Rather: Bush Guard Memo Story "Accurate," Never Proven Not So

In an interview with Marvin Kalb carried live by C-SPAN from the National Press Club on Monday night, Dan Rather made quite clear that he believes in the accuracy of his Bush National Guard story based on what everyone else realizes were fabricated memos. Rather argued that "one supporting pillar of the story, albeit an important one, one supporting pillar was brought into question.

To this day no one has proven whether it was what it purported to be or not." Kalb pressed for clarification: "I believe you just said that you think the story is accurate?" Rather affirmed: "The story is accurate." Rather soon maintained that the public recognizes the "hidden hand pressure" politicians exert on media executives and so "they understood that what we reported as the central facts of the story and there were new insights into the President's, were correct and to this day, by the way have not been denied which is always the test of whether," and he moved on before finishing his sentence. Later, talking about using "courage" as a sign-off in the mid-1980s, Rather rued: "There's part of me, it says, you know, 'damn I wish I hadn't caved, I wish I'd stuck with it.'" That prompted Kalb to ask: "Do you think your network showed courage last fall?" Rather answered by remaining silent for seven seconds.

On bloggers, who were credited with exposing the forged memos, Rather condescendingly suggested there are some in that field with integrity equal to his: "There are bloggers who have as much integrity as I, or the most integrity-filled people I know." Showing that he still sees the episode through political eyes, he complained about how the news media "picked up pretty quickly on those bloggers who were partisan, politically affiliated and/or had an ideological axe to grind with us."

Rather also admitted his naivete about the impact of bloggers: "I think it was true of a lot of news organizations, unaware or not knowing enough of how quickly bloggers could strike."

Kalb, a former correspondent for both CBS News and NBC News, where he hosted Meet the Press, suggested a pre-planned conspiracy against the CBS story as he marveled at how the bloggers were able to react so quickly -- posting evidence within hours which undermined the authenticity of the memos.

Kalb was hardly an impartial interviewer. The press release last week, from the George Washington University announcing the event, featured this bit of infatuation for Rather by Kalb: "Dan Rather has been my friend and colleague for more than 40 years. I think he is an exceptional journalist, who can shed light on the radical changes sweeping through the media. He can also help us understand his unintended role as a player in last year's presidential election. I can't wait to sit down and talk with a journalist who has become a legend in his time."

Rather appeared in the latest installment of a series of interviews conducted by Kalb, which are presented under the moniker of The Kalb Report. Held at the National Press Club, the series is produced by the George Washington University and the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy at Harvard University. C-SPAN, along with XM satellite radio and ABC-owned Washington, DC radio station WMAL, carried live the 75-minute-long September 26 session which began at 8pm EDT. The Kalb Report's Web site: www.gwu.edu

When posted, this item will include video and audio of Rather's claim that his story was accurate. Last night I also provided additional video clips, in both RealPlayer and Windows Media formats, to Matthew Sheffield, Executive Editor of the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org, for a node he began Monday night on the Rather interview. Go to: newsbusters.org

Now, highlights of Rather's remarks, based on the closed-captioning painstakingly corrected by me against the video:

# Rather: "One thing I learned, I knew it going in, but you know sometimes you have to keep learning. I'm fond of saying this because it's true: 'I don't always learn fast but I learn good.' And one of the things I learned about this is not to overgeneralize about bloggers. In going down the list of what things have happened to us. Yes, there's some strange and, to me, still mysterious things, certainly unexplained things about how it got attacked and why even before the program is over, but I try not to bog down in it. There are bloggers who have as much integrity as I, or the most integrity-filled people I know have, and who feel that it's their mission in life to ask questions and keep on asking questions. There are other bloggers, and I'll go ahead and say it that some of the quote, 'mainstream press,' seem to take, you know, if not delight in our dilemma, they picked up pretty quickly on those bloggers who were partisan, politically affiliated and/or had an ideological axe to grind with us. And instead of saying well, they've raised these questions, for example about the documents -- 'are these questions true?' -- next thing I know they were in mainstream newspapers and away it went. "But it's very important, Marvin, to understand that I, we had a responsibility when we did that story. We met that responsibility to the best of our ability at the time. We did not do it perfectly. We did not do it perfectly. And we, when I say we underestimated the potential of the attacks that were going to come on us, some of them from the right motivation, some of them from what I've described before. Here's the thing about blogging: You don't want to over-generalize. There are a lot of different kind of bloggers. But we, and I include myself in this, we dealt with a story that had thermo-nuclear potential for reaction. And instead of saying we have to be prepared to respond quickly to any and all criticism, we were remarkably unprepared for that. I think it's fair to say and again I just speak for myself but I believe it to be true of CBS New and I think it was true of a lot of news organizations, unaware or not knowing enough of how quickly bloggers could strike. Strike is kind of an emotionally-laden word, I guess. But both those who didn't wish us well -- and may have been organized for their own purposes -- but others who were saying hey, I don't believe this. You just don't want to over-generalize, but we were not prepared to meet."

