Rathergate

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: burnedout
An interesting segment concerning David Van Os, Bill Burkett's attorney, from the New York Times:

[Hat tip: Ed Morrisey]

An article on Wednesday about disputed memos obtained by CBS News that cast doubt on aspects of President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard truncated a quotation from David Van Os, a lawyer for Bill Burkett, a retired National Guard officer whom Newsweek called a source of the memos. Asked what role Mr. Burkett had in raising questions about Mr. Bush's military service, Mr. Van Os posed a hypothetical chain of events in which someone - not Mr. Burkett, he said - reconstructed documents that the preparer believed existed in 1972 or 1973. Mr. Van Os then asked "what difference would even that make'' to the "factual reality of where was George W. Bush at the times in question and what was he doing?''

Incidentally, Mr. Van Os is running for seat on the TX Supreme Court.

Buahahahaha.. A pre-emptive defense? Does he really think people will buy that BS?

CsG

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Yes, the document "experts" opinions are MOOT. None of them can definitively prove anything. And of course neither can CBS. If you want the original documents, go talk to Bill Burkett. I'm sure he can help you out. That is, if he survives all of the death threats he's getting.

Texan has a history of attacks on Bush - Houston Chronicle

[Hat tip: Charles Johnson]

Possible CBS [read: "See BS"] source has had his credibility questioned before.

WASHINGTON - Bill Burkett, who has emerged as a possible CBS source for disputed memos about President Bush's Guard service, has a long history of making charges against Bush and the Texas National Guard.

But Burkett's allegations have changed over the years, and have been dismissed as baseless by former Guard colleagues, state legislators and others.

Even Burkett has admitted some of his allegations are false.

Burkett wrote a long indictment against Bush for a Web site in 2003 in which he said he personally was ordered to "alter personnel records of George W. Bush." In that article, Burkett said that when he refused he was sent to Panama as punishment, where he contracted a disabling disease.

But when asked about that charge by the Houston Chronicle in February, Burkett said, "That statement was not accurate, that is overstated.". . . . yada yada

 

[Crimson]

Its curious that many of the same people now defending CBS were ones I remember jumping on the Fox News 'Fair and Balanced' issues. Maybe we could sue 'CBS News' because its certain not 'News'.. its MADE UP.. 'CBS Fiction' perhaps?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Yes, the document "experts" opinions are MOOT. None of them can definitively prove anything. And of course neither can CBS. If you want the original documents, go talk to Bill Burkett. I'm sure he can help you out. That is, if he survives all of the death threats he's getting.

Doesn't this bring up a question though? Mainly, if all CBS and Rather have are copies, and there is no method for proven or denying the authenticity of copies, shouldn't journalistic integrity have prevented CBS from airing the 60 Minutes episode in the first place?

Or am I just being silly by assuming CBS and Rather have any sort of journalistic integrity?

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: Crimson
Its curious that many of the same people now defending CBS were ones I remember jumping on the Fox News 'Fair and Balanced' issues. Maybe we could sue 'CBS News' because its certain not 'News'.. its MADE UP.. 'CBS Fiction' perhaps?

Funny how that works, eh? Had Fox News released the memos showing that Kerry had self-inflicted wounds, the dog would have been all over them...but since the "lies" were directed toward Bush, CBS is a credible source...the liberals are really gasping for air being 15% behind in the polls...

 

[burnedout]

Even Andy Rooney indicates that he believes the memos are fake:

Rooney'd rather CBS fessed up

BY PAUL D. COLFORD
DAILY NEWS BUSINESS WRITER

CBS curmudgeon Andy Rooney indicated yesterday he believes the controversial documents on President Bush's National Guard service are fake and said it could cost Dan Rather down the road.

"I'm surprised at their reluctance to concede they're wrong," Rooney said, referring to CBS brass.

Despite praising Rather as "a good, honest newsman," Rooney added, "I'm unsure if they're whistling in the dark instead of apologizing.". . . . .

 

[piasabird]

Dan Rather is a Liar and he froged the documents himself.

Prove me wrong.

If I am wrong let Mr Rather reveal his source?

In a court of law, you have to prove a document is authentic!

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Dan Rather is a Liar and he froged the documents himself.

Prove me wrong.

