Skip to comments.In Rush to Air, CBS Quashed Memo Worries
Posted on 09/18/2004 7:27:43 PM PDT by jhouston
In the early-morning hours of Sept. 8, Dan Rather was preparing to fly to Washington for a crucial interview in the Old Executive Office Building, but torrential rain kept him in New York.
White House communications director Dan Bartlett had agreed to talk to "60 Minutes," but only on condition that the CBS program provide copies of what were being billed as newly unearthed memos indicating that President Bush had received preferential treatment in the National Guard. The papers were hand-delivered at 7:45 a.m. CBS correspondent John Roberts, filling in for Rather, sat down with Bartlett at 11:15.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Rather and CBS now blame the White House. If the White House had just called them liars and forgers they would have never...
Dan Rather: "It's raining harder than emails from angry conservatives to the CBS website."
As us. We did it.
It's all Bush's fault!!
If anything, this indicates that CBS knew there were problems with the memos and then acted like plaintiffs' trial lawyers when the White House did not object to the memos.
The article also had a few accidental laugh lines:
Howard said he believed some of the outsiders' questions about superscript and proportionate spacing were "kind of silly."
Dan Rather: "Charges and insults are sticking to me tighter than ticks on a hound".
Rather: This is going to stain my career like......well, you know.
I take it Roberts isn't a poker player.
If the documents were hand-delivered, why did the CBS fax header appear on the documents that the White House distributed to the rest of the media?
Of course Howie had to get in a dig in the last couple of sentences. Has to repeat the "but the story is true" line.
This is great. Not only is Rather destroyed by this, his groomed lefty replacement Roberts has his hands dirty too. He was an anti-Bush hack out of the same mold as his boss.
Good response! I thought the same thing. Bush knew these documents were coming. They were prepared to punt and trap CBS back on their own 1 yard line. How mean!
One of the revelations here in the middle of the story is that Rather has known Ben Barnes for 30 years. Many of us suspected Barnes and he were acquaintenances, if not more. And he never revealed this during the program.
He is pretty good, though, at walking through an open door and then complaining that someone tricked him by not closing it.
Kerry was able to deny the validity of "Unfit for Command" without reading a page of it.
The good thing about this and the NYT story is that a lot of large metropolitan papers (e.g. Houston Chronicle) subscribe to the WP and NYT services and will reprint these throughout the country tomorrow in the Sunday morning papers.
We're collectively better at most everything than the WH staff.
What a bizarre story. Thanks for the post.
Hey, Howard Kurtz and Michael Dobbs, an I know you're lurking -- this is as stupid as the BS that CBS put out last week. It won't fly.
I'm sure that a lit of the trivial details are correct. It has that glossy look and feel of the best fictional journalism, but the underlying thesis is that CBS fully expects to find the real OJ killer.
The problem is that the person or persons that forged the documents are the same people who have been pushing the story for two decades. The documents are fake and the people behind them are proven liars.
Keep it up and the Post will go down the drain with CBS.
Not exactly a fair comparison.
If this had been a national security issue, it may have been possible.
This was a political issue and if our President had used government resources to comment on it he would have been guilty of converting government money for his own personal use.
I don't think the intellectual power and speed of the internet has been recognized by anyone but daily participants in the phenomenon.
Wave us off this if we're wrong? If the White house had objected, Dan Rather would have been MORE sure he was on the right track.
This must be a confusing time for the MSM -- they don't want to turn on one of their own family, but they don't want to be splashed with all the crap either. Time to choose, fellas!
I love the question at the end about "as CBS been hoaxed." No, CBS fell short of every standard of journalistic integrity that exists.
The "kind of silly" guy is kind of silly. And they talk about Republicans being out of touch?
Finally, I am struck again by the fact that this was a non-story from the git-go. No one would have cared about a young lt who was transitioning out of the Guard missing a physical.
...like the stain in my drawers."
"So much of this debate has focused on the documents, and no one has really challenged the story. It's been frustrating to us to see all this reduced to a debate over little 'th's."
What is left of the story? What are the allegations? This CBS story is the shoddiest piece of journalism I have EVER SEEN. I cannot believe it. If I was the CEO of a company that were this incompetant I would fire the lot.
