Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CBS Relied On Dems for Documents
RatherBiased.com ^

Posted on 09/17/2004 11:45:54 PM PDT by RatherBiased.com

The Washington Post and The New York Times both have huge stories in today's editions on the connections between Bill Burkett, CBS News, and the Democratic Party. Memogate is the story that just keeps giving.

First from the Post's:

The former Texas National Guard officer suspected of providing CBS News with possibly forged records on President Bush's military service called on Democratic activists to wage "war" against Republican "dirty tricks" in a series of Internet postings in which he also used phrases similar to several employed in the disputed documents. [...]

In e-mail messages to a Yahoo discussion group for Texas Democrats over the past few months, Burkett laid out a rationale for using what he termed "down and dirty" tactics against Bush. He said he had passed his ideas to the Democratic National Committee but that the DNC seemed "afraid to do what I suggest."

In another message, dated Sept. 4, Burkett hinted he might have had advance knowledge of some details in an explosive segment that aired Sept. 8 on the CBS News program "60 Minutes." [...]

"I believe that Bush knows that there is more coming out than Ben Barnes," Burkett wrote. "No proof, just gut instinct."

In an Aug. 13 essay for a liberal webzine called OnlineJournal.com, Burkett hinted again that President Bush was going to be attacked. This time he was more specific:

Americans will get through the gotchas of the preemptive strike from the Republican swift boat crews who want to elevate obviously flimsy charges in order to immunize Americans from more Bush assaults. The Bush assaults are rumored to finally close the issue of Bush's disappearance from his Air National Guard duty in Alabama; efforts and methods to falsify and cover up Bush problems in his files; and the obvious disciplinary actions that led to his grounding from flying. Both sides will count on the electorate to sicken of this style and leave the real meat on the table untouched.

As documented in most recent polls, the real issues of Iraq have already required enough Maalox for most Americans. Most Americans don't like war. They are rapidly moving their focus to their domestic issues of jobs, healthcare and education.

Burkett elaborated on his thoughts in an Aug. 31 posting not printed in the Post:

While some of us pine for the return of Bill CLinton, that's not the real answer. Many of us have risked everything on this election. And the disappointment is deep and difficult to manage.

But we fight on, inspite of incompetance at the top.

The truth probably is that many of the insiders simply didn't think to chekc someone out in Texas. Does that mean they won't check out those that submit themselves for key positions, as well. That's what we all think.

CBS has said that it obtained its controversial documents within the last few weeks. It may have received them from Burkett following the latter's unsuccessful attempts to pass them on to former Democratic senator Max Cleland who traveled to Texas in late August. Before Cleland's trip, Burkett had telephoned the ex-senator saying that he had damaging information about Bush. He was told to pass this information along to the Democratic National Committe but, according to the Post, national hq was less than enthusiastic.

In an Aug. 21 posting, Burkett referred to a conversation with former senator Max Cleland (D-Ga.) about the need to counteract Republican tactics: "I asked if they wanted to counterattack or ride this to ground and outlast it, not spending any money. He said counterattack. So I gave them the information to do it with. But none of them have called me back."

Cleland confirmed that he had a two- or three-minute conversation by cell phone with a Texan named Burkett in mid-August while he was on a car ride. He remembers Burkett saying that he had "valuable" information about Bush, and asking what he should with it. "I told him to contact the [Kerry] campaign," Cleland said. "You get this information tens of times a day, and you don't know if it is legit or not."

Contacted by the New York Times, Cleland confirmed contact with Burkett, acknowledging that the disgruntled former guardsman had offered him information relating to Bush's guard service.

"I couldn't swear to it whether he used the term documents or information," Cleland told the paper. "It was some kind of stuff, some kind of information he wanted to get to the campaign, or something, regarding Bush's National Guard service. I referred him up to somebody in the campaign."

CBS has publicly denied Burkett was its source although a source within the network told Times reporter Jim Rutenberg that Burkett had "helped with the reports" but did not elaborate on exactly how.

Burkett's lawyer, a prominent Democratic activist named David Van Os who is the party's candidate for the Texas Supreme Court denied that his client had forged the Memogate documents.

