Posted on 01/22/2017 3:42:02 PM PST by Kaslin
No no no!
It's a very useful award, but with a more descriptive name.
How About The Perpetual Dan Rather Fake But True Chutzpah Award?
There must be a good source to document those charges.
In todays political climate I refuse to accept any claim without verifiable documentation.
Speaking as one who lied and got called out. Where was all this ‘accountability’ talk for the last eight years?
THAT’S IT! PERFECT!
Like we did you, Rather? You don’t want to play with fire, you’ll get burned again.
Dan Rather complaining about lies is rather akin to an ancient whore crying “rape”.
And he’s got the documents to prove it!
I remember back in 1998 he would start every story re: the Clinton scandals with “and now the latest of Republican Special Prosecutor Ken Starr’s investigation into the President’s personal life.”
This era will finally mark the time the general media goes completely off the deep end.
Rather is probably the biggest liar that ever disgraced the news media in this country. Almost as abhorrent as Crissy “Tingle Legs” Matthews.
says the guy that got fired for lying.
http://www.conservapedia.com/Rathergate
Proof of forgery
Script
Comparison of one of the Killian documents with a similar document written with the default settings on Microsoft Word
The script used in the document was instantly suspected and first realized to be a forgery by a Freeper with the username of “Buckhead”.[8][9] Bloggers also picked it up that the font was “Times New Roman”, and matched the documents up with the default layout of Microsoft Word. As to it being a part of the U.S. military, journalist Robert Bluey wrote “The typography experts couldn’t pinpoint the exact font used in the documents. They also couldn’t definitively conclude that the documents were either forged using a current computer program or were the work of a high-end typewriter or word processor in the early 1970s. But the use of the superscript “th” in one document - “111th F.I.S” - gave each expert pause. They said that is an automatic feature found in current versions of Microsoft Word, and it’s not something that was even possible more than 30 years ago.”.[10]
The standard-issue machine in all branches of the U.S. armed forces for writing documents during the 1960’s-1970’s was the IBM Selectric and Selectric II typewriters, both of which contain interchangeable fonts on a typeface ball. So wide-spread was the use of these machines that they were made part of the planned maintenance system in which repairs and upgrades were done by military personnel rather than the factory. The use of stand-alone word processors and office computers did not appear at military commands until as early as the late 1970s, well after the Killian documents were supposedly written.[11]
Umm, thanks for the great advice there, Mr. Rather. So glad you could, umm, speak on the topic of exposing lies...
No, I just can’t do it. I can’t reply to this with a straight face. Danny boy, Mr. Fake But Accurate? Shut up and sit back down, that you’re not a social pariah and outcast speaks volumes about liberal desires for ‘truth.’
He was unemployed at the time. Has he finally found a job?
Rather, Morley Safer and a few other CBS so-called reporters/journalists were lucky to get out of Vietnam alive. The threat didn’t come from their distant allies in the VC and Hanoi, but from American soldiers who read the lies that they were writing about events those soldiers had been in and were almost totally different from what CBS published.
I got this from veteran U.S. pro-American, ethical journalists and a soldiers when I was a journalist in SVN and Cambodia during the war.
Rather and Safer were “hated” more than the communist enemy, for who the soldiers had respect. It was the liars of the American media who really pissed them off and they were a disgrace to the honest reporters, photographers and cameramen who risked their lives to tell us the truth.
-----
internal ABC News Political Director Mark Halperin memo dated Friday October 8, 2004:
It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite graveI do not want to set off and endless colloquy that none of us have time for today - nor do I want to stifle one. Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion.
The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done.
Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win.
We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.
I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.
It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that 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.