Posted on 04/20/2012 9:30:26 PM PDT by Aria
Eight years ago, Dan Rather broadcast an explosive report on the Air National Guard service of President George W. Bush. It was supposed to be the legendary newsmans finest hour. Instead, it blew up in his face, tarnishing his career forever and casting a dark cloud of doubt and suspicion over his reportingand that of every other journalist on the case. This month, as Rather returns with a new memoir, Joe Hagan finally gets to the bottom of the greatest untold story in modern Texas politics, with exclusive, never-before-seen details that shed fresh light on who was right, who was wrong, and what really happened.
(Excerpt) Read more at texasmonthly.com ...
This was sent to me by a liberal. Wondering what you guys think. Sounds very far fetched to me - not to mention irrelevant but it is curious.
A LibTurd LSD induced wet dream.
Well, one thing it would mean if true is that the GOP is not the Totally Stupid Party.
I read the whole screed after it was posted on FR a few days ago. The author spends 90% of his time bashing Bush and trying to connect dots that can’t be connected, then almost in passing dismisses the “fake but acccurate” forgeries as unimportant because someone dredged up a typewriter from the 70s that has superscripts. Of course, we knew that all along, the point being that the faked documents were FAKES, they never existed in typewritten form. The technical forensic analysis showed the documents were absolutely identical to a modern Word document and no typewriter would have ever produced output that perfectly matched to a computer output 30+ years later.
FAKE Fake fake, Rather is a lying partisan publicity hack who is driven by his steaming pile of ego to try to prove he was an actual journalist before he dies, and he ain’t gonna make it.
Rather’s only purpose on earth has been to create the “Fake but Accurate” standard for left-wing forgery by which future fabrications can be judged.
I didn’t realize it was posted here before. Search doesn’t always work.
The whole thing seems really far fetched.
There is one key point, deep into the article, where the author finally gets to the point and there his whole argument immediately breaks down:
The morning before the broadcast was scheduled to air, CBS showed the memos to the White House for a response. Dan Bartlett was the networks contact. Before Bartlett was interviewed, he emailed copies of the memos to Albert Lloyd, Bushs longtime National Guard expert. In an interview in 2008, Lloyd told me he immediately recognized them as forgeries: I looked at them and I said, Dont do a damned thing with these, because these are fake.
Bartlett, however, appears to have ignored Lloyds assessment. When asked by CBS whether he doubted the authenticity of the memos, Bartlett replied, Im not saying that at all, adding that he only questioned the timing of their release. His interpretation of the memos, in fact, was that they reaffirm what weve said all along.
And so, on September 8, Rathers report aired on the Wednesday edition of 60 Minutes.
So the article claims that someone in the Bush White House recognized the documents as forgeries right away and says "Dont do a damned thing with these, because these are fake.". What does that even mean? Then the article claims "Bartlett, however, appears to have ignored Lloyds assessment," because he didn't say that the documents were fake. How does that make sense? So CBS uses the documents, claiming that they are real, and then gets in trouble for doing so. But then the article turns around and claims that the objections to the authenticity of the documents proved not to be accurate.
So what is it? Are the documents forgeries or not? The article doesn't say. It notes that the White House concluded that they were fake right away but does not say why. It faults the White House for not warning CBS that the documents were fake and theorizes that it was a deliberate set-up to withhold this assessment. But then the article states that the case against the documents collapsed leaving the impression that they are real.
Only a crazy, evil leftist would claim so many contradictory things at once.
this is why I don’t buy Texas Monthly.
“What’s the frequency, Kenneth?”
"There's no evidence so we must investigate."
"If you don't, we'll just nationalize . . . uh."
yitbos
there’s the BS in the story about proportional typewriters existing in 1973. They did, but they ware TYPESETTERS, not used to write memos by secretaries.
Can you imagine a secretary banging out all her memos on a refrigerator sized typesetter costing 100,000$ Didn’t happen. Would never happen.
They STILL are not admitting the papers were FAKE, even after the secretary who supposedly typed them said they were fake!
Who says people are rational creatures? This is certifiable insanity that they won’t let go of
Thanks ....I will use your comment to debunk the liberal.
Austin is the liberal armpit of Texas. Imagine how they feel when all major state official are Republicans of one sort or another. The irony here is that Bush is closer ideologically to them than the liberal Republican speaker. Once they chose to demonize someone, they refuse to look at exculpatory evidence.
“Truth or Consequences” a place in New Mexico?
It always makes me think of: “By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of the LORD men depart from evil.” (Proverbs 16:6)
“Truth or Consequences” a place in New Mexico?
It always makes me think of: “By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of the LORD men depart from evil.” (Proverbs 16:6)
It sure is. Actually, I thought the music was better in Fort Worth; especially the blues.
FAKE Fake fake, Rather is a lying partisan publicity hack who is driven by his steaming pile of ego to try to prove he was an actual journalist before he dies, and he aint gonna make it."
Thanks for reading it. I couldn't waste that much time.
Lt. Dan is a washed up has been never was. He will always be remembered as a liar.
At the time this was supposedly going down, 1972-1973, I was working in a print shop that had one of the few varieties of machines that would produce right and left justified type directly on paper. One would type a line at a time and after the line was complete, one pushed a button and the machine would print that line on paper. It was slow, clumsy and even an experienced operator made lots of mistakes. No one would have used such a device to type memos.
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.