 |
Posted on 01/12/2005 1:02:38 PM PST by RatSlayer
Let's start with the title of the CBS Panel: "Report of the Independent Review Panel Dick Thornburgh and Lewis D. Boccardi; Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Nicholson Graham LLP, Counsel to the Independent Review Panel." My first question is from whom is the review panel and its hired lawyers independent? Who paid the law firm for its hundreds, probably thousands of hours of research? I assume CBS paid them.
[snip]
So, for example, if CBS's own hired lawyer, Mr. Thornburgh had found that the document in question was actually a fraudulent Department of Defense document, or that anyone at CBS subjectively believed the document was fraudulent before they used devices of interstate commerce to broadcast it, he might have exposed CBS to criminal and civil liability on both forging government documents and wire fraud charges. The Thornburgh/Boccardi Report makes no such conclusion, although it does present facts that might lead a reasonable person to reach such a conclusion.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
I'm a virgin poster (I usually just wait for someone else to post and then reply), so please go easy on me.
More reasons CBS will never tell where the memo's came from. Of course, there's always the possibility that CBS dummied up the memo's themselves, which is all the MORE reason not to tell...
Sweet.
"More reasons CBS will never tell where the memo's came from."
I just bet Mary Mapes copy of MS Word defaults to the proper parameters.
BTTT
I'll read the rest of it when I have time - but so far there seems to be this amazing consistency - between a "news organization" that is indifferent to the basic factual integrity of what they disseminate as "news" and this attempt to present the truth of their errors. CBS seems to have a genetic inability to get it.
Hmmmm.
“One report describes Robin Rather as an environmentalist and "a likely candidate for Austin Mayor in 2006." Another report states that she lives in the same congressional district as the former Texas lieutenant governor and heavyweight Democratic contributor Ben Barnes. He is the man behind most of the charges about President Bush's service record (SeeBS 60 Minutes expose). Potential mayoral candidates and heavyweight campaign contributors tend to mingle. And according to that second report, Robin Rather and Barnes worked together on Democratic party fundraisers--perhaps including that March 2001 event described above.
Dan Rather refuses to disclose the provenance of the forgeries, and CBS claims that they came from Lt. Col. Jerry Killian's "personal" files, which his widow and son deny. So where did they come from? And why is Dan Rather stonewalling--despite the terrible risk both to himself and to CBS News?
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
Did the documents come from Barnes? If so, how did they make their way to Dan Rather? Was Robin Rather the conduit, either for Barnes or for some unknown party? If so, then Dan Rather's seemingly inexplicable conduct suddenly makes sense. If the disclosure of certain facts could be expected to cause his daughter severe damage, what father would not risk everything he had to attempt to insulate her?
Great Find!
You done good, RS.....
The little known (and used) "fraud template".
LVM
|
"If the disclosure of certain facts could be expected to cause his daughter severe damage, what father would not risk everything"
Consider the possibility that you're ascribing a higher standard of behavior here than the subject warrants. What you're talking about is one of those abhorrent 'family' values. (sarc)
I hope Mary Mapes brings a few more folks down with her before she's through. She may hate Bush, but at this point I suspect she hates Dan Rather more.
No wonder the first thing poor Dan did was say how sorry he was she was fired.
The four who were fired were all guilty as sin. But they weren't the only ones.
Not in my mind! Not at all. This report, as Tony explains quite well, was an inside job.
If CBS and Rather had one ounce of real decency they'd be looking for the source. Either they know the source, knew the documents were fake, or they don't have an ounce of decency .......... or all three.
LOL.
Sure you are....., and the checks in the mail and Dan Rather was politically motivated.
Unfortunately, I cannot take credit for the find. Limbaugh mentioned the article on his show and I was surprised to discover that no one had posted it more than an hour later.
Since it answered some of the questions I had about the report, I decided to go ahead and post it instead of being my usual lazy self and waiting for someone else to post it.
The fake, forged documents were "SO BAD", I'm almost inclined to believe that, "that's the way they planned it". Let's see who hires Mapes and friends. Let's see who the attorneys are. None of these folks care about their reputation. They've made their money.
You are the man.
Do not wait 15 months to post something again.
Thanks.
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.