# "Now an independent panel that was appointed, headed by a long-time Republican, a man -- Thornburg, who's former Attorney General of the United States and is a distinguished American, but a good friend of the Bush family headed this independent panel and the independent panel, what did they conclude? One, that what we did, whatever anybody thought about it was not born of political bias. Number two, that with three to four months, and many millions of dollars to spend on trying to determine, they could not and did not determine whether the documents in question were what they purported to be or not. And, the third thing that was said by the panel was that the major, the main reason that a panel had to be appointed and what they were most critical about is how we defended the story after the story had run. And I'm paraphrasing here but I think it's an accurate paraphrase, and I want it to be said in my own case that my principal ah, -- I don't want to say crime, my principal problem was that I stuck by the story, I stuck by our people for too long. I'm guilty of that. I believed in the story and the facts of the story were correct. "One supporting pillar of the story, albeit an important one, one supporting pillar was brought into question. To this day no one has proven whether it was what it purported to be or not. In terms of [unintelligible "myself"?] it was 'he stuck by the story,' I stuck by the story because I believed in it. 'He stuck with his people.' Listen I've made nearly every mistake in the book. But my attitude when we go into stories, we go into them together, we ride through whatever happened and we come out the other end together. You know, I didn't give up on my people, our people, I didn't and I won't." [Applause] Kalb: "Dan, thank you. You said, I believe you just said that you think the story is accurate." Rather: "The story is accurate." Kalb: "Okay."

# Kalb: "You have an opportunity now, I mean you're a reporter for 60 Minutes, that's a very important program. Would you go now and go back to that story and do it again and find the documentation that would in fact would prove what you believe to be the accuracy of that story?" Rather: "Straight up. No chaser, no. One, CBS News doesn't want me to do that story, they wouldn't let me do that story." Kalb: "Why?" Rather: "Well that's a question you have to ask them. But I've moved on from it and I've done my best to put it behind me, I've, you know, taken my licks, taken my shots."

# Rather: "I have always been humbled and I recognize that's not a word generally associated with anchor people and the egocentric world of television news, but I've always been humbled by how much the audience gets it. That is, if you do something wrong, if you try to fool them, they pick up on it right away. And never more than what this last year has said to me that the public at large did not, as you put it, 'feast' on us. The public at large, they got it. They knew exactly what happened. Nobody had to spend much time explaining it to them. We had a story, you can argue that we shouldn't have, might of, could of, shouldn't have handled during political camp-, but they understood that what we reported as the central facts of the story and there were new insights into the President's, were correct and to this day, by the way have not been denied which is always the test of whether-. They understood that on the documents, as I said once, I wish we had done it better. No excuses. Not a matter of we didn't have enough time or were crashing, no excuses. They get it. And that gives me a lot of hope. "I don't want this to sound like some sophomoric journalism but I really believe it inside that something is turning in the country when it comes to journalism. I think that people have begun to understand there are pressures on journalism. Again I'm not complaining about it. It goes with the territory. You have to be able to face the furnace and take the heat if you're any good at all. But the public's now beginning to understand that because a number of things have happened. This whole business of, get the picture, we have a reporter who didn't print a story in jail when somebody somewhere fairly high up had exposed an undercover intelligence agent, and is still running around, now, however that turns out, and wherever you stand, the public has a sense, you know, there's a lot that goes on when it comes to pressuring reporters, and a lot of games are played in there, and when a reporter handles a difficult story, when a reporter faces the furnace and says, 'okay, I'll take the heat,' the public understands it. Now, if you're wrong, they're going to nail you. You don't have to wait for the politicians or the political operatives to do it, the public will nail you and they'll nail you solid. But if you are out there every day trying to do a good job and you make a mistake, or it's a little unclear whether you made a mistake or not, they get it. I have more confidence in the audience today than I have ever had and part of it is because I think something is beginning to turn. People understand that many of the politicians in both parties and of all persuasions have gotten so good at what I call 'hidden hand pressure,' the public is waking up to it and if we're to have an increase in integrity-filled journalism it will start with the public demanding it."