If I am wrong let Mr Rather reveal his source?

In a court of law, you have to prove a document is authentic!

So quite whining and go sue him. Then you will see how it works in court.

 

[Chadder007]

CBS = OWNED
Houston Chronical article that shows the guy who possibly handed over the documents to CBS as an admitted Bush hater and an admitted fraud.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2799919

 

[1EZduzit]

I really don?t have a big problem with the way GWB got into the ANG. There were obviously strings pulled for him, but that was standard procedure then. Bentson, Conalley, and Adger also did it. Strings were even pulled for some Dallas Cowboys. It is obvious. When GWB claims he wasn?t aware of any influence used on his behalf he just proves himself to be liar.

Where the rub comes is that after a million dollars worth of training, GWB doesn?t even bother to go in for his scheduled physical? That is total BS. Then to add insult to injury he takes off for Alabama without even having his transfer approved. Who was in charge, GWB or his CO? Clearly strings were being pulled from above again. His mother even says they wanted him closer because ?he was getting in too much trouble? in Texas.

It gets worse, nobody from his new unit is willing to come forward and say they saw him there. Not even one person knew him?? There also seems to be a blank in his attendance after he went back to his Texas unit. It appears that he finally made up his attendance, but not in the required ?15 days before or 30 days after?. GWB didn?t make up his missed drills even close to the required time frame.

Other National Guard members were being sent to Vietnam for failing to meet their attendance commitment. After having a million dollars worth of training invested in him he should have at least been held to the same standard as others were, Again, more evidence of strings being pulled. I don?t mind so much how he got in the ANG as the way he behaved after getting such a big break. Others would have killed to get that spot, the least he could have done was to keep his nose clean (no pun intended).

Another question, why hasn?t GWB brought forward any of his fellow comrades-in-arms from his TANG unit to comment about his missed physical and his ?transfer? that hadn?t been approved? . Kerry brought forward his fellow comrades. It doesn?t seem like GWB was too well liked, does it. That seems to support Knox?s version, now doesn?t it. All GWB does is point to his honorable discharge paper as irrefutable proof. He may have gotten an ?honorable discharge? but the facts strongly question whether he deserved one.

GWB hired a team of people to ?scrub? his record for anything that might give him problems and then has claimed that everything has been released. It seems that the mudslinging is working. The know facts have enough holes in them to allow the mud to stick, especially since GWB won?t denounce the documents as lies. Instead he hides behind his wife?s skirt and has her publicly say the documents are ?probably? forgeries. LOL. That might be enough for his diehard supporters, but I don?t think the rest of the country is buying into that defense.

Attack CBS all you want. Your ?kill the messenger? tactics aren?t working because as more of the facts are known, people can see for themselves that something is amiss.

 

[EagleKeeper]

The docs were faxed from a Kinko's. Therefore CBS does not have the originals. Given the questions surrounding the docs, they were irresponsible to air the story - they were warned in advance.

Other investigations have created a suspicion that the source may be an anti-Bush person (based upon location co-incidence) who was not in the ANG unit or even Air Force.

If that is the source, CBS should have checked further instead of try to jump the gun and/or act as an attack dog for the Kerry camp.

CBS knows who faxed the docs to them. Currently that becomes your source (the sender). They have the responsibility to verify the souce now (journalistic intergrety), which at this time, not trying to do; just misdirecting by saying the intent is accurate.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Supposedly this is a pic from the Abilene Kinko's surveillence camera on the 6th (<-- should I superscript that?)

http://www.celluloid-wisdom.co...s_surveillance_camera/

Smile Bill Burkett. You're on Candid Camera.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
The docs were faxed from a Kinko's. Therefore CBS does not have the originals. Given the questions surrounding the docs, they were irresponsible to air the story - they were warned in advance.

Other investigations have created a suspicion that the source may be an anti-Bush person (based upon location co-incidence) who was not in the ANG unit or even Air Force.

If that is the source, CBS should have checked further instead of try to jump the gun and/or act as an attack dog for the Kerry camp.

CBS knows who faxed the docs to them. Currently that becomes your source (the sender). They have the responsibility to verify the souce now (journalistic intergrety), which at this time, not trying to do; just misdirecting by saying the intent is accurate.