"From my knowledge of Bill's character, I am 100 percent positively, unequivocally certain that Bill Burkett has not created or falsified any documents," Van Os told the Times.

Stan Merriman, co-founder of a group seeking to make the Texas Democratic party more liberal, echoed Van Os's sentiments in a Sept. 17 posting to the Yahoo Texas Democrats mailing list.

"Our brother, Bill Burkett is under siege by the Carl Rove [sic] smear machine," Merriman wrote.

"David Van Os assures me that as Bill's legal Counsel on a longstanding basis, any assertions that Bill has engaged in 'forgery' vis a vis the now infamous documentation of the Bush desertion of duty as a Texas National Guardsman is total smear with the footprints of the Karl Rove modus operandi all over it."

"I stand with both our brothers Burkett and Van Os and applaud their guts to stand up to the right wing slander machine; President Kerry and many of our DNC brethren can take a lesson from our two populist fellow-Texans who have the cajones to look contemptuously in the eye these ruthless cowards bringing down our formerly proud democracy and tell them to go to h*ll."

A long-time associate of Burkett's is James Moore, a former reporter for CBS's Houston affiliate, KHOU. Since 1994, Moore has been hounding Bush over his National Guard service. Eventually, he left "objective" journalism and has since become a part of the anti-Bush cottage industry that has sprung up following Bush's emergence as a national figure. He is the author of two books on the president,

Bush's Brain and Bush's War for Reelection.

While researching his second book, Moore received assistance from Burkett who provided him with a number of documents which Moore used to make the case that Bush had acted dishonorably during Vietnam. Some of these documents were given to CBS News which used in a Feb. 12 Evening News report which relayed Burkett's charges that Bush had instructed staff members to destroy documents which cast doubt on his Guard service.

Mary Mapes, the producer of CBS's Sept. 8 report which relied on the controversial Memogate documents likely was the recipient of these papers since, according to the network, she has been working on the Bush Guard story for the past five years and is based in Dallas. CBS officials have confirmed that Mapes interviewed Burkett.


TOPICS: Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: burkett; cbs; cbsnews; forgery; killian; memogate; rather
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-121 next last
To: Hank Rearden
hehehehe Full blown gonzo.
51 posted on 09/18/2004 1:16:42 AM PDT by Michael121 (An old soldier knows truth. Only a Dead Soldier knows peace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ArmyBratproud

Thanks. I'm thinking of something even bigger than this, i.e., not just Burkett being in trouble, but the entire Viacom Corp. Let's say that Rather knowingly conspired to use the forged documents that came from the Democratic Party, using the power of CBS as a news organization to hurt the Republicans in a presidential election. There must be federal laws against corporations allowing this to happen, i.e., if rather than proactively doing something like firing Rather and issuing corrections, they simple "let it ride".


52 posted on 09/18/2004 1:19:19 AM PDT by jporcus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

You wrote:

"Wow! You mean all we have to do is forge some historic documents, get some media hound to buy into their authenticity, let some scandal develop, and then the mainstream media will quote our FREEPINGS at length in articles from coast to coast? Where do we sign up?"


[Full rack of Sarcasm Torpedoes ARMED. FIRE!]
What if I have a grainy wrinkled fax of a Photoshop
picture of RatherStupid(TM) giving a Lewinski
to a llama?

And then claim all of the tin-foil hobos I
interviewed ("what's the frequency, Kenneth")
authenticated the picture?

And then--oops--other people are able to
recreate the picture on Photoshop, but I claim
that the photo could have been taken with
the (notoriously authenticatable--just ask UFO nuts)
Polaroid?

And I don't have the originals?

And I won't name my source?

And then impugn the motives of those questioning
these faxes, saying I won't succumb to pressure from
well-financed partisans?

And then--gasp--it turns out that every person
I asked about the story who disagreed, I didn't
use? Or that I lied to them about what they
were verifying? Mis-describing the pictures over
the phone, pretending they were eyewitness notes
instead of a fax of a Photoshop document?

And then--shudder--it turns out that those I DID
quote from, back off from their claims, except for
one 86 year old woman who used to be Rather's
typist tell me she heard other journalists
saying he sucked Donkey D*cks? And she still
says my photo is fake, because I used a Llama,
and not a Donkey, in the picture? But she
knows "these kind of thoughts went around" the
newsroom, and did I know that he was a knee-jerk
liberal, too?

