”It’s Bur-KAY!”
Posted on 09/20/2004 8:34:29 AM PDT by veronica
It's fairly clear to me that the media is about ready to name former Army National Guard Lieutenant Colonel Bill Burkett as the source of the forged memos in the "Danron Affair" and hope that things end there. CBS is, I'm quite sure, ready to pounce upon this line.
They probably won't fire Dan Rather. Instead, they'll fire producer Mary Mapes (the apparent driving force behind the story) and then plead they were duped by a man who, it just happens, has spent time in mental institutions and can therefore be depicted as a crazy fraudster.
However, it is equally clear that this is not the whole of the story. It is eminently clear to me that others must have been involved in the process that led to this effort to perpetuate a fraud against the American people and, furthermore, that those unnamed others must be exposed and held accountable before we move beyond this.
It is now admitted that at least one person within the Kerry campaign, former Senator Max Cleland, apparently spoke with Burkett and therefore had knowledge of these documents.
Let's go back in time and try to reconstruct what happened based on what we already know. As late as August 13th of this year, Burkett was claiming that:
-- I have found no documentation from LTC Killian's hand or staff that indicate that this unit was involved in any complicit way to either cover for the failures of 1LT Bush, or to provide him pay or certification for training not completed. On the contrary, LTC Killians' remarks are rare. Burkett
Now, let's flash-forward eight days, to August 21st, the day that Burkett spoke to Cleland. The Washington Post writes:
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."Burkett
So, by the 21st of August, Burkett is claiming have information with which the Democrats can launch a "counterattack" against the Bush Campaign and that information is compelling enough to get him on the phone with Max Cleland.
By the 25th of August Burkett was saying, again according to the Post, "that he and other researchers had "reassembled" files showing that Bush did not fulfill his oath to obey his superior officers."
So, what are we to conclude? While nothing is certain, I would guess that the information that Burkett sought came into his possession some time between August 13th and August 21st, when Burkett spoke to Cleland.
The Kerry Campaign, it would appear, first learned of the existence of the forged documents at some point shortly before Burkett spoke to Cleland on the 21st (after all, I doubt if Burkett would be able to simply speak to Cleland without first convincing more junior individuals in the campaign of his "credibility").
Burkett himself describes having to get through, "get through seven layers of bureaucratic kids" in order to speak to Cleland. Who did Burkett speak to and what did he tell them?
So, we are now left the following questions:
1) What did Burkett mean when he claimed that he and other "researchers" had "reassembled" the files?
2) Who were the other "researchers" who helped Burkett "reassemble" the files?
3) What did the Kerry campaign know about these fraudulent documents and when did they know it?
4) Is Burkett the perpetrator of this fraud, or is he himself a victim of it?
Before we go any further, it is necessary for the Kerry campaign and the Democratic National Committee to disclose any and all known contacts between themselves and Bill Burkett.
Whatever the exact circumstances, this man certainly did assist in attempting to defraud the American people and everyone deserves to know if and how he was assisted by both the Kerry campaign the DNC which, after all, must have had some forewarning of this attack to prepare its disastrous "Operation Fortunate Son."
More importantly, however, what we need to establish is this: did the documents originate with Burkett, or did some other individual or group use a gullible Burkett as a conduit for fake papers, knowing that, given his past history of mental problems, he would make an easy patsy if things went wrong?
If you read his words closely, a better picture emerges. He and fellow "researchers" worked to "reassemble" the files. What does this mean?
It seems to me that someone approached him claiming to have first-hand knowledge of the (fake) information contained with the forged memos. This information was then combined with Burkett's own background knowledge and turned into a finished item.
This story does not end with Bill Burkett and, ultimately, it is not about him. By most accounts Col. Burkett is not a well man. It's about the people who used Burkett for their own purposes.
Some have noted that these memos seem to be made-to-order for the storyline that CBS, the Kerry Campaign, and the Democratic National Committee wanted to run with. I agree. At the very minimum, both CBS and the Kerry campaign were utterly reckless and irresponsible and, through these things, allowed someone to attempt to influence a Presidential election with fake documents.
At the maximum, well, it's much worse.
Willing accomplice.
A perp, trained at the Donald Segretti School of Political Chicanery ("ratf**king"). Also, Max Cleland's buddy.
This is a DNC operation, with Max Cleland and Burkett as their
fall guys.
Hopefully, though, he'll object to being the fall guy for the whole scheme, and name some others.
Here starts another long week for the OLD MEDIA. I bet most of CBS were contemplating calling in sick today.
the DNC was onboard as evidenced by the fortunate son commercial..........terry mcAwful was right out there saying it was Karl Rove who forged them before most dems even thought they were fake......he was ahead of the curve why? - 'cause he had his own copies? he knew they were fake early.......how?
If Rather really wants to save his own skin, he'll break the story behind the story. He has to decide if he cares more about his own career and reputation, than he does about doing CYA for the Democratic party. He can still come out a winner, if he chooses the first option.