# Kalb: "You've often used the word 'courage' in your broadcasts, why?"... Rather: "First of all, it was my father's favorite word. My mother's favorite word was meadow. Somewhere back in the, you know, catacombs of my mind as a child I know, God rest her soul, my mother's favorite word was meadow. She liked the ring of the word, she liked what it conjured up in her mind and what she hoped it would conjure up. And my father's favorite word was courage. Again he liked the strength of the word. He liked the definition of the word so it begins with that. That's part of it. The other is that I came to like the word a lot, sometimes saying it, giving my best chance to mount maybe just a wee, small part of it. But it was no big deal and I became convinced that it was not a good idea to end the broadcast with it when I made an effort to do so one time. But for you alone, and for you alone today only I'll reveal something to you: There's part of me, it says, you know, 'damn I wish I hadn't caved, I wish I'd stuck with it.'" Kalb: "Do you think your network showed courage last fall?" Rather, silent for seven seconds. Kalb: "Okay." Rather. "No, I don't want that silence to indicate an answer. I think that's something each person has to judge for themselves. I was then, and I have been ever since then, and I am now really proud to work at CBS News. I've been mightily blessed and really lucky. I like the people and, yes, I think there are all kinds of courageous people inside CBS News."

A little turn about is fair play, isn't it?

I posit that Dan Rather is a blithering f*****g idiot. I offer, as proof, the archives of Free Republic and the opinions of many freepers over the years.

Okay, Dan, PROVE IT ISN'T TRUE.

Clymer.

So if there is no evidence to prove something isn't true

Then it must be true???

HIS MIND IS WARPED!

To this day no one has proven whether it was what it purported to be or not." Kalb pressed for clarification: "I believe you just said that you think the story is accurate?" Rather affirmed: "The story is accurate."<<

Vs.

>>Rather spoke after interviewing the secretary to Bush's former squadron commander, who told him that the memos attributed to her late boss are fake -- but that they reflect the commander's belief that Bush was receiving preferential treatment to escape some of his Guard commitments.<<

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24633-2004Sep15.html

I seem to have a different definition of accurate.

DK

oh man, I HATE that Rather admits to "Fake but Accurate".
My greatest fear is, somebody down the road, showing some goofy memo, telling me wrestling is fake.

Rather also admitted his naivete about the impact of bloggers: "I think it was true of a lot of news organizations, unaware or not knowing enough of how quickly bloggers could strike."

Yep, that lying piece of s--t, Rather, would have waited until closer to the election if he had known how fast bloggers could "strike". ( Strike is defined here as "being able to uncover a forgery)

This is so sad. :*(
I think it's time Mr. Rather was tested for
Alzheimer's, apparently his 'misremembering'
of the facts *proven* by many good bloggers
here and elsewhere has gotten out of control!

Yeah...I want a magical fax that can change anything I put through it into the TrueType font of my choice, without simultaneously altering any forged signature on the document.

Dan Rather? The resigned-in-disgrace-like-Nixon Dan Rather? It's hard to believe he's still around, and running at the mouth.

My Dad always said, "Class will tell."

From that site:

Mary Mapes has a book coming out It's called "Truth and Duty: the Press, the President, and the Priveledge of Power."

I suppose it would be too much to ask of a disgrace like Mapes to check the spelling of the words in the.... TITLE OF HER BOOK!

("Privilege" is NOT spelled "Priveledge".)

Rather: Bush Guard Memo Story "Accurate," Never Proven Not So

My assertion that Dan Rather and Fidel Catro were homosexual lovers is accurate.

It has never been proven not so.

Photo of Dan copping a feel.

I know I'm getting horribly bogged down in minutia, but honestly, do normal people really have a "favorite" word? For some reason the concept is so far outside my realm of experience, that it's really tripping me up.

"Look Ma, I painted 'COURAGE' on all the walls of the den, it is my favorite word ya know."

I can think of all sorts of words the evoke fond memories, or are generally pleasant, but a favorite word? Courage? Meadow?

And how in the world did I manage to make it to this point in my life without having the slightest inkling of what either of my parents' favorite word would happen to be? Oh, I can remember any number of words that you might think were their favorite by the frequency and emotion under which they were tossed around, but they really weren't anything like 'courage' or 'meadow.'

I was getting a little concerned about this whole idea and then I remembered that Rather's off his gourd.

He'll never believe they documents are fakes because he WANTS them to be real. He SO wants to do anything that can bring President Bush down. He still holds a grudge against #41, and he can't get to him now, so he'll take it out on his son, instead.

Okay, I checked Amazon and apparently Mapes DID spell her title correctly. I guess it was just the person who runs that site you linked to who can't spell.

You are absolutely right. I made stupid assertion without any facts and in the process made myself look foolish. (See Dan, its not that hard to admit when you screw up. ; ) )

I still think there are a lot of loud Baby Boomers who for some reason thought they would be young and hip and non-establishment forever. Most boomers are good and decent grown ups. The others are loud and large concentrations seem to live in Hollywood and Newsrooms all over this country.

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.