And after all this comes out, I then bleat that
since RatherLazy(TM) is not answering the charges
it only makes them more likely to be true?

Will, say, PETA buy into it? No? Aren't they interested
in ANIMAL RIGHTS?

How close-minded are YOU, anyway?


THE ABOVE IS A FAIRLY 'ACCURATE' 'coroboration' of
the rigorous logic and analysis of RatherDumb(TM) and CBS.



53 posted on 09/18/2004 1:20:11 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: jporcus

FUNNY YOU MENTION THAT. We would have to ask one of the lawyers of FR is they think this would fly. I know how to look up legal cases and codes and statutes to an extent.
BUT THEY WOULD KNOW IF IT WOULD FLY.
The State Atty folks in Austin are starting to hear rumbles...from what I understand...so who knows.

Texas Penal Code - Chapter 2 Sect. 7.02 (maybe (a) 2, 3 and (b))

§ 7.02. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONDUCT OF
ANOTHER. (a) A person is criminally responsible for an offense
committed by the conduct of another if:
(1) acting with the kind of culpability required for
the offense, he causes or aids an innocent or nonresponsible person
to engage in conduct prohibited by the definition of the offense;
(2) acting with intent to promote or assist the
commission of the offense, he solicits, encourages, directs, aids,
or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense; or
(3) having a legal duty to prevent commission of the
offense and acting with intent to promote or assist its commission,
he fails to make a reasonable effort to prevent commission of the
offense.
(b) If, in the attempt to carry out a conspiracy to commit
one felony, another felony is committed by one of the conspirators,
all conspirators are guilty of the felony actually committed,
though having no intent to commit it, if the offense was committed
in furtherance of the unlawful purpose and was one that should have
been anticipated as a result of the carrying out of the conspiracy.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.


54 posted on 09/18/2004 1:27:02 AM PDT by ArmyBratproud (all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte

Wasting your time with Ford. Their Board is as leftist as RATher and CBS.


55 posted on 09/18/2004 1:28:16 AM PDT by clee1 (Islam is a deadly plague; liberalism is the AIDS virus that prevents us from defending ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch

Hey, if this was reversed and Burkett's ranch was part of a Republican pact to do in the Democratic presidency, we'd see pictures all over the media with reporters intoning, "Here we are, outside the Burkett Republican Compound..."


56 posted on 09/18/2004 1:29:21 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com

Isn't it sad that a man (either Burkett or Rather) can have his life so consummed with hatred for Bush that there seems to be little else in his life? He (they) give up almost everything else to pursue charges against Bush (which seem rather [no pun intended] meaningless when examined).


57 posted on 09/18/2004 1:31:03 AM PDT by Diddley (To Burkett and Rather - Get lives!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jporcus

Just thinking...but...I wonder if CBS can be charged since there office is not is Texas. Not sure how that works.
I guess they drag their sorry butts down here after they serve them with extradition papers.

WHILE WE ARE PONDERING ABOUT IT....This looks interesting too.

SUBCHAPTER B. CORPORATIONS AND ASSOCIATIONS


§ 7.21. DEFINITIONS. In this subchapter:
(1) "Agent" means a director, officer, employee, or
other person authorized to act in behalf of a corporation or
association.
(2) "High managerial agent" means:
(A) a partner in a partnership;
(B) an officer of a corporation or association;
(C) an agent of a corporation or association who
has duties of such responsibility that his conduct reasonably may
be assumed to represent the policy of the corporation or
association.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.


§ 7.22. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY OF CORPORATION OR
ASSOCIATION. (a) If conduct constituting an offense is performed
by an agent acting in behalf of a corporation or association and
within the scope of his office or employment, the corporation or
association is criminally responsible for an offense defined:
(1) in this code where corporations and associations
are made subject thereto;
(2) by law other than this code in which a legislative
purpose to impose criminal responsibility on corporations or
associations plainly appears; or
(3) by law other than this code for which strict
liability is imposed, unless a legislative purpose not to impose
criminal responsibility on corporations or associations plainly
appears.
(b) A corporation or association is criminally responsible
for a felony offense only if its commission was authorized,
requested, commanded, performed, or recklessly tolerated by:
(1) a majority of the governing board acting in behalf
of the corporation or association; or
(2) a high managerial agent acting in behalf of the
corporation or association and within the scope of his office or
employment.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1975, 64th Leg., p. 913, ch. 342, § 4, eff. Sept.
1, 1975; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.