Yeah they rushed alright. FOUR YEARS trying to get this sorry story off the ground. More a desparation move by the libs supporting media. Good Work DAN
The post should stop trying to cover for a thoughtful (clearly stupid) and calculated move by CBS
The memos are forgeries...get over it! The real story is why is CBS continuing to stand behind their story when no intellegent person in the country believes the memos are real. The real story is that CBS will continue to stand behind the story so they won't have to reveal their source, which would undoubtedly lead back to the DemocRATS.
It seems CBS is trying to blame the whitehouse.... UNBELIEVEABLE!
And we saw how well that worked.
At some point the MSM is going to learn that, "No comment" from this White House means "Nice Rope. Would you like to borrow a chair?"
How can you be sure he saw them first?
Yeah. They've been obsessed with bringing down the president for year. Their obsession blinded them to the truth, and caused them to ruin themselves. It would be like Greek tragedy if it wasn't so petty and pathetic.
In a day when docu-fiction is the rule and the Dirty Rat Michael Mooron is the standard bearer for the Stone-age press then we will play by their rules. Dan Rather is guilty until he can prove himself innocent and in this case it is very likely true. If Kitty Kelly can drudge up sludge with no proof from 30 years ago then we have more than enough proof to consider Dan Rather-guilty. This was the co-ordinated attack from the DNC to damage our President for the Yaaaawn Kerry campaign.
Forging military documents is a criminal offense although someone as powerful as Rather wont be convicted like one of us would. This was a powerful man using the power of the Mainstream media and the clout of 60 Minutes to topple a government. 60 Minutes was the foundation of investigative TV and has 30 years of distinguished journalism behind it. Unfortunately we got a glimpse into how honest that journalism is. This was the rule rather than the exception as we got a glimpse of their sources, especially the anonymous variety. This time his hatred and desparation made him go off the abyss and into the complete fabrication of evidence. How could he not notice the Kinkos Fax return line??? Nice that they whited that out before they put it on their Webpage which added 15 mins to Howlin & Co exposure!
If Dino-Dan thinks that W should answer questions from false evidence then Dan needs to answer questions about why he used forged evidence. His charges have absolutely no substance but these charges are valid. So Dan, why did you put these forged documents and signatures of a dead Military Officer on your news program??
This is what happens when 95% of the Stone-age press worships at the feet of moral relitivists like bull clinton. The art of spin, or lies as it was called pre-clinton becomes varying degrees of lying. GW has the truth on his side just as the Swifties do. Yaaaawn Tax & Kerry and DNCBS only have lies on their side and must hide from the issues. In comes this mudslinging story and the high risk phony documents that are scrutinized by the Inter-news. The evidence gets blown away in a matter of minutes and the fraud is exposed to the entire world. Its a new day and the Fathers of Freedom would be proud.
Dano-saur Rather-guilty can resign and DNCBS can apologize to the country for their criminal activity but it wont matter. The Stone-age press has exposed itself for the Rat spokesman that it is and will never be believed again. They can pretend to be more balanced but whenever they use their well worn phrases, sources inside the ..... ears will hear false documents and a huge mountain of salt will be added. For Dan, he needs to take his own advice and, answer the charges! In the Michael Mooron, Kitty Katty world, your found guilty unless you can prove yourself innocent!
Pray for W and The Truth
Well, Dan, weren't you confident of the story reported on Jan. 20, 2001 that George Bush was sworn into office as the 43rd President?
A nervous breakdown? Is that a current diagnonis? I don't think I've heard that term in almost 30 years.
Michael Dobbs is one of the top journalists in the MSM, in my opinion. But he writes so factually and lawyer-like that it leaves it to the reader to decide how to interpret the result. Which is normally good, but this stuff is so over the top that I wish some of the incredolousnes that he must have felt as a journalist on witnessing the piss poor journalism of CBS has come out more in his story. I want someone to slam these guys as hard as they deserve it. In print.
They complain that they can't afford to do in-depth investigative journalism, but they can afford to charter a jet for Gunga Dan.
CBS sent a Canadian disc jocky...
Yes, exactly. And, absence of comment from the WH is what they rely on to persist with the story that the documents are "Forgeries, but accurate."
The original plan anticipated an objection from the WH, based on the substance (not on the forensics), but once there was no substantive complaint from the WH, there was no need to air the part of the story that supported the documents' authenticity.