scum.
Does any FReeper have a picture of the notorious "Mapes"?
Thanks for the info.
Comment# 12, the female behind and closest to Cleland in Mapes.
Here's another question that I haven't heard answered.
How did Mapes know to contact Burkett? We know Burkett was trying to shop the docs. Did he call CBS?
He says he called Cleland, and he called the DNC but got nowhere. But did Cleland or the DNC alert Mapes to Burkett? Otherwise, how did Mapes know Burkett had the docs?
Outstanding!
Thanks!
bump
Bump!
Safire needs to read USA Today more. They revealed the name of the non-source -- Conn. And he told USA Today he had nothing to do with this.
Conservatives should stop slavering over Dan Rather's scalp, and liberals should stop pretending that noble ends justify fake-evidence means.
Why shouldn't Dan Rather be fired? He was the one who pushed this story on the air.
I think Safire means Rather was just a useful idiot, and that the focus should be on the source of the forgery, IMHO.
I disagree with that. Rather still has neither retracted the story, nor even admitted the documents were forged. He's more than a useful idiot or a dupe; he is the reason this report got on the air in the first place.
It's still a relatively free country, so that's still possible. I don't believe Rather would knowingly take part in fraud for his "swan song". I could be wrong.
As I said, I sure as heck believe it. As Howie Carr put it, even the Boston Globe didn't think Burkett was a credible source. Yet Dan Rather said he was an "unimpeachable source."
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.