In Rush to Air, CBS Quashed Memo Worries

Washington Post ^ | 09/20/2004 | Howard Kurtz, Michael Dobbs

[jhouston]

In the early-morning hours of Sept. 8, Dan Rather was preparing to fly to Washington for a crucial interview in the Old Executive Office Building, but torrential rain kept him in New York.

White House communications director Dan Bartlett had agreed to talk to "60 Minutes," but only on condition that the CBS program provide copies of what were being billed as newly unearthed memos indicating that President Bush had received preferential treatment in the National Guard. The papers were hand-delivered at 7:45 a.m. CBS correspondent John Roberts, filling in for Rather, sat down with Bartlett at 11:15.

[Howlin]

How can you be sure he saw them first?

[68skylark]

Yeah they rushed alright. FOUR YEARS trying to get this sorry story off the ground.

Yeah. They've been obsessed with bringing down the president for year. Their obsession blinded them to the truth, and caused them to ruin themselves. It would be like Greek tragedy if it wasn't so petty and pathetic.

[bray]

The Dano-saur at DNCBS is calling for The President “answer the charges”, and prove that he wasn’t AWOL or defy a direct order to take a physical 35 years ago. Now it is time for Dan Rather-criminal to answer his questions. Why did you knowingly use obviously forged documents to bring charges against President Bush? Why did you try to defraud the American People with your false charges? Who was the source of your forged documents. Until he answers these questions he is guilty of forgery and defrauding the American Public.

In a day when docu-fiction is the rule and the Dirty Rat Michael Mooron is the standard bearer for the Stone-age press then we will play by their rules. Dan Rather is guilty until he can prove himself innocent and in this case it is very likely true. If Kitty Kelly can drudge up sludge with no proof from 30 years ago then we have more than enough proof to consider Dan Rather-guilty. This was the co-ordinated attack from the DNC to damage our President for the Yaaaawn Kerry campaign.

Forging military documents is a criminal offense although someone as powerful as Rather won’t be convicted like one of us would. This was a powerful man using the power of the Mainstream media and the clout of 60 Minutes to topple a government. 60 Minutes was the foundation of investigative TV and has 30 years of distinguished journalism behind it. Unfortunately we got a glimpse into how honest that journalism is. This was the rule rather than the exception as we got a glimpse of their sources, especially the anonymous variety. This time his hatred and desparation made him go off the abyss and into the complete fabrication of evidence. How could he not notice the Kinko’s Fax return line??? Nice that they whited that out before they put it on their Webpage which added 15 mins to Howlin & Co exposure!

If Dino-Dan thinks that W should answer questions from false evidence then Dan needs to answer questions about why he used forged evidence. His charges have absolutely no substance but these charges are valid. So Dan, why did you put these forged documents and signatures of a dead Military Officer on your news program??

This is what happens when 95% of the Stone-age press worships at the feet of moral relitivists like bull clinton. The art of “spin”, or lies as it was called pre-clinton becomes varying degrees of lying. GW has the truth on his side just as the Swifties do. Yaaaawn Tax & Kerry and DNCBS only have lies on their side and must hide from the issues. In comes this mudslinging story and the high risk phony documents that are scrutinized by the Inter-news. The evidence gets blown away in a matter of minutes and the fraud is exposed to the entire world. It’s a new day and the Fathers of Freedom would be proud.

Dano-saur Rather-guilty can resign and DNCBS can apologize to the country for their criminal activity but it won’t matter. The Stone-age press has exposed itself for the Rat spokesman that it is and will never be believed again. They can pretend to be more balanced but whenever they use their well worn phrases, “sources inside the .....” ears will hear “false documents” and a huge mountain of salt will be added. For Dan, he needs to take his own advice and, “answer the charges!” In the Michael Mooron, Kitty Katty world, your found guilty unless you can prove yourself innocent!

Pray for W and The Truth

[doug from upland]

After the show, one colleague asked an elated Rather whether he was sure the documents were real. "I have never been more confident of a story in my life," he said.

Well, Dan, weren't you confident of the story reported on Jan. 20, 2001 that George Bush was sworn into office as the 43rd President?

[A Citizen Reporter]

"Since leaving the Guard, Burkett has run a ranch near Abilene, Tex., and been active in local Democratic politics, posting messages on the Internet urging other Democrats to wage "war" against Republican "dirty tricks." He has told reporters that he suffered from depression and had a nervous breakdown after the military declined to treat him for a tropical disease he contracted while on assignment in Panama."

A nervous breakdown? Is that a current diagnonis? I don't think I've heard that term in almost 30 years.

