Posted on 09/21/2007 9:24:02 AM PDT by Jean S
This has been O.J. week on cable TV. But the most interesting story out of the courts — and the world of TV news — is Dan Rather v. CBS Corporation, Viacom Inc., Leslie Moonves, Sumner Redstone and Andrew Heyward.
Rather, the former anchor of the CBS Evening News, is still really, really mad about losing his job in the wake of the George W. Bush/Air National Guard/phony documents story. And now he is telling his version of events in the form of a $70 million lawsuit against his former employers.
You remember the story. Aired at the height of the 2004 presidential campaign, Rather reported that Bush received preferential treatment to get into the Guard during the Vietnam era.
Rather based his conclusions on newly discovered documents purporting to prove that preferential treatment.
Of course, it turned out the documents were phony, or at least impossible to verify. CBS retracted the story, and Rather apologized.
Now Rather is making some rather astonishing allegations.
First, he claims that, after the report stirred controversy, top CBS management conducted a sham investigation of the story for the purpose of making sure that damaging information about George W. Bush be kept secret.
“CBS announced that it was conducting a thorough independent investigation into the underlying story of the broadcast and its production,” the lawsuit says, “when in fact its intention was to conduct a biased investigation with controlled timing and predetermined conclusions in order to prevent further information concerning Bush’s Texas Air National Guard service from being uncovered.”
This fake investigation, Rather charges, was done so that CBS could “pacify the White House” by making Rather the “scapegoat” of what would become known as Rathergate.
Rather also reveals that while all this was going on, he strongly believed in the Bush story — he apparently still does — and threatened to hire his own private investigator to keep looking into it.
CBS, according to Rather, then hired its own private eye, whom Rather says came to the conclusion that “the [documents] were most likely authentic, and that the underlying story was certainly accurate.” But Rather alleges that CBS — not wanting to do anything to hurt the Bush White House — kept the investigator’s findings under wraps.
Perhaps you were unaware of CBS News’s unwavering support of George W. Bush. I certainly was. I would bet that the White House was, too.
In any event, Rather alleges, CBS bigwigs forced him to apologize, even though he believed no apology was necessary.
Finally, according to Rather, on Nov. 3, 2004 — the day after Bush was reelected — CBS told Rather he “was being terminated as anchor of the CBS Evening News.”
Rather’s move wasn’t made public until weeks later, when it was cast as his own decision, one made apart from the Bush/Air National Guard controversy.
Will this end up in a courtroom? It’s hard to say.
But CBS will have to defend itself, even if the case only reaches preliminary skirmishes.
And what interesting skirmishes they might be.
On one side, you’ll have Dan Rather arguing that the CBS News Bush Air National Guard report was legitimate.
And on the other side you’ll have CBS News arguing that the CBS News Bush Air National Guard report was … well, not legitimate.
CBS management will have to argue what nearly everyone, except Dan Rather, knows: that the Bush report was no good, that it should never have been broadcast, and that CBS made a mistake by airing it.
Now that will be a story.
York is a White House correspondent for National Review. His column appears in The Hill each week.
That's how CBS writes all of it's news stories, too.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
CBS
There, fixed.
‘Perhaps you were unaware of CBS News’s unwavering support of George W. Bush. I certainly was. I would bet that the White House was, too.’
If this doesn’t prove Dan Rather’s insanity, nothing ever will.
But Rather alleges that CBS — not wanting to do anything to hurt the Bush White House
Who in the entire world would believe one word of that?
Perhaps dan is deluded; perhaps not, but his attorneys are not deluded.
Why file now just before election primaries and the run up to the general election?
Something is going on and I haven't quite figured it out yet, unless it is a simple shakedown for bucks, and that seems a little far fetched.
We live in Orwellian times.
Another thing that convinced me that the documents were forgeries was the anachronism “CYA” in the header.
That terminology, especially the acronym “CYA,” did not come into popular usage until the late 80s.
Snopes doesn’t appear to have even tried to spin this one (there is no reference to it at all).
Dan's very own personal "OJ" moment .... he's obviously been pursuing the truth of this story with the same vigor that OJ has used in pursuing the 'real' killer of Nicole.
"What is that damned frequency, Kenneth?"
The 3 year limitation was about to expire.
Then why wait that long?
Either way, the question about the timing is identical, in part because I do not believe in coincidence, other than being struck by lightning out of a clear sky.
But his lawyers are not. This was not done out of insanity
Courage.
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.