§ 7.23. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY OF PERSON FOR CONDUCT IN
BEHALF OF CORPORATION OR ASSOCIATION. (a) An individual is
criminally responsible for conduct that he performs in the name of
or in behalf of a corporation or association to the same extent as
if the conduct were performed in his own name or behalf.
(b) An agent having primary responsibility for the
discharge of a duty to act imposed by law on a corporation or
association is criminally responsible for omission to discharge the
duty to the same extent as if the duty were imposed by law directly
on him.
(c) If an individual is convicted of conduct constituting an
offense performed in the name of or on behalf of a corporation or
association, he is subject to the sentence authorized by law for an
individual convicted of the offense.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.


§ 7.24. DEFENSE TO CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY OF
CORPORATION OR ASSOCIATION. It is an affirmative defense to
prosecution of a corporation or association under Section
7.22(a)(1) or (a)(2) that the high managerial agent having
supervisory responsibility over the subject matter of the offense
employed due diligence to prevent its commission.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1975, 64th Leg., p. 913, ch. 342, § 5, eff. Sept.
1, 1975; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.


58 posted on 09/18/2004 1:33:19 AM PDT by ArmyBratproud (all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: ArmyBratproud

Good points. There's got to be something unlawful, nevermind unethical, about all this.


59 posted on 09/18/2004 1:36:39 AM PDT by jporcus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: jporcus

Before anything...would have to find the statute/penal code that shows that what Burkett (or whoever else they worked with ) did was actually a crime as Pat Cadel's atty suggested it was. I am looking throught he Penal Code listings right now. I don't want to look through those statutes...I don't know what it goes under. An atty could probably find it in 2 minutes....

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/petoc.html

See
TITLE 4. INCHOATE OFFENSES

CHAPTER 15. PREPARATORY OFFENSES

§ 15.01. CRIMINAL ATTEMPT
§ 15.02. CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY

You can click on the Chapter 15 bar (as with all other chapter listings....and it will open the Sections.


60 posted on 09/18/2004 1:43:27 AM PDT by ArmyBratproud (all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
"I love the guy," Staudt said of Bush. "I'm so tired of this negative crap about him that I'd like to volunteer to build a barn and take you press guys out behind it and kick your asses." --- Walter Staudt

Another Great American.

61 posted on 09/18/2004 1:46:27 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude Adjustments Offered Here Free of Charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com

Looks like he should be playing the "Chuckie" doll in a horror flick.


62 posted on 09/18/2004 1:49:10 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude Adjustments Offered Here Free of Charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ArmyBratproud; jporcus; All

BINGO?
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/petoc.html
Texas Penal Code. Title 8
Chapter 37
--§ 37.09. TAMPERING WITH OR FABRICATING PHYSICAL
EVIDENCE.

--§ 37.10. TAMPERING WITH GOVERNMENTAL RECORD.

(PRETTY SURE AN ELECTION IS AN OFFICIAL PROCEEDING)
§ 37.09. TAMPERING WITH OR FABRICATING PHYSICAL
(1) alters, destroys, or conceals any record,
document, or thing with intent to impair its verity, legibility, or
availability as evidence in the investigation or official
proceeding; or
(2) makes, presents, or uses any record, document, or
thing with knowledge of its falsity and with intent to affect the
course or outcome of the investigation or official proceeding.
(b) This section shall not apply if the record, document, or
thing concealed is privileged or is the work product of the parties
to the investigation or official proceeding.
-

§ 37.10. TAMPERING WITH GOVERNMENTAL RECORD
1) knowingly makes a false entry in, or false
alteration of, a governmental record;
(2) makes, presents, or uses any record, document, or
thing with knowledge of its falsity and with intent that it be taken
as a genuine governmental record;

Would be interesting to get a prosecutor's view on this.
Or any atty really.