Firing Mapes probably won't be sufficient since she in not a 'face' at CBS. Also, CBS had better handle her firing very carefully. P*ss her off, and she squeals on the whole lot of you. Viacom then steps in and the real housecleaning begins.
As such, for him not to resign or be fired should NOT be an option. The 1% of credibility he had remaining is gone - period.
If Burkett isn't a Patsy in this how do CBS come off with claiming him ( a bombthrowing Democrat partisan with a history of mental illness) as an "unimpeachable source.
Besides, what would he know? HE NEVER SERVED WITH G W BUSH.
I just can't see how CBS can survive this. Rather gets paid a king's ransom because of what his image on camera represents. The notion of Rather being associated with "believability and integrity" is shot to hell except for the socialist fan club. If the very product they are using to draw viewers (the news anchor) is rotten to the core, they're out of business, plain and simple. The advertising dollars will dry up as ABC and NBC start hiking their rates to make up for the new viewers they will acquire.
This is really a win-win. CBS can end the Rather regime now and re-build, or die a slow death that claims everyone's job down the line.
Burkett is very much a perp...but don't forget, these "documents" apparently received wide dissemination within the DNC. On a thread on FR last week, there was a report from Nashville, TN in early August. A low-level Kerry operative predicted that new revelations about President Bush's guard service would soon be made. As I recall, this guy is in charge of "Veterans for Kerry" in Tennessee, hardly the type who's on the daily conference call with Bob Shrum. It seems highly unlikely that this minor functionary would make those claims without some advance knowledge of the documents and/or the CBS report. I think its time for FReepers to do a little digging on ties between Mary Mapes (producer of the CBS report) and the Democratic Party....
Yep...poor ole' fool. Texas Rangers will probably arrest him soon!!!
I hope that Killian's son and/or Greg Abbott (TXAG) go after Burkett for the forgery of Killian's signature. We'll then see if Burkett is still willing to play the Patsy.
"-If Burkett isn't a Patsy in this how do CBS come off with claiming him ( a bombthrowing Democrat partisan with a history of mental illness) as an "unimpeachable" source.-"
I guess they will have to...uh...bend the truth a little.
Red
CBS may still be hiding something, particularly about a money trail in this story.
As Okie01 noted on another thread, it seems unlikely that CBS would have based their reporting solely on Burkett, especially since Burkett's credibility problems were already well known to CBS and others.
Okie01 said, " I'm guessing that Somebody may be our "unimpeachable source" who vouched for Burkett and the documents to Rather.".
There may well be another key CBS informant somewhere. However CBS may have their own reasons to wish us to believe they relied solely on Burkett.
The disclosure of the second source might prove highly embarrassing to CBS and/or the Democrats. As Mark Steyn said last week, its obvious the CBS execs were willing to take a great deal of heat in order to keep this story under wraps. Is there something they don't want us to know about their CBS news reporting?
If CBS is hiding a second source, this very public conversation with Burkett could be an act of intentional misdirection. CBS may wish the public to assume that CBS based their reporting solely on Burkett, which as Okie01 says seems unlikely. But the public conversation between Rather and Burkett could be a misdirection.
So what could it be about the second source and the CBS reporting that CBS might not want us to know? It's very interesting to note that in his synopsis of his conversation with Cleland, Burkett mentions the topic of money. Burkett is quoted as asking Cleland "if they wanted to counterattack or ride this to ground and outlast it, not spending any money.". Mentioning money in this context raises the possibility that this was a pecuniary matter. Is it possible that CBS not only accepted these memos, but actually paid good money for them? This could be the embarrassing detail CBS wishes to conceal about the story. Or was there Democratic money in the mix?
The chain of events which fooled CBS into accepting these bogus documents may have required a coordinated effort on the part of several individuals. For example, someone like Burkett could have reported to Mapes that Killian complained about pressure to help Bush, or that Bush had disobeyed an order to undergo a medical exam. A second collaborator might have sent the forged memos.
Or maybe Burkett faxed the memos while Burkett's information was simultaneously being spoon-fed to CBS through Democratic back channels. CBS, anxious to get out this negative story about Bush, might have treated the collaborating sources as corroborative. Then CBS on their own initiative might have garnered the other weak collaborating evidence such as the opinions of handwriting experts and so on. (For the most part this secondary weak evidence has all been discredited by now).
There is supposedly a Yahoo board posting by Burkett claiming he gave some information to Cleland by telephone. Cleland according to Burkett was someone overtly wishing to be very aggressive in campaigning against Bush. Suppose Max Cleland went on to pass Burkett's unsubstantiated accusations on to others and the information worked its way back to Mapes through the Democrat grapevine. Certainly based only on the information we now know, the connections between Burkett, Cleland, Van Os, and CBS could scarcely have been closer. Kerry is just one step removed from Cleland.
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.