Like the SBVFTT weren't all anti-Kerry? You were more then happy to beleive them. Now go prove that Mrs. Knox is just making this up. Go search out all of Bush's fellow ANG comrades and let's see what they have to say.

Mayber GWB could just go public and denounce the documents as lies? What seems to be his problem with doing that? If he isn't willing to call CBS liars face to face, then suffer the consequences.

Face it boys, your fearless war president leader is letting you down.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
The docs were faxed from a Kinko's.

I've got a great idea....

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
The docs were faxed from a Kinko's.

I've got a great idea....

Ssshhhhhh! ! !

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Yes, the document "experts" opinions are MOOT. None of them can definitively prove anything. And of course neither can CBS. If you want the original documents, go talk to Bill Burkett. I'm sure he can help you out. That is, if he survives all of the death threats he's getting.

Doesn't this bring up a question though? Mainly, if all CBS and Rather have are copies, and there is no method for proven or denying the authenticity of copies, shouldn't journalistic integrity have prevented CBS from airing the 60 Minutes episode in the first place?

Or am I just being silly by assuming CBS and Rather have any sort of journalistic integrity?

Isn't it possible, despite the ability to verify the documents, that CBS has other corroberating evidence to back them up? I mean, they had the old ANG secretary on the air who claimed that the documents weren't typed by her but verified the contents of the memos? News programs and media outlets go to press with stories supported by anonymous sources all the time. Is there any way to verify those stories 100%? I don't think so.

Hell, I'm just as skeptical as anyone about this story, that's why I keep recommending an independent investigation of CBS and how they constructed this story.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Yes, the document "experts" opinions are MOOT. None of them can definitively prove anything. And of course neither can CBS. If you want the original documents, go talk to Bill Burkett. I'm sure he can help you out. That is, if he survives all of the death threats he's getting.

Doesn't this bring up a question though? Mainly, if all CBS and Rather have are copies, and there is no method for proven or denying the authenticity of copies, shouldn't journalistic integrity have prevented CBS from airing the 60 Minutes episode in the first place?

Or am I just being silly by assuming CBS and Rather have any sort of journalistic integrity?

Isn't it possible, despite the ability to verify the documents, that CBS has other corroberating evidence to back them up? I mean, they had the old ANG secretary on the air who claimed that the documents weren't typed by her but verified the contents of the memos? News programs and media outlets go to press with stories supported by anonymous sources all the time. Is there any way to verify those stories 100%? I don't think so.

Hell, I'm just as skeptical as anyone about this story, that's why I keep recommending an independent investigation of CBS and how they constructed this story.

If CBS and Rather were upfront and forthwith about this whole ordeal I would be happy to give them the benefit of the doubt. However, their secretive behaviour, their hesitance to open any sort of internal investigation, the ridiculous tactic of trotting out some octogenarian's anecdotes as "proof" while refusing to air any soty of dissenting opinions from experts, or even admit the existing faux pas on their part, is more than evidence enough of the true facts behind this case.

 

[1EZduzit]

Oh and 1ezdunit - I dont' have cable(for the 1000 th time)[note no superscript] so I don't get Fox News. I randomly choose which network to watch if I choose to watch something beside Jim Lehrer.

CsG

I guess you have interent?


http://www.foxnews.com/

It doesn't matter, I was just joking about it anyway

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

If CBS and Rather were upfront and forthwith about this whole ordeal I would be happy to give them the benefit of the doubt. However, their secretive behaviour, their hesitance to open any sort of internal investigation, the ridiculous tactic of trotting out some octogenarian's anecdotes as "proof" while refusing to air any soty of dissenting opinions from experts, or even admit the existing faux pas on their part, is more than evidence enough of the true facts behind this case.

Ridiculous? She was right there, on the base, typing the memo?s She HAD to know what was going on to do her job.

Come on King George, denounce the documents as lies. Quit hiding behind Laura and face this issue like a man. Are the documents lies, or not? Or are you afraid of a little old ?octogenarian?. :laugh:

 

[Chadder007]

White House slams the CBS Report and Dan Rather's advice.
http://washingtontimes.com/nat...40917-120800-8932r.htm

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

If CBS and Rather were upfront and forthwith about this whole ordeal I would be happy to give them the benefit of the doubt. However, their secretive behaviour, their hesitance to open any sort of internal investigation, the ridiculous tactic of trotting out some octogenarian's anecdotes as "proof" while refusing to air any soty of dissenting opinions from experts, or even admit the existing faux pas on their part, is more than evidence enough of the true facts behind this case.