63 posted on 09/18/2004 1:54:52 AM PDT by ArmyBratproud (all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: jporcus

see posts 60 and 63.

Sure looks like they broke Texas law....

Gotta wonder what an atty would think of that.


64 posted on 09/18/2004 1:56:48 AM PDT by ArmyBratproud (all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: ArmyBratproud

Looks good to me! Unfortunately, I am not a lawyer!


65 posted on 09/18/2004 1:57:48 AM PDT by jporcus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: ArmyBratproud
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
66 posted on 09/18/2004 2:05:56 AM PDT by igoramus987
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
The race is on to score an interview with Walter Staudt, the former commander of the Texas National Guard and the man the infamous CBS documents allege pressured Killian to "sugar coat" Bush's performance review. Staudt might be able to clear some things up for everyone, but story after story over the last few days has frustratingly reported that he won't return anyone's phone calls....

ABC News got the interview --

Speaking Out
Air National Guard Colonel Denies Bush Got Preferential Treatment
ABCNEWS.com
Sept. 17, 2004— The man cited in media reports as having allegedly pressured others in the Texas Air National Guard to help George W. Bush is speaking out, telling ABC News in an exclusive interview that he never sought special treatment for Bush. [SNIP]

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/Politics/Vote2004/staudt_bush_040917.html
67 posted on 09/18/2004 2:24:55 AM PDT by Jackson Brown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com
the DNC seemed "afraid to do what I suggest."

How low do you have to be when even the DNC turns up it's nose??

68 posted on 09/18/2004 3:32:48 AM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com

http://www.texaspopulists.com/

David Van Os then gave a rousing speech about the need to reactivate the base of our state Party and what must be done to revitalize it. He discussed the potential upcoming Communication Workers of America (CWA) strike against SBC, due to SBC’s insistence that the union concede on some health care benefits. He attributed the decline of the Texas Democratic Party to the Party neglecting to organize its base, while pursuing the “mythological swing vote”, resulting in a “continuing spiral of losses”. David encouraged us to look to our legacy of great leadership from past Democrats such as Harry Truman, Ralph Yarborough, Glen Maxey, James Stephen Hogg and Jim Hightower, leaders who ran as populists, not away from that tradition.

Our featured speaker was Jim Hightower, who spoke of his mixed emotions as he watched our Congressional Democratic leadership in Washington.
......................................................
Bill Burkett's lawyer, Van Os/..Part of the Molly Ivins Texas dem "progressives"


69 posted on 09/18/2004 3:34:24 AM PDT by MEG33 (John Kerry has been AWOL on issues of national security for two decades)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Texas-Democrats/message/7278

Fellow Progressive Populist Caucus Members:

Our brother, Bill Burkett is under siege by the Carl Rove smear machine. Bill
is a charter member of the PPC and our friend.


70 posted on 09/18/2004 3:39:45 AM PDT by MEG33 (John Kerry has been AWOL on issues of national security for two decades)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte
Bonaparte, thank you so much for the list; I intend to mail my caustic message to American Express with a bcc. to all other sponsors for ease of message and time! I've had such a fine time each day mailing CBS directly--using different names for the acronym--criminal, castro, etc.

Best regards as always . . . Penny

71 posted on 09/18/2004 4:25:05 AM PDT by Penny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com
Please, please, please pursue Cleland in unearthing the name of the contact person in the DNC that he says he gave Burkett. From there, a trail to criminal activity in the DNC and CBS exists--of this I'm certain!

Regards . . . Penny

72 posted on 09/18/2004 4:30:37 AM PDT by Penny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com
It is truly fascinating to watch it all unfold. The scale of this scandal is so massive it's undeniable.

But I don't know if it is going to result in changes for the better. I feel that part of Dan's delusion is he thinks he's impartial on the air, even though he is obviously consumed by his bias.

Call me cynical, but I think news organizations will see his inadmission to tilting to the left as Rather's downfall, not his acceptance of bad data. I suspect they will just continue to become more openly partisan...so if you are conservative, you will watch one channel, liberal another.

And the 'facts' will rarely surface in such an environment. Instead it will be all about personalities like Carville or "Bow-Tie Boy" or whomever and how well they can "spin" and "slam", not about events. We already see so much of this now. Soon, the news will be 24 hour campaign commercials.

