Posted on 09/23/2004 7:17:00 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Whoever, having devised any scheme or artifice to defraud transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. --- U.S. Criminal Code, Chapter 63, Section 1343.
That was no mere "dirty trick"; it could be a violation of the U.S. criminal code. If the artifice had not been revealed by sharp-eyed bloggers, a national election could have been swung by a blatant falsehood.
Who was the forger? Did others conspire with him or her to present a seeming government document -- with knowledge of its falsity and with intent to defraud, which is a felony in Texas? Who was to benefit and how?
We have hard evidence of crimes by low-level operatives here -- from wire fraud to forgery -- as well as the potential of high-level political involvement. Is no prosecutor prepared to enforce the law?
Both should focus on the lesson of the early '70s: From third-rate burglaries to fourth-rate forgeries, nobody gets away with trying to corrupt American elections.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
A criminal investigation should have already been announced.
Contact everyone who might have jurisdiction. Demand a full criminal investigation into the forgeries.
It might not have been Lockhart, even though he talked to Burkett, and is saying they didn't talk about the memos (I don't believe him), but somebody with the Kerry campaign had to be involved in this. They should thoroughly investigate the Mapes woman and see who she knows in the campaign.
Burkett says Lockhart asked him for the ducuments!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1225365/posts
All they have to do is listen at DNC headquarters for that lovely sound of shredders.......
Newt was on Hannity's radio show earlier today saying the same thing. This has strong criminal implications with so much at stake. If rathergate.com and freerepublic are making such a huge impact on CBS, perhaps even the law will be carried out against those who perpetrated this crime. But it may take more sustained emphasis from us Freepers.
Christopher Hitchens on Scarborough Country made an excellent point tonight with respect to the use of the word forgery when characterizing the memos.
His contention is that rather than use the word forgery, or a variation thereof, a more accurate description would be the word fabrication.
Forgery suggests that one is atempting to recreate something that already exists or had existed.
A fabrication is simply a creation without any foundation based in fact or reality.
Wow, didn't know that. I was going by what I'd read before about Lockhart saying they didn't talk about the memos.
I do not believe that they were duped.
I believe that they were wiling co-conspiritors.
This is not the first time CBS has pulled a stunt such as this.
It is just the first time they got caught so fast.
CBS should have their license to brodcast pulled.
The CBS reporters should be fired.
The forger should do prison time.
But none of those things will ever happen becausse this originated in the DNC and the other alphabet propganda arms of the DNC will cover for CBS.
rather can hardly be called a journalist any more and safire just made him out to be a victim. He was more than willing to go along with any crap to smear the President without proper investigation and verification and will go to his death protecting the people who were involved.
If someone painted a painting and tried to pass it off as an undiscovered Renoir, it's FORGERY.
The Democrats created memos and tried to pass them off as real official National Guard Memos, including FORGING the signature of Killian, this is FORGERY, not "fabrication".
The intent was to create the impression that these were REAL government documents, no different from the guy, who tries to pass of a forgery as a real Renoir.
Good points. However, I do remind here; the text was "fabrication" however, there was Mr. Killian's "forged" signature. So, there are two "crimes" to address --just-- concerning the actual paper. No?
The attached signature of Killian would certainly fall under the forgery description.
Christopher Hitchens on Scarborough Country made an excellent point tonight with respect to the use of the word forgery when characterizing the memos.
His contention is that rather than use the word forgery, or a variation thereof, a more accurate description would be the word fabrication.
Forgery suggests that one is atempting to recreate something that already exists or had existed.
A fabrication is simply a creation without any foundation based in fact or reality.
This is something that has bugged me from the beginning. Unlike Chris Hitchens, I am not genius enough to have put it into words. The other thing that bothered me early on was the stupid and naive belief that Dan Rather's every anal emanation had such godlike force that it had to be disproven beyond a reasonable doubt.
In this case, several Freepers are over-determining this. The memos are FABRICATIONS. The signature, call it a forgery, bad cut and paste job, whatever, was affixed to add a touch of reality, yes, but we get to our determination of what these docs are by what the creator(s) intended, which was to make fakes, from the ground up, that would be taken for real. A FORGERY would be a real check, say, with a forged signature; real contracts ... but with forged signatures, etc.
You tell'em Safire!
Portal dedicated to ending the DNC
http://www.noDNC.com
I'm kind of impressed at how hard Safire has been hitting this issue involving fellow elite journalists. He must realize how badly this hurts his profession.
-- Joe
Yeah, as soon as they get finished prosecuting Sandy Berger, right?
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.