Dan Rather REPLACED!

Weisse Luft said:

CBS found someone who will tell it like he is told instead of ginning the evidence

LOL.. wtf is is all about?

Is that the former Iraqi Information Minister?

keydates said:

Is that the former Iraqi Information Minister?

Yeah, Baghdad Bob in all his glory. See? Isn't this a great country? An immigrant can come to our country, apply himself, work hard, and because he has the neccessary skills he too can achieve the American dream. Imagine that, just walk right in off the street and ace the lead anchor job at CBS.

keydates said:

Is that the former Iraqi Information Minister?

The sad thing is if CBS keeps it up the IIM will have more credibility. I see 60 minutes on Wednesday's being pulled if it it gets to bad.

For the what is it about? It depends on who or what you listen to but the long & short is - an unnamed source (Top person in Kerry's campaign from some) gave CBS these CYA memos (not kidding that is the subject line) written by one of then Lt. Bush's Commanding Officers. Mind you they are copies from 1973 (no original's known (oh except on some DNC staffers PC - just kidding & I will explain this a little bit later) and no one close to the now deceased officer believes they are real. (familiy, secratary, others that serverd with him) They basically stated that Lt. Bush missed drills & a physical while in the National Guard - thus did not serve in the NG honorably, and higher ups were tring to sugar coat everything. Did I mention that the signatures do not match or come close to other documents signed by said gentlemen? Did I forget to mention that the CO supposedly putting preasure on Bush's CO to sugercoat everything (named in the doc as I recall) had retired 18 months earlier & could no more influence said items than the then current President. Did I mention that even some of CBS investigators had doubts about the authenticity of said documents & every forensic investigator interviewed says it was appears to have been done with a version of Microsoft Word, copied multiple times to look old, etc... (Something with the spacing, centering, etc...) CBS still swears they are authentic, but every other news organiztion is basically laughing at them for a bad hoax.

SLS, you forgot to mention the documents were faxed to CBS from a Kinko's copy center in Abilene TX, 21 miles from the home of Bill Burkett, a Texas Democrat activist(to put it bluntly, he is as looney as Base Commander Ripper in Dr. Strangelove) and represented legally by david Van Os, another DNC operative and candidate for a judge position. This is pointing in the wrong direction for Senator Kerry.

What is even more damning is the pilferage of military records from Camp Mabry in Ausitn by Bill Burkett. This self proclaimed pilferage ranks right along the Watergate conspiracy.

SLS said:

The sad thing is if CBS keeps it up the IIM will have more credibility. I see 60 minutes on Wednesday's being pulled if it it gets to bad.

For the what is it about? It depends on who or what you listen to but the long & short is - an unnamed source (Top person in Kerry's campaign from some) gave CBS these CYA memos (not kidding that is the subject line) written by one of then Lt. Bush's Commanding Officers. Mind you they are copies from 1973 (no original's known (oh except on some DNC staffers PC - just kidding & I will explain this a little bit later) and no one close to the now deceased officer believes they are real. (familiy, secratary, others that serverd with him) They basically stated that Lt. Bush missed drills & a physical while in the National Guard - thus did not serve in the NG honorably, and higher ups were tring to sugar coat everything. Did I mention that the signatures do not match or come close to other documents signed by said gentlemen? Did I forget to mention that the CO supposedly putting preasure on Bush's CO to sugercoat everything (named in the doc as I recall) had retired 18 months earlier & could no more influence said items than the then current President. Did I mention that even some of CBS investigators had doubts about the authenticity of said documents & every forensic investigator interviewed says it was appears to have been done with a version of Microsoft Word, copied multiple times to look old, etc... (Something with the spacing, centering, etc...) CBS still swears they are authentic, but every other news organiztion is basically laughing at them for a bad hoax.

According to 60M tonight, Killian's secretary (I guess she maintained all the officer files) says that the docs are definitely fake/forgeries but she also says that all the words and sentiment of the documents are completely true and use the exact words of the original docs.

She believes that the documents were intentionally copied from the originals so that blame could not be assigned to whomever leaked the documents -- if the originals were leaked, then everyone would know who they came from.
I think everyone involved, including Rather, probably knew they were forgeries to begin with.

She also says that Killian's family would have no way of knowing about the content of the extra CYA files Killian kept. She seemed almost dismissive of the suggestion that his son would know.

She came off as very credible and had both positive and negative things to say about Bush. The gist of her interview was that Bush's CO did not like Bush at all, that Bush believed himself to be "above the rules" and that he absolutely defied orders from his CO to have a physical, which is just not done.

As Rather said tonight, people are attacking the authenticity of the documents, but the content of the story, the facts, are absolutely supportable.

At the end of the story, Dan Rather was emphatic "we will continue to pursue the story of Bush's service..". It almost sounded like a threat. Dan's got it in for Bush now. Methinks he does not like heavy-handed tactics from the White House.

Personally, I think this story is a waste of time. Everybody already knows Shrub shirked his duties. I don't think it will have any impact on the election at all.

Speaking of questionable journalism, is someone going to start a thread on Kitty Kelley? I can't wait for her book to be released.