WTH ever happened to "reporting"?

73 posted on 09/18/2004 4:33:31 AM PDT by Jalapeno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com

The first time I looked quickly at the picture, I thought it was Tim Russert.


74 posted on 09/18/2004 4:34:04 AM PDT by Bernard (Let Freedom Reign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com

Love the MSM feeding frenzy!
Everyone ganging up on CBS and Dan Rather – not because he’s a fraud, but because they want the market share. I don’t really care why, I just like that it is happening.


75 posted on 09/18/2004 4:40:28 AM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com

You got that right. It's so juicy even the media that normally protects lefties are going for the jugular.


76 posted on 09/18/2004 4:40:34 AM PDT by Casloy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com
Burkett's a bonehead. If he did come up with this screwy idea, why do I think he had help? Like one of those won't-somebody-rid-me-of-this-meddlesome-priest deals?

Burkett needs to be subpoenaed in any case. Last time I checked forgery was still a crime in the good ol' US.

77 posted on 09/18/2004 4:40:34 AM PDT by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com
Saturday, when all the news that's fit to bury gets in the papers.

I love Saturdays.
78 posted on 09/18/2004 4:40:35 AM PDT by snooker (French Fried Flip Flopper still Flouncing, be careful out there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheLion

Awesome comment by Staudt. A real Texan, like GW.


79 posted on 09/18/2004 4:42:05 AM PDT by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch
Gaw! It looks like he's wrapping the mobile home in brick. See in the front?
80 posted on 09/18/2004 4:42:14 AM PDT by Jaysun (Taxation WITH representation isn't so hot either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch
Nice fence poles, must have come from the tree branches he found in the neighbors farm.
81 posted on 09/18/2004 4:43:09 AM PDT by Recon by Fire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com

Memogate? I swear that name was already taken by the Clinton administration.


82 posted on 09/18/2004 4:44:04 AM PDT by Styria
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snooker
This was the 'rats big suprise and they had to spring it a month early 'cause Kerry was drowning.

This backfired bigger than a "Wile E. Coyote" cannon shot.

83 posted on 09/18/2004 4:44:38 AM PDT by Semper Paratus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Semper Paratus
My thoughts as well. When I saw the Burkett postings we dug up a few days back, it all came together.

First up it was Dan and the forged TANG story.
Then comes Kitty litter
Last but not least is the abu-grab book.

Had to rush it all out or Kerry would be sitting on the bottom in his sunk Swift boat.

Long live the Pajama People ... :-}
84 posted on 09/18/2004 4:49:34 AM PDT by snooker (French Fried Flip Flopper still Flouncing, be careful out there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com

Kudos to ABC they have been on this like an ornery Texas alligator on a ....oops slipped into Ratherspeak there for a second.


85 posted on 09/18/2004 4:51:01 AM PDT by Straight Vermonter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 1stMarylandRegiment
Straight out of Rules for Radicals

The subject of the senior thesis of the soon-to-be Democratic candidate for President.

Twenty-two days and counting...

86 posted on 09/18/2004 4:54:44 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Hillary becomes the RAT candidate on October 9. You saw it here first.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com
Beckett is a cut-out. Depend on it

Beckett's role is to shield more important people, to be expendable if the need arises. He may have been involved, but would Dan Rather fall on his sword to protect just Beckett? I don't think so.

87 posted on 09/18/2004 4:54:50 AM PDT by SauronOfMordor (That which does not kill me had better be able to run away damn fast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor

Beckett = Burkett


88 posted on 09/18/2004 4:56:23 AM PDT by SauronOfMordor (That which does not kill me had better be able to run away damn fast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com

""I love the guy," Staudt said of Bush. "I'm so tired of this negative crap about him that I'd like to volunteer to build a barn and take you press guys out behind it and kick your asses."

Very funny! Problem is, the libs wouldn't understand it at all. Would NOT have a single clue why that statement is funny. Not one.


89 posted on 09/18/2004 5:03:23 AM PDT by BillyCrockett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com
This story has legs of its own that no one can stop now. Even if the WaPo or NYT drops it, someone else will pick it up. It is a tremendously engaging narrative which desperately is in need of a dramatic conclusion.

