Dan Rather: "My Story Was True"

[Hissyspit]

Source: Mediaite

Dan Rather Tells Piers the Difference Between His and Lara Logan’s Woes: ‘My Story Was True’

by Josh Feldman | 9:38 pm, December 9th, 2013 VIDEO

Former CBS newsman Dan Rather is in rather a unique position to tackle the issues surrounding 60 Minutes following its erroneous Benghazi report, and on Piers Morgan‘s show Monday night, Rather explained the key difference between his report and Lara Logan‘s: his story was true.

Rather echoed points made in Mediaite’s defense of Logan: that it’s very easy to blame the correspondent (being the face of the reporter) and forget that there are people working on these reports behind the scenes who are deserving of similar, if not more, scrutiny, and that any judgment of Logan’s journalistic bona fides should take her entire career into account, and not just this one incident.

As for his report on George W. Bush‘s national guard service, Rather said that there was a big difference between the fallout from his and Logan’s reports.

“With our story, the one that led to our difficulty, no question the story was true. What the complaint… was ‘Okay, your story was true, but where you got to the truth was flawed.’”

Read more: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/dan-rather-tells-piers-the-difference-between-his-and-lara-logans-woes-my-story-was-true

[Cha]

1. Oh, I'm very capable of blaming the people behind the story and

Lara Logan.



http://theobamadiary.com/2013/11/13/rise-and-shine-667/

Glad Rather is getting a chance to reiterate that his story was true.. CBS!

[dchill]

13. I know! I too can multitask!

Seriously, I blame Logan more... She WANTED that story to be true - even though she knew it wasn't.

[calimary]

46. And if you take the larger view of her career, you have to remember that speech she gave

where she turned into a cheerleader for war. Agenda much?

[lostincalifornia]

2. Most of us know that, and in spite of multiple witnesses that confirm it, the MSM has essentially

Remained silent. There is such a double standard that exists in the media, and the myth about a liberal media was perpetrated by the right wing media

[Ace Acme]

3. I was told that Michael Moore was offered the same docs as Rather

... but MM's fact checkers told him the docs looked hinky.

[lapfog_1]

5. I have always maintained

That the phony docs were a right wing plot to discredit the entire story.

And Dan Rather (and his producers) were dumb enough to fall for the bait.

There was a similar incident regarding yellow cake in Niger being purchased by Saddam that was faked up by some of the same people (only this time the docs were to fool the American people). Something about Embassy letterhead being stolen in Italy and then supporting documents (on the same letterhead) that supported the claim of Iraq purchasing yellowcake.

There is a lot of shit in this world... and not ALL conspiracy stories are false (ask Joe Wilson about that).

[pamela]

7. They came from Rove...I'm convinced of that.

I watched that whole thing go down that night. I saw the report and wanted to see the documents. I went to the CBS site and at first they weren't there and then the White House released the documents and that is when the Freepers got them and suddenly "discredited" them.

I kept thinking "Why would the White House release these? Why aren't they in full-scale damage control mode?" Then, it all started coming apart and I was sick. I knew it was a Rove rat-fucking.

[lapfog_1]

10. Donald Segretti

"In 1974, Segretti pleaded guilty to three misdemeanor counts of distributing illegal (in fact, forged) campaign literature and was sentenced to six months in prison, actually serving four months. One notable example of his wrongdoing was a faked letter on Democratic presidential candidate Edmund Muskie's letterhead falsely alleging that U.S. Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a fellow Democrat, had had an illegitimate child with a 17-year-old; the Muskie letters accused Senator Hubert H. Humphrey of sexual misconduct as well."

One of the original "rat fuckers"... and a direct line (in republican operative heritage) to KKKarl Rove.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

65. Yes, it was always just a little convenient how the wingnut blogs knew just how to pick them apart

and were able to do within hours of the report.

[Mr. Mojo Risen]

84. Yes I remember that too

All of a sudden everybody was a fricken document expert. I don't remember the little detail. It was something about typewriters during that era not being able to make some kind of symbol. It just didn't make sense that so many people caught that so fast.

[Major Nikon]

17. At best the documents were a red herring

What was convieniently ignored was the fact that W was actively flying and participating with TANG up until the point at which TANG started mandatory drug testing. Once drug testing started Dim-son dropped out never to return.

[CTyankee]

31. I most totally agree withyou! It was a right wing plot to discredit the story!

Havaen't we all learned something about these bastards over the past few years?

[beachbum bob]

52. you are 100% correct

Provide phoney evidence on a true story and pow...story is gone. Brilliant strategy and msm fell for it

[starroute]

8. The documents looked completely authentic

Last edited Tue Dec 10, 2013, 01:45 AM - Edit history (1)

I spent a lot of time staring at them and looking at what other people had to say about them, and there was no way they could have been created on a computer.

The fonts were compatible with variable-spacing typewriters of the time.

There were irregularities in the letters and the baseline of the kind you would get on a typewriter but never on a computer.

The address header in a couple of them was off center and slightly tilted compared to the body of the letter. This is something that would happen in the old days if you created a letterhead on the cheap by typing the address on one sheet of paper and then making multiple photocopies of that part alone for future use.

The problem was that the documents were not the originals but xeroxes of the originals -- and that meant there was no way to verify