Posted on 09/25/2004 12:40:46 PM PDT by lancer
WASHINGTON -- The executive producer of CBS's "60 Minutes" midweek broadcast, who partially blamed the Bush White House for bogus documents used by Dan Rather, is a former staffer for New York Democrats who was still making political contributions while on the network's payroll.
Josh Howard served on the staff of Rep. Stephen Solarz and worked for Sen. Charles Schumer when Schumer was a state assemblyman, a background confirmed by CBS. Federal election reporting records show that Howard, identifying himself as a CBS employee, contributed $1,000 in each of Solarz's last two campaigns for Congress in 1990 and 1992.
When CBS first conceded possible defects in the documents about George W. Bush's military service, Howard said: "If the White House had just raised an eyebrow -- they didn't have to say they were forgeries -- but if there was any hint that there was a question, that would have sent us back."
What a stupid Clymer. Did it ever occur to him that Karl Rove knew that!
Imagine that! 'we don't have to prove they're real. "You" do!'
Excellent point. I can just see Rove saying "If CBS wants to hang themselves we'll give them all the rope they need."
What I would like to know is how many other networks follow the same underhanded process of coordinating their 'news' stories with the dem candidates.....AROUND THE COUNTRY.
Here's what I don't get; What the heck was so damaging about these memos even if they were real ( and I know they're not)? I can see the White House looking at them and saying, "yeah, so what, we've been over this many times" and blowing the guy off. JMHO.
As Hitchens said the other night, they're not forgeries, they are fabrications of documents that never, ever existed.
My question to the panel would be: How do you forge documents that never existed?
No CBS would have pounced on the denial and called it stonewalling. Nice try, but I don't believe for a minute that doubts from the White House would have caused CBS to back off and look more closely.
Easy answer---all of them (except "maybe" FOX). Watching ABC NEWS is like watching a Kerry policital ad. They ALWAYS have an early lead with a LONG video clip of a Kerry speech that just happens to allude to some other story (usually Iraq). Noticeably, there is NEVER a balancing comment/clip from the Republican side shown
I totally agree with you. I think Zell Miller said it best .. the dem party has been taken over by people who's only goal is to take down a sitting president during wartime.
One of the other people they refused to air was a former roommate of Bush .. their reason for not showing this interview .. the guy was too favorable to Bush.
I guess the CBS people are too stupid to pick up on that statement as an indication of total bias against the President.
Howard said: "If the White House had just raised an eyebrow -- they didn't have to say they were forgeries -- but if there was any hint that there was a question, that would have sent us back."
Can you imagine if the "White House" had tried to stop the story? The CBS slant would be "Those in the White House did everything possible to Stop this story!"
I guess liberals figure it's our responsibility to keep them from being brainless fanatics. Or something...
There is some sense of forgery where the signatures were added. If those were checks and the signatures applied as these were, they would certainly be called "forgeries." However, the point about fabrication is certainly well taken.
True. You just have to wonder about a "forged" signature on "fabricated" documents. LOL
What bothers me is that by using "forgeries" to describe all the documents, they are giving the impression that they had the original documents and just "copied" them.
They are just trying to give a false impression.
In the pursuit of accuracy, they should be saying, "fabrications, with forged signatures." I won't hold my breath.
I agree. So what if he missed a physical exam. Big deal!
WHO'S going to care? The hippy pot smokin liberal Vietnam democRAT generation? they don't care a toot! and the patriotic 'defend-America' crowd? Well, they will take W in a blind's eye over that commie lovin "Effing" Kerry.
What the heck was so damaging about these memos even if they were real ( and I know they're not)? I can see the White House looking at them and saying, "yeah, so what, we've been over this many times" and blowing the guy off. JMHO.
What was damaging was that the producers/CBS/Dan Rather were trying to say that Bush did not show up for his required health exam due to the fact that they had just started checking for drugs that year....oh, and then conveniently Kitty Kelly came out the next week and said that Bush took drugs.....and she happened to also mention that Bush did not show up for health exam.....this was explained on one of the freerepublic posts and makes the most sense! But, they did not succeed for many reasons and it came back to them.....YES!!!
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.