Skip to comments.Rather's Lawsuit Shows Role of G.O.P. in Inquiry
Posted on 11/16/2008 7:46:40 PM PST by steve-b
When Dan Rather filed suit against CBS 14 months ago -- claiming, among other things, that his former employer had commissioned a politically biased investigation into his work on a "60 Minutes" segment about President Bush's National Guard service -- the network predicted the quick and favorable dismissal of the case, which it derided as "old news."
So far, Mr. Rather has spent more than $2 million of his own money on the suit. And according to documents filed recently in court, he may be getting something for his money.
Using tools unavailable to him as a reporter including the power of subpoena and the threat of punishment against witnesses who lie under oath he has unearthed evidence that would seem to support his assertion that CBS intended its investigation, at least in part, to quell Republican criticism of the network.
Among the materials that money has shaken free for Mr. Rather are internal CBS memorandums turned over to his lawyers, showing that network executives used Republican operatives to vet the names of potential members of a panel that had been billed as independent and charged with investigating the "60 Minutes" segment....
Another memorandum turned over to Mr. Rather's lawyers by CBS was a long typed list of conservative commentators apparently receiving some preliminary consideration as panel members, including Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge, Ann Coulter and Pat Buchanan. At the bottom of that list, someone had scribbled "Roger Ailes," the founder of Fox News....
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I just hope Rather continues to pour his own money into this bottomless pit
Yet no mention that the “document” was a fabricated fraud that he peddled as being true...
Biased per Dan Rather = 4 dems and 1 republican.
I love this. Rather spending his money to expose CBS. Reminds me of the Bible story of the Phillistines turning upon themselves and killing each other
Didn't Dan use dem operatives to vet the information for his infamous forged Lucy Ramirez story and document?
Rather suggesting an investigation might be politically motivated.
Now THAT is rich.
Would that be something if Freepers need call as Rather witnesses or CBS witnesses LOL!
Thanks steve-b,here’s a bump.
“What’s the frequency Kenneth?”
Rather and Bill Moyers are two loathesome Texans. I think both worked for LBJ? I know Moyers did but I think dan the dummy worked at CBS during Nam.
I remember in one of the biographies of LBJ, his secretary was named Rather. Not sure if they are related.
Dan Blather said they were “authenticated” documents from “unimpeachable sources”.
Their document authentication experts REFUSED to authenticate them, only the signature was said to be “consistent” by the signature expert, who said he couldn't authenticate a copy.
Moreover they were not from “unimpeachable sources” but from ONE highly impeachable nut-ball source.
Rather helped cover the Kennedy assassination. Probably his big break.
Us Texans are noted for our pride, but these two are downright shameful
What am I missing here? So what if CBS wanted to include a conservative on their investigative panel? It is as if the NYT AND Rather think conservatives have two heads and should never be included in anything.
I met Bill Moyers at a dinner hosted by the President of NYU some years ago. I must say that up close he seemed particularly loathsome, although I was very careful not to say so.
As for the lawsuit—Go Dan!
“- I’ve tried everything. I can say to you with confidence, I know a fair amount about LSD. I’ve never been a social user of any of these things, but my curiosity has carried me into a lot of interesting areas.”
Never knew he played with LSD. That explains a lot.
I first had my doubts about Rather’s sanity during his coverage of Desert Storm. He was in a helicopter, pointing out an open door, and speaking to the camera, explaining to his audience the geography below. He would point in one direction and authoritatively assert, “Over there is Iraq”, then point in a different direction and say “There, Iran” then again in a third direction, “And there, Syria”. The only problem was that there was DENSE FOG outside and neither he nor his audience could actually see a bloody thing. He was pointing into a directionless mist (”Over there lies Iraq; beyond there, Iran...”). I thought to myself, “This guy is loony-tunes.”
Wasn’t that the story where they were jawboned by an ass?