Posted on 01/16/2005 6:23:28 AM PST by John Jorsett
Dan Rather was on the run, chasing big stories from New York to Florida to Texas and back to CBS headquarters in Manhattan. In less than a week: The Republican National Convention. A deadly hurricane. An interview for a blockbuster CBS investigation. Former President Clinton's open-heart surgery.
[snip]
Rather, 73, recalled somewhat vaguely that he had heard from his star producer that Burkett was a "straight-talking West Texan" with a reputation as a "truth teller." Had he turned to Google, though, the CBS anchorman would have found stories painting Burkett as something quite different: a highly controversial and disgruntled retired military man who had led the media astray before.
But Rather relied on the research of that producer, Mary Mapes, as both put their trust in Burkett. That fateful convergence helped produce a terribly flawed report that said President Bush shirked his military duty, a story that would backfire and cost Mapes and three others at CBS their jobs, while tarnishing Rather's storied career.
[snip]
How did it happen?
In a series of interviews and in the 224 pages of the independent panel's report, a portrait emerges of what is an inherently messy business — a television news operation "crashing" to quickly land a big story. The description of breathless news- hounds on the hunt might have been drawn from any of the nation's big newsrooms, were it not for a series of troubling patterns that ultimately crippled the CBS production, including: a glaring inattention to alternative points of view; the pronounced detachment of top news managers; and, especially, an extreme reliance on just one trusted individual to get the story right.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
And then CBS appoints Thornburg to the panel to investigate this story.
One little problem. Thornburg works for CBS ... he is their lawyer. And if he finds bias on the part of the network, he has opened up his own client to litigation.
Major conflict of interest.
That's part of the whitewash - the role that the bulk of the rest of the MSM is playing here. Very few are even questioning the term "independent panel" - when the panel was, as you noted, hardly independent and instead beholded to protect CBS's interests.
And there were two possible findings that could have led to criminal or civil investigations - that the documents were fraudulent and that the CBS employees deliberately tried to sway the election. Which is why the panel avoided reaching those conclusions despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
It's all part of the MSM whitewash cycle.
The bottom line is, CBS knowingly used forged military documents to fraudulently influence an election within 60 days of the vote. Dan Rather and his cronies should be charged in criminal court for this.
.
And LIBERAL Los Angeles Times Media Critic DAVID SHAW still insists on telling us that...
RATHER's work 'Shoddy, Slipshod' not LIBERAL..?
http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1227809/posts
NUTS
.
According Fox Sunday Morning, Rather is standing by the stories, despite the report and the evidence against it.
The failure of the MSM to declare the documents forgeries, doesn't pass the giggle test.
That figures. It's the ole Klinton defense. The vaunted CBS news professionals are now professing that they don't know what makes water boil.
The "independent panel" was hardly independent. Thornburg's law firm's biggest client is CBS! That's like having your own lawyer investigate you for misdeeds. They investigated, but due to lawyer-client privilege, certain facts would need to be buried in their client's best interest, wouldn't it?
A good amount of what they claim doesn't pass that test. They don't care. They are not about to admit their shortcomings, because it would force them to re-evaluate their core philosophies which they use to rationalize their lies, deceipts and omissions.
Bears repeating. Once that the cat was out of the bag that the Memogate story was blatently fake, CBS's legal strategy (in hindsight) appears to be:
A) Announce an internal investigation
B) Hope that GWB would win
C) Hope that GWB's "new tone" would not prompt future legal action against CBS. Remember, he's the only one with standing and potential damages.
If GWB did sue CBS, they have points A, B (no actual damages), and the 1st amendment to start undermining any case. The rest of the MSM would rally behind CBS during the trial and it would be a big distraction from anything GWB want's to get done.
Perhaps they suffer from the delusion that there are people who rely on LAT for news and informed opinion. Seriously, though, they have to cover the story and this article is about as anodyne as anything they could have run. It avoids factual mistatements and gross mischaracterizations, without attacking CBS' fig leaf of a report.
Rather was trying a political hatchet job! He had done it before! My bet is that he was well paid to do it when he did. The Swift Boat Vets were peeling away some of Kerry's attempted secrecy and deception and the dems needed something FAST to take the pressure off! The forgeries had worked in Kerry's file (the Lehman citations) and would work in the endless attack on Bush's record. Of course the CBS lawyers would place the minimum blame possible and sacrifice underlings to divert attention from the real truths. It is what Willie did with Monica; why wouldn't such a crooked approach work for Rather?
Rather disavowed his apology. He's still employed. Nothing changed.
Perhaps they suffer from the delusion that there are people who rely on LAT for news and informed opinion.
=======
Many do, who read the hard liberal rags...but we know that is not what they are gettting. How the RatherGate story was reported by all of them, bracketed them as to their extreme bias, to the extent of supporting and pandering to criminal acts of the left. Welcome to the left and their desperate and dangerous "anything goes" mentality. And the MSM just sings their song -- but I think it is a "swan song".
LATimes still pushing the story as true but unverified.
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.