Popycock. Rather said the documents were authentic and he had a handwriting analyst verify the signature matched. This isn't the case of "shooting the messenger", its a case of "fruit of the poisoned tree".

Protecting the individual who "leaked" these documents is pure fabrication. Why are the forged documents artificially aged?

Saucy, you are really reaching on this. Rather knows he is toast and is trying to "rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic".

Saucy said:

According to 60M tonight, Killian's secretary (I guess she maintained all the officer files) says that the docs are definitely fake/forgeries but she also says that all the words and sentiment of the documents are completely true and use the exact words of the original docs.

She believes that the documents were intentionally copied from the originals so that blame could not be assigned to whomever leaked the documents -- if the originals were leaked, then everyone would know who they came from.
I think everyone involved, including Rather, probably knew they were forgeries to begin with.

She also says that Killian's family would have no way of knowing about the content of the extra CYA files Killian kept. She seemed almost dismissive of the suggestion that his son would know.

She came off as very credible and had both positive and negative things to say about Bush. The gist of her interview was that Bush's CO did not like Bush at all, that Bush believed himself to be "above the rules" and that he absolutely defied orders from his CO to have a physical, which is just not done.

As Rather said tonight, people are attacking the authenticity of the documents, but the content of the story, the facts, are absolutely supportable.

At the end of the story, Dan Rather was emphatic "we will continue to pursue the story of Bush's service..". It almost sounded like a threat. Dan's got it in for Bush now. Methinks he does not like heavy-handed tactics from the White House.

Personally, I think this story is a waste of time. Everybody already knows Shrub shirked his duties. I don't think it will have any impact on the election at all.

Speaking of questionable journalism, is someone going to start a thread on Kitty Kelley? I can't wait for her book to be released.

Hmmm....The documents are forgeries, but the what's inside of them is true?
How the hell does that make any sense?

Bikerman2004 said:

Hmmm....The documents are forgeries, but the what's inside of them is true?
How the hell does that make any sense?

Starving people are known to eat amazing things. Ever hear of the Donner Party? 😄

Weisse Luft said:

Saucy, you are really reaching on this. Rather knows he is toast and is trying to "rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic".

Exactly...You know CBS "used" to be neutral and in my opinion farely objective. However, as of late, all I see is them using their news vehicle pushing all the stories from "bush bashing" books yet, never give the same air time to the opposition...Now this...They have an agenda and they share it with Michael Moore-lies...

Bikerman2004 said:

Hmmm....The documents are forgeries, but the what's inside of them is true?
How the hell does that make any sense?

That's saucy logic akin to fuzzy math...

Bikerman2004 said:

Hmmm....The documents are forgeries, but the what's inside of them is true?
How the hell does that make any sense?

What doesn't make sense? Nothing too extraordinary there; it's called shooting one's self in the foot (or ass). Assuming the documents are fakes, which hasn't been proven but is, I admit, looking likely -- that would mean that someone fabricated them to reinforce a damaging theory about Bush for the sake of amping up the bad PR. That doesn't have any bearing on whether or not Bush actually slacked off on aspects of his TNG service, though it sure looks stupid.

Creating forgeries to reinforce the truth might be counter-productive, but it's hardly implausible.

It's a shame, because as I've been saying for a while, the embarrassing facets of Bush's TNG duty stand on their own. Rather than try to grossly emphasize the obvious with fake evidence, the "conspirators" should have simply prevented the story from falling off the radar.

lokstah said:

What doesn't make sense? Nothing too extraordinary there; it's called shooting one's self in the foot (or ass). Assuming the documents are fakes, which hasn't been proven but is, I admit, looking likely -- that would mean that someone fabricated them to reinforce a damaging theory about Bush for the sake of amping up the bad PR. That doesn't have any bearing on whether or not Bush actually slacked off on aspects of his TNG service, though it sure looks stupid.

Trust me..they are fakes. I joined the Navy in 1987 at that time we were just getting word perfect. There is no way in hell that document could have been typed by an IBM Selectra I or II nor could it have been typed with the zerox 860 which was in use in the early to mid 80's...No this was before even that dinosaur..So, yes it has been proven..A typewriter did not type it with those fonts..

What this proves is what no one on the democratic side is willing to admit. That there is a media bias out there and no matter how much evidence is provided it is always shrugged off...or "well, well what about that Rush Limbaugh guy??"

We are talking CBS NOT talk radio here. Dan Rather who cannot hide is love for the left even if his life depended on it...Let's see we have the DEMS crying about the swifties yet when major news organization makes up [censored] it's ok? or how does it go? Well yes it appears that it is fabricated but?????

I would prefer not to brush this gem under the carpet so quickly....thanks

lokstah said:

What doesn't make sense? Nothing too extraordinary there; it's called shooting one's self in the foot (or ass). Assuming the documents are fakes, which hasn't been proven but is, I admit, looking likely -- that would mean that someone fabricated them to reinforce a damaging theory about Bush for the sake of amping up the bad PR. That doesn't have any bearing on whether or not Bush actually slacked off on aspects of his TNG service, though it sure looks stupid.