[traviskicks]

Michael Dobbs is one of the top journalists in the MSM, in my opinion. But he writes so factually and lawyer-like that it leaves it to the reader to decide how to interpret the result. Which is normally good, but this stuff is so over the top that I wish some of the incredolousnes that he must have felt as a journalist on witnessing the piss poor journalism of CBS has come out more in his story. I want someone to slam these guys as hard as they deserve it. In print.

[Brandon]

The next stop was Texas. Rather was in Florida, so CBS chartered a plane to get him to Austin.

They complain that they can't afford to do in-depth investigative journalism, but they can afford to charter a jet for Gunga Dan.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

CBS sent a Canadian disc jocky...

[Wild_Bill_8881]

Yep, the dates all kind of fit together with burketts phone conversations with max cleland when max told him to "get hold of somebody at DNC"

next thing ya know old sleazy barnes comes slithering out from under his rock like a horny horn toad to get hold of his good old buddy Danny RAT=ther

VERY interesting

[Cboldt]

If anything, this indicates that CBS knew there were problems with the memos and then acted like plaintiffs' trial lawyers when the White House did not object to the memos.

Yes, exactly. And, absence of comment from the WH is what they rely on to persist with the story that the documents are "Forgeries, but accurate."

The original plan anticipated an objection from the WH, based on the substance (not on the forensics), but once there was no substantive complaint from the WH, there was no need to air the part of the story that supported the documents' authenticity.

[RtWngr]

Absolutely amazing. CBS will never admit they made a mistake. Never. They are going to ignore this story. Equally incredible is the complete lack of mention of Staudt's statement that he exercised no preferential treatment and that Bush did his duty. Seems to me that when (1) the document is fake and (2) the only living person mentioned in the document denies its contents the case is closed. But CBS will take the position that the story is accurate and the fake documents don't change that. I can imagine if these were documents sourced by a Republican against Kerry. Rather would be spitting in the camera he would be so outraged.

[mikenola]

Just cool. A front page 1000 word article by WAPO on this debacle. No honor among theives, eh?

[expatpat]

After the show, one colleague asked an elated Rather whether he was sure the documents were real. "I have never been more confident of a story in my life," he said.

That says it all about Rather's career..

[Helms]

[shrinkermd]

In medicine it used to be that, "the operation was a success but the patient died." Now in journalism, "it is the documents are forged but the allegations in the memorandums are true." Denying the obvious gives some temporary solace,but over time few will believe either of these assertions. Eventually, these falsehoods become the subject of bad jokes.

What shows is that these people hated the President so much it poisoned their reasoning and judgment. I suppose I should be happy, but I am not. The public deserves more from people who wrap themselves in the first amendment as a substitute for determining the truth in a fair and accurate manner.

[doug from upland]

Excellent analysis.

[daviscupper]

Excellent post. It is actually a very well researched and well written article that destroys the credibility of the 60 Minutes broadcast. It is probably as critical an article you will ever see of one MSM member criticizing another MSM member. They point out shoddy reporting, that less-than credible or fully credentialed document authenticators were used, they mentioned that CBS ignored the concerns of even these document examiners, and they even show John Roberts' claim that the White House's not challenging the authenticity of the documents as tantamont to authenticating the documents as very inappropriate. Not bad for the Washington Post.

However, where they fell short is at the end. Although they pointed out that CBS has retreated to the "ridiculous" stance: "the documents might be forgeries but the story is true" they should have ripped CBS's ethical shortcomings. Hey, CBS used forged documents to smear a sitting President with the intent to adversely impact his chances of getting reelected. In a time of War this is near treasonous behavior. JMHO.

[VRWCTexan]

"On Friday, Sept. 3, the day after the convention ended, Mapes hit pay dirt. She told Howard her source had given her the documents."

Given Mape's obvious obsession it's plausible that she is "dirty" in this forgery scam (i.e. Barnes is ready and she needs something to back it up)

I believe the while Burkett may become the "fall-guy" - there are just too many errors in the memos that a career guardsman like Burkett would be able to avoid making on his own.

[counterpunch]

I will explain.
CBS said that the documents - this "hard evidence" - is what convinced Barned to agree to be interviewed. According to their story, if it is to be believed, CBS said to Barnes "we have these damning documents" and that is what made him change his mind and go public with his (newly changed) story.

Now, if it actually was, as this article tells us, Barnes who called up Dan Rather a couple days BEFORE CBS had the documents and told him that he had a "confession" and wanted to be interviewed, since it is reasonable to assume to these documents were the catalyst for this bold decision, because Barnes would not want to be making unsupported accusations without some kind of empirical evidence, then this means Barnes saw the documents a few days before CBS did.

This means he had direct contact with the forger, rather than CBS being the ones to show the docs to Barnes.

Do you follow that now?