But, I think, the further it goes (beyond Rather), the longer it will take.

It's really a huge story, much bigger than Watergate. It's more like the Dreyfus affair in terms of potential connections within and among the powerful.

Think of the level of confidence these people possess, to send Rather and Heyward out there to defend these documents!

The decision to bring down the President using forged "news", via CBS News, for heaven's sake-this isn't using left wing (black) pajama-wearers!

90 posted on 09/18/2004 5:06:18 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Hillary becomes the RAT candidate on October 9. You saw it here first.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch

possibly festooned?

yeah and if he was male enough to father children they would be running barefoot through the B.S. spread around his plantation.


91 posted on 09/18/2004 5:10:38 AM PDT by 537cant be wrong (the lib turneraitor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Diddley
"...give up almost everything else to pursue charges against Bush (which seem rather [no pun intended] meaningless when examined).


This is the really amazing part of this whole story, the "crime" they are trying to expose (even if true, and I don't concede that it is) is so minor, as to be on the level of jay walking.

I have read that the true plan was to slowly build a case that President Bush was a druggie and come late October run a story connecting the dots.

But again, (and I don't concede any truth to those charges) President Bush has already admitted that he had a period in his life where he was wild and reckless, and then he repented and reformed his life.

President Bush is not running on who he was 35 years ago, but on his record of the past four years. You would think the Democrats would be able to find something more recent to disagree with this administration.

John Kerry made a big mistake using his time in Viet Nam as the reason to elect him President. If he was as smart as they keep telling us, and he had plans to run for President some day, he should have cleaned up his record years ago. He could have gone to one of the many Veternans conventions and apologized for his words and deeds. This simple act would have neutralized the Swifties, but it is obvious that he still thinks he is right, and that thinking is what will keep him from winning this election.

I have often wondered about how Bill Clinton was able to get away with all he did. The only conclussion I could come up with is that he sold his soul to the devil, but the price was more then his sould, but the entire Democrate Party. Think about it, Bill Clinton with all he said and did, comes out of eight years of scandals in the White House untouched, yet everything else is in shambles. If the Democrats are mad, they are focusing on the wrong man (President Bush), the real cause for their current pain is Bill Clinton.

Perhaps Bill Clinton was good for the country after all. If his eight years in the White House results in the death of the Democrat Party, then it may have been worth it, thanks Bill. (Maybe Bill Clinton was a Karl Roves invention as well.)

92 posted on 09/18/2004 5:15:08 AM PDT by CIB-173RDABN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com

There's also been a web site up and on the web pushing this story since October 5, 2000. Using The Wayback Machine you can see what's been on the site:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.awolbush.com

It appears that someone has been funding this story and pushing it for four years running. Who are the people behind the web site? What is their connection to this current memo controversy?

Some digging, while holding my nose it is hard to type that way by the way, turned up links to thomaspaine.com, mention of a "Martin Heldt", there is mention about a refusal to follow two direct orders for a physical (hmmm, wonder where that claim showed up lately?), etc. too much to stomach this early in the AM.

The site's registration information lists:
Registrant:
Tell the Truth, Inc. (AWOLBUSH-DOM)
3 Harbor, #315
Sausalito, CA 94965
US

An older registration had this info:
Administrative Contact:
Easton, Will (WEO45) weaston@IGC.ORG
Tell the Truth, Inc.
4130 Cesar Chavez #60
San Francisco, CA 94110
415-563-8277

Could it be the "Will Easton" who introducted Dr. Dean out in San Francisco earlier this year?
http://sf4dean.com/gallery/SFMar18/HowardDean_03_18_04_009

The same "Will Easton" who is organizing "supporters of Barbara Boxer, Democrat from California, to discuss organizing and mobilizing for her 2004 Senate run."
http://boxerforsenate.meetup.com/8/

The same "Will Easton" who is involved with the Institute for Global Communications (IGC)? http://www.igc.apc.org/