Creating forgeries to reinforce the truth might be counter-productive, but it's hardly implausible.

It's a shame, because as I've been saying for a while, the embarrassing facets of Bush's TNG duty stand on their own. Rather than try to grossly emphasize the obvious with fake evidence, the "conspirators" should have simply prevented the story from falling off the radar.

I was referring to CBS for saying that they may be fake but the content is not. Once the credibility of the documents is dubious, then the content of those specific documents is also suspect. I'm not making any comment on his service just how ridiculous CBS looks. Frankly, I don't think anybody really cares about Bush's NG service.

zapper said:

Trust me..they are fakes.

What this proves is what no one on the democratic side is willing to admit. That there is a media bias out there and no matter how much evidence is provided it is always shrugged off...or "well, well what about that Rush Limbaugh guy??"

...Let's see we have the DEMS crying about the swifties yet when major news organization makes up [censored] it's ok? or how does it go? Well yes it appears that it is fabricated but?????

I would prefer not to brush this gem under the carpet so quickly....thanks

Regarding your document analysis experience -- permit me to refer to the actual experts, thanks. Since plenty of them doubt the papers' authenticity, I think you can allow me that.

Regarding the great liberal bias of the media, well, that's another story (and another thread entirely). Though Fox would never have dredged these documents up, I don't think the TNG papers represent the best case, so much as they represent poor fact-checking and ratings-driven shoddy investigative journalism. Niether you nor I know how CBS came upon these papers, but it's far more likely they were produced by an anti-Bush source and shared with a scoop-hungry CBS, than that they were penned by Dan Rather in his basement after a night of love with Molly Ivins.

lokstah said:

Regarding your document analysis experience -- permit me to refer to the actual experts, thanks. Since plenty of them doubt the papers' authenticity, I think you can allow me that.

Regarding the great liberal bias of the media, well, that's another story (and another thread entirely). Though Fox would never have dredged these documents up, I don't think the TNG papers represent the best case, so much as they represent poor fact-checking and ratings-driven shoddy investigative journalism. Niether you nor I know how CBS came upon these papers, but it's far more likely they were produced by an anti-Bush source and shared with a scoop-hungry CBS, than that they were penned by Dan Rather in his basement after a night of love with Molly Ivins.

No kidding. They were probably pecked (clicked?) by Bill Burkett and David Van Os, both Democrat activists in Texas. They were faxed to CBS from an Abilene TX Kinko's Copy Center, just 21 miles from Burkett's ranch and Bill has a standing account with that Kinko's. If that is't bad enough, David Van Os is running for a judicial position as a Democrat. And both have sponsored Democrat rallys, fund raisers and generally assisted in the Kerry campaign.

And Bill Burkett is retired from the TX Army National Guard and has been claiming medical disability from an overseas deployment. He claim his medical treatment and disability was denied under then Governor George Bush.

This is getting mighty damning for Kerry-Edwards. They better distance themselves and in a hurry.

Bikerman2004 said:

I was referring to CBS for saying that they may be fake but the content is not. Once the credibility of the documents is dubious, then the content of those specific documents is also suspect.

But the content of the documents -- with the possible exception of the "sugarcoat" remark -- are simply referrences to items we've been hearing about for a while now. The "value" of the documents to the anti-Bush effort was simply that they put a little more filler, and a face, to the slacker story. It was just a little icing, not a bombshell.

All the more reason that the conspirators, if they exist, are complete clods. If you're going to construct a piece of shameless bunk for the sake of damaging a political figure, for crying out loud, go for the jugular.

lokstah said:

Regarding your document analysis experience -- permit me to refer to the actual experts, thanks. Since plenty of them doubt the papers' authenticity, I think you can allow me that.

Certainly it is your right to do so however you seem to be an intelligent individual. My point was it doesn't take an "expert" to tell these docs were forged it is pretty obvious that common sense is all that is required. We are not talking DNA or handwriting analysis which would require an "expert"...You can't change history and fact remains that the equipment that produced the correspondence hadn't been invented yet...Kind of like, if the evidence that was produced was contained on a yellow sticky or some other invention that was not around at the time...

Quoted post said:

Niether you nor I know how CBS came upon these papers, but it's far more likely they were produced by an anti-Bush source and shared with a scoop-hungry CBS, than that they were penned by Dan Rather in his basement after a night of love with Molly Ivins.

That is true we don't know and I don't trust Dan Rather...

Bikerman2004 said:

Frankly, I don't think anybody really cares about Bush's NG service.

More or less true. The bigger this thing gets, the sillier it's going to seem. It had some minor value as a character piece, but it's also the kind of story that would have made a bigger difference in 2000, when America was just getting to know the guy.

At this point, if there's a side of Bush which screams "I'm a smirking slacker brat," he's already been forgiven for it.

It's only been dredged out to counterbalance the Vietnam-Kerry connection, but even that has been poorly managed. You know the Kerry campaign is struggling when it can't make the Bush-Kerry military service comparison look favorable.

Ah, hell. 😠