Posted on 09/19/2004 9:52:16 PM PDT by technomage
Matt Drudge just announced that CBS will admit, maybe as soon as tomorrow, that they were 'deceived' and are launching an intensive, in-depth investigation.
Does this mean CBS will review all stories done by this producer and see if she has used false information before? It throws into question a lot of their past reporting. If they don't fire Dan Rather they aren't serious about regaining any credibility, not that they ever had any.
Hey, I'm thinkin this is startin to develope into a screenplay. Think we can get Micheal ah ahMoore to fund it? Sounds like the next Cannes Film Festival favorite to me! Maybe even an Oscar!
I thought Burkett basically admitted to being the source when he said that "we have reassembled your records", and that he in turn took them to Cleland after getting the run around while trying to contact the Kerry campaign.
So if that is the chain of custody - Burkett, Cleland, Kerry campaign - then obviously Rather got them from the Kerry Kamp. Burkett has already taken away the possiblity of denial for CBS. They have nowhere to run or hide now.
Good point, the only way CBS can make a clean break is to do a story on how the documents came through the Democratic party. I think the likelyhood of that is less than zero.
I think this is what will happen:
1. ol' DandyDan will float some completely unsubstantiated allegation that they were deceived by a right-wing partisan trickster.
2. This will give the Dims a chance to continue to claim that GW didn't meet his obligations.
3. CBS will refuse to reveal their source even though that source somehow 'deceived' them.
LOL. Why, I'll betcha Dan will say they even used a Republican or Independent medium to avoid any charges of spiritual partisanship.
Not a word of this at the DUmmy board! They all sleep as ROME burns!
We need a timeline to pass on to media outlets so they can get a clue & start seeing the big picture. I think we need a new training school called, the FREEPER School of Bloggerism [Hey, journals and its accompanying 'ism' began to evaporate a decade ago].
What? You mean use a traditional standard that's been utilized anytime a lowly print journalist's work has come into question on an elite broadcast journalist? Tell me, what media planet are you from?
But they were not... same with ABS and NBS... also PBS... with knowledge and aforethought they are aiding and abeting a criminal enterprise, the democrat party... sedition pure and simple for decades now... Pity sedition is LEGAL in this country... TODAY... It should NOT be so...
Look for the reporting to continue to avoid facts in favor of emoting:
Reporter to CBS spokesperson:
"How do you feel having to have your credibility questioned?"
CBS spokesperson: "We're hurting. We've felt we've been deceived. Betrayed. Surely, our viewers have been snookered a time or two."
Reporter: "How much was Dan Rather involved in CBS' vulnerability to be deceived?"
CBS spokesperson: Pay no attention to that 72-year-old man behind the curtain trying to bring the President down. He is the great & powerful anchor wizard of Texas, from the Land of Van Oz. How was the Wizard to know that Burkett did not have a brain? That the Democratic leadership has no heart? And that the Democratic platforms are full of straw?
Gal. Mary Mapes will be the first over the side.
This is gonna' hurt more than walkin' with a stubbed toe on hot asphalt.
Absurd, and delicious. They're still trying to save 'the story.'
And in doing so, they're sucking all the oxygen from Kerry's campaign.
Yeah, I think it's the drugs. I have these moments of total loss of reality.
Burkett hasn't spoken to anyone but CBS since it came out he was probably the source for the forged memos. As soon as their name was mentioned in the press, an innocent person would have immediately been on the phone calling all over, or having a representative call all over in an attempt to clear their name. They'd be on the TV repeatedly or talking to the press to try to countermand any misgivings about their involvement in the incident. Burkett hasn't done any of that. In fact, the only one he's chosen to speak to is Rather, the one he originally turned the memos over to. That's like Major Andre interviewing Benedict Arnold about the (Arnold) documents that ended up in his (Andre's) boots.
Right. I'm assuming we'll be hearing the story about the Bush documents being destroyed again.
Someone on Fox News yesterday discussed CBS being upset that the White House didn't tell them the documents were bad after they provided them with copies. CBS is claiming they went with the story when the White House didn't challenge the documents. Never mind how many experts told them the documents were bad, they'll try to somehow pin this on the White House.
It was just pointed out by Jeff Greenfield on CNN that there were thousands of people on the internet who have expertise to challenge a story as they did these documents..(and that is a story these reporters should remember)
What did Max Cleland know and when did he know it?
And the reason we should believe anything regarding the investigation would be...
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.