Ridiculous? She was right there, on the base, typing the memo?s She HAD to know what was going on to do her job.

Right. She was there over 30 years ago. And, as well all know, 80+ year olds tend to have perfect recall from way back when.

Edit: Hmm:

http://washingtontimes.com/nat...40917-120800-8932r.htm

He also commented on Mr. Rather's attempt to salvage the story by interviewing an 86-year-old Bush critic on Wednesday's edition of "60 Minutes II." The anchorman asked Marian Knox, a secretary for a National Guard unit more than 30 years ago, whether Mr. Bush received preferential treatment.
"I feel that he did," she replied.
To which Mr. McClellan answered, "So now some are looking at feelings and not the facts. We don't have to rely on the feelings of a nice woman who has firmly stated her opposition to the president."
White House aides were furious that Mr. Rather did not disclose to viewers that Mrs. Knox told the Dallas Morning News that she opposed the president's re-election, calling him "unfit for office" and "selected, not elected." Bush advisers were also incredulous that Mr. Rather gave such credence to a woman who openly admitted that much of what she was telling the newsman was "conjecture" and "gossip."

uch:

Come on King George, denounce the documents as lies. Quit hiding behind Laura and face this issue like a man. Are the documents lies, or not? Or are you afraid of a little old ?octogenarian?. :laugh:

Bush has no need to address this issue and it would be a dumb move if he did. It's not about "fear," hiding anything, or lies. Keep on building up that strawman though while ignoring reason.

 

[1EZduzit]

Right. She was there over 30 years ago. And, as well all know, 80+ year olds tend to have perfect recall from way back when

She didn't look 80 in the interview, are you sure she is 80+ years old. Show me the proof please. Anyway. just because she's 80 doesn't mean her memories is bad. Prove she has a bad memory. You can't, can you!! It is just another "feeble" attempt to "kill the messenger".

Bush has no need to address this issue and it would be a dumb move if he did. It's not about "fear," hiding anything, or lies. Keep on building up that strawman though while ignoring reason

Look at GWB's ANG record. It has gaps in it big enough to drive a Mack truck through. Your the one trying to build a strawman case. Let's see GWB produce some of his comrade-in-arms to back up his version or lacking that, come forward himself and denounce the documents as lies.

I for one certainly expect a president who is sending troops to their deaths to have enough guts to defend his own military record.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Right. She was there over 30 years ago. And, as well all know, 80+ year olds tend to have perfect recall from way back when

She didn't look 80 in the interview, are you sure she is 80+ years old. Show me the proof please.

I have MS Word. If you give me a few minutes I'm sure I could produce an authentic birth certificate for you.

Anyway. just because she's 80 doesn't mean her memories is bad. Prove she has a bad memory. You can't, can you!! It is just another "feeble" attempt to "kill the messenger".

Inversely, you can't prove she has a good memory either. Seems we're at a statlemate on that particular issue.

Look at GWB's ANG record. It has gaps in it big enough to drive a Mack truck through. Your the one trying to build a strawman case. Let's see GWB produce some of his comrade-in-arms to back up his version or lacking that, come forward himself and denounce the documents as lies.

http://www.chronwatch.com/cont...ntDisplay.asp?aid=9259

I for one certainly expect a president who is sending troops to their deaths to have enough guts to defend his own military record.

He did. He said he was proud of his service.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

...funny how the kids are now saying Bush needs to address the documents, though doesn't expect Kerry to produce ALL of his medical documents and military records, draft deferment rejection and all.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Oh and 1ezdunit - I dont' have cable(for the 1000 th time)[note no superscript] so I don't get Fox News. I randomly choose which network to watch if I choose to watch something beside Jim Lehrer.

CsG

I guess you have interent?


http://www.foxnews.com/

It doesn't matter, I was just joking about it anyway

I do not go to Foxnews as I've said multiple times. Their website is not in my rotation of news reading. Sorry to burst your little bubble.


Get the originals blather.

CsG