Not sure if this is the same "To Tell the Truth, Inc." that got a contract from the Allegheny County in Pennsylvania this month:
APPROVED EXECUTIVE ACTIONS - 9/7/04
EXEC. ACT. AUTH.
COST
CENTER/JOB OBJECT DEPARTMENT VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
882-04 9/3/2004 203105 63010
Administrative
Services Tell The Truth, Inc.
To enter into an Agreement for consultation services for
M/W/DBE and the Department of Administrative Services.
Estimated Cost: $56,000 $56,000.00
www.county.allegheny.pa.us/exaction/sept2004/240907.pdf


93 posted on 09/18/2004 5:25:28 AM PDT by VoteHarryBrowne2000 (Mad as Zell!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanVictory
"Cleland doesn't know when to not pick something up." Terrific line from American Victory.
94 posted on 09/18/2004 5:48:43 AM PDT by Malesherbes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: jporcus; ArmyBratproud
Let's say that Rather knowingly conspired to use the forged documents that came from the Democratic Party, using the power of CBS as a news organization to hurt the Republicans in a presidential election. There must be federal laws against corporations allowing this to happen, i.e., if rather than proactively doing something like firing Rather and issuing corrections, they simple "let it ride".

I've reviewed forgery and fraud laws, and think criminal charges there are dry holes.

I haven't reviewed or studied electioneering laws, but have an aversion to "going there" for the same reason I have an aversion to Congressional hearings. Both lead to regulation of political expression by the media, using the force of law.

To me, the best "correction" is for the public to view all media with deep skepticism, and for each individual to develop critical thinking and analytical skills. Reading comprehension, logical thinking, etc. are useful to society in proportion to the fraction of its people that posses those skills.

I have no issue with the cause of action that GWB has against CBS News for defamation, or a shareholder suit by Viacom shareholders, if their stock loses value on bad business judgement.

95 posted on 09/18/2004 5:49:27 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: snooker

"Both sides will count on the electorate to sicken of this style and leave the real meat on the table untouched. "

Yes, they knew the Swift Boat Veterans had some real meat to serve up; and counted on these faked memos about Bush to innure the public to the TRUE charges.

Lots here on FR had thought so, but here he actually SAYS it!


96 posted on 09/18/2004 5:51:59 AM PDT by AMDG&BVMH (Proudly served in the National Guard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: jporcus
Dittos to jporcus. Rather is the asbestos in the Viacom system. The whole thing should be torn down in the interests of public safety.
97 posted on 09/18/2004 5:57:03 AM PDT by Malesherbes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
Think of the level of confidence these people possess, to send Rather and Heyward out there to defend these documents!

Tough to figure out who the "strategically placed" people are; but the events and subsequent behavior point to high placement in the respective organizations.

Not even Les Moonves has come out, either way. I wonder how CBS News fits into Viacom's business. Is it a money maker? Break even? Loss? One thing that Viacom wants, is to be able to influence the political process via deception and propaganda. In principle, it is worth having that, even if the operation is a loser on the balance sheet.

I think the bigger motivating objective of CBS News (and NBC, ABC, CNN, PBS, NPR, AP, etc.) is the ability to manipulate public opinion and the political process - not necessarily to earn a profit. It's about power first, and money second.

98 posted on 09/18/2004 6:02:49 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Diddley
" Isn't it sad that a man (either Burkett or Rather) can have his life so consumed with hatred for Bush that there seems to be little else in his life? He (they) give up almost everything else to pursue charges against Bush (which seem rather [no pun intended] meaningless when examined). "

We can never underestimate the capacity for jealously and vindictiveness in individuals, but this ultimately, and often rather quickly, destroys those so unfortunate to have this condition.
99 posted on 09/18/2004 6:07:46 AM PDT by mtntop3 ("He who must know before he believes will never come to full knowledge.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
Van Os is Burkett's lawyer. Because he may have to defend him in a criminal trial, he has not asked him if he is the forger. That is why Van Os says that Burkett is not the forger based only on knowledge of his character.

Even if Burkett is the forger, he may not have been the faxer. Remember, Rather said the memos came from "an unimpeachable source." Burkett is not "unimpeachable." Therefore, did someone else, someone who is unimpeachable, visit Burkett in Texas and use that Kinko's? If so, who? Who is the Deep Throat of this story?

100 posted on 09/18/2004 6:42:30 AM PDT by p. henry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-121 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson