Posted on 09/24/2004 5:03:29 AM PDT by harpu
This article indicates that Burkett may have been unaware that the documents were fake. So it is important to locate who gave him the documents.
more crap from the FORT WORTH[less] STARTLEGARM!!!!!
tick....tock....
or should I say:
tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick...
According to the Associated Press, Lockhart said he listened to some campaign advice from Burkett for a few minutes and does not recall talking about Bush's National Guard records.
LOL! What a convenient lapse of memory.
Where did Burkett get the idea that Dan Rather has 70 mollion viewers? Forged Nielsen documents perhaps?
Has anyone called the agency that produced the ad to find out when it was produced?
Good question.
The Fort Worth Star-Telegram is a liberal, kerry-supporting, Bush bashing rag. Yet, I still find it somewhat amazing this paper tried to bury the news in its own article.
The headline and lead paragraph of the story is basically-"No collusion between CBS source and kerry campaign." It is not until PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE STORY that there is a passing reference to the news of Lockhart demanding the documents from Burkett.
In other words, the paper is so partisan, it throws away a major scoop in order to protect kerry.
Newsmax, Fox and Drudge have picked it up, but will the big boys even bother to ask Lockhart about this? Major, major suppression is underway. Will it work?
"I was absolutely and clearly told that that was as far as anyone could go without crossing the line of [journalistic] ethics," Burkett said.
During a single phone conversation with Lockhart, Burkett said he suggested a "couple of concepts on what I thought [Kerry] had to do" to beat Bush. In return, he said, Lockhart tried to "convince me as to why I should give them the documents."
In the third paragraph, Burkett describes Lockhart as trying to convince Burkett to give "them" (who? CBS or Kerry campaign?) the documents.
In the first paragraph, Burkett is quoted as though CBS gives him assurance that his phone nmumber will be given to Lockhart - and this is AFTER CBS has the documents.
Which is it? I think that Lockhart's call was the trigger to Burkett, to give the documents to CBS.
I wonder how hard it would be to find a copy of something with Burkett's signature and compare it to the fake Killian signature . . .
I don't think Burkett did, but he might have. Regardless of the affiliation of the forger, the DNC and Kerry campaign are up to their eyeballs in this, and CBS is going to be exposed as working in at least loose coordination (maybe through a small number of strategically placed operatives) with the DNC and Kerry campaign.
The other media outlets likewise work in harmony with the Democrat party, but instead of being caught in direct coordination, operate with selective and biased reporting.
Anyway, I speculate that a mid to lower-level party hack crafted the forgeries, and that Burkett was the bag man. Like CBS, Burkett wants to believe the forgeries are true.
Goodness, I feel as tho I need hip boots to even read this drivel.
"During a single phone conversation with Lockhart, Burkett said he suggested a "couple of concepts on what I thought [Kerry] had to do" to beat Bush. In return, he said, Lockhart tried to "convince me as to why I should give them the documents.""
Was this phone call before or after Burkett met with Cleland and Rassmann on their trip to the Crawford Ranch???
IF that happened.... I just think it is absolutely hillarious.
He's a cornered rat, and cornered rats can be made to run in the right direction... if you put on the pressure and give him an exit.
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.