Posted on 09/20/2004 9:34:42 AM PDT by SmithPatterson
CBS Regrets Bush Memos Story
NEW YORK, Sept. 20, 2004
(CBS/AP) CBS News on Monday said it regretted broadcasting a story about President Bush's military service based on documents whose authenticity is in doubt, saying the source of the material had misled the network.
CBS News Anchor Dan Rather, the reporter of the original story, apologized.
In a statement, CBS said former Texas Guard official Bill Burkett "has acknowledged that he provided the now-disputed documents" and "admits that he deliberately misled the CBS News producer working on the report, giving her a false account of the documents' origins to protect a promise of confidentiality to the actual source."
The network did not say the memoranda — purportedly written by one of Mr. Bush's National Guard commanders — were forgeries. But the network did say it could not authenticate the documents and that it should not have reported them.
"Based on what we now know, CBS News cannot prove that the documents are authentic, which is the only acceptable journalistic standard to justify using them in the report," said the statement by CBS News President Andrew Heyward. "We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret."
"Nothing is more important to us than our credibility and keeping faith with the millions of people who count on us for fair, accurate, reliable, and independent reporting," Heyward continued. "We will continue to work tirelessly to be worthy of that trust."
Additional reporting on the documents will air on Monday's CBS Evening News, including the interview of Burkett by Rather. CBS News pledged "an independent review of the process by which the report was prepared and broadcast to help determine what actions need to be taken."
In a separate statement, Rather said that "after extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically."
"I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers," he said.
"We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry," Rather added.
The authenticity of the documents — four memoranda attributed to Guard commander Lt. Col. Jerry Killian — has been under fire since they were described in a Sept. 8 broadcast of 60 Minutes.
CBS had not previously revealed who provided the documents or how they were obtained.
Burkett has previously alleged that in 1997 he witnessed allies of then-Gov. Bush discussing the destruction of Guard files that might embarrass Mr. Bush, who was considering a run for the presidency. Bush aides have denied the charge.
In the statement, CBS said: "Burkett originally said he obtained the documents from another former Guardsman. Now he says he got them from a different source whose connection to the documents and identity CBS News has been unable to verify to this point."
Questions about the president's National Guard service have lingered for years. Some critics question how Mr. Bush got into the Guard when there were waiting lists of young men hoping to join it to escape the draft and possible service in Vietnam.
In the Sept. 8 60 Minutes report, former Texas Lt. Gov. Ben Barnes — a Democrat — claimed that, at the behest of a friend of the Bush family, he pulled strings to get young George W. Bush into the Guard.
Other questions concern why Mr. Bush missed a physical in 1972, and why there are scant records of any service by Mr. Bush during the latter part of 1972, a period during which he transferred to an Alabama guard unit so he could work on a campaign there.
The CBS documents suggested that Mr. Bush had disobeyed a direct order to attend the physical, and that there were other lapses in his performance. One memo also indicated that powerful allies of the Bush family were pressuring the guard to "sugar coat" any investigation of Lt. Bush's service.
Skeptics immediately seized on the typing in the memos, which included a superscripted "th" not found on all 1970s-era typewriters. As the controversy raged, CBS broadcast interviews with experts who said that some typewriters from that period could have produced the markings in question.
Other critics saw factual errors in the documents, stylistic differences with other writing by Killian and incorrect military lingo.
Some relatives of Col. Killian disputed that the memos were real. His former secretary said the sentiments regarding Mr. Bush's failures as an officer were genuine, but the documents were not.
Some document experts whom CBS consulted for the story told newspapers they had raised doubts before the broadcast and were ignored. CBS disputed their accounts, pointing to the main document expert the network consulted, Marcel Matley.
Matley insisted he had vouched for the authenticity of the signatures on the memos, but had not determined whether the documents themselves were genuine.
Last week, CBS News stood by its reporting while vowing to continue working the story. The network acknowledged there were questions about the documents and pledged to try to answer them.
Mr. Bush maintains that he did not get special treatment in getting into the Guard, and that he fulfilled all duties. He was honorably discharged.
On Saturday, a White House official said Mr. Bush has reviewed the disputed documents that purport to show he refused orders to take a physical examination in 1972, and did not recall having seen them previously.
In his first public comment on the documents controversy, the president told The Union Leader of Manchester, N.H., "There are a lot of questions about the documents, and they need to be answered."
The Bush campaign has alleged that their Democratic rivals were somehow involved in the story. John Kerry's campaign denies it. In an email revealed last week, Burkett said he had contacted the Kerry campaign but received no response.
Meanwhile, a federal judge has ordered the Pentagon to find and make public by next week any unreleased files about Mr. Bush's Vietnam-era Air National Guard service to resolve a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the Associated Press.
The White House and Defense Department have on several occasions claimed that they had released all the documents only to make additional records available later on.
©MMIV, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
This is not the end of this episode.
It's been my observation that a forced apology is NEVER sincere. But it's better than none at all.
SeeBS should give Rush Limbaugh a 20 year no fire contract to do Rather's job.
I think they owe an apology to Killian and his family as well.
They regret the memos were bad forgeries. Next time they'll be better forgeries and will be harder to debunk.
Good point!
If they had been more careful, the slime would have stuck!
SOMETHING TO REMEMBER!
It boils down to these facts....
1. There is NO WAY THAT CBS WAS TRICKED OR MISLED. Too many people and facts say otherwise.
2. CBS AND RATHER CONTINUE TO LIE AND COVER UP WHO SUPPLIED THE FORGERIES.
3. CBS AND RATHER ARE PROTECTING THE SOURCE. To disclose the source would BRING DOWN RATHER, CBS AND THE KERRY CAMPAIGN.
4. IF CBS WERE GENUINE ABOUT THEIR ROTTEN, HIT PIECE, THEY WOULD APOLOGIZE TO BUSH. This whole HIT PIECE was targeted to hurt Bush. WHERE IS AN APOLOGY FROM CBS AND RATHER??? (I know, don't laugh).
CBS AND RATHER ARE COMPLICIT IN A CRIME against President Bush, in violation of public trust, in violation of FCC regulations and THEY DON'T CARE. CBS IS FINISHED AS A CREDIBLE ORGAINZATION.
''Burkett originally said he obtained the documents from another former Guardsman. Now he says he got them from a different source whose connection to the documents and identity CBS News has been unable to verify to this point.''
So much for the source being ''unimpeachable''. The saga continues.
It's only going to get worse. every time Dan opens his piehole, they step into it deeper.
They need to fire him if they hope to regain an ounce of respect; even from liberals.
I am sure he could get a comfy spot at CNN.
There has been no apology from C BS to President Bush and those of us who support President Bush.
It is time boycott any advertiser who pays the 40 pieces of silver to any C BS NOTNEWS or Lies Instead of News program from 60 minutes to Blather's evening lies.
If the source originated anywhere other than the high ranks of the DNC, I think they would have "outed" it by now. They certainly wouldn't be risking their entire reputation, and everything that implie$, by protecting some isolated whack-job.
Burkett will say that the substance of the memoranda is still correct and that these are recreations. Rather will apologize for airing them, but he still stands by the story. He will say that Bush must answer the questions about his guard service. Another non-apology apology.
Remember when Cleland made that bus trip to the Bush ranch to protest the Swift-Vets? That had to be when the transaction of documents took place. It puts the two men logistically together in a state of heightened willingness.
I guess the DNA test results on the stained blue memo are in?
The Killians and at least two of their experts say that they told CBS that the documents were forgeries.
And CBS never spoke to Staudt.
Apparently.
They violated Texas law by forging a Government document. That is a felony.
Rather is an accomplice and Burkett is guilty as sin.
They should both be tried.
Most liars and cheats do regret getting caught.
They're going to regret it through their ratings and lost revenue for a long time to come.
Burkitt is not "the press". Since forging the documents is illegal as is probably passing on/misrepresenting known forgeries, I would think Burkitt could be encouraged by prosecution to own up to the lineage of the documents.
Rather was probably not interviewing him as much as telling him not to talk about the DNC part of it.
Absolutely unbelievable. Burkett is "unimpeachable." And he's not the originator. But CBS will keep digging. PLEASE . . . it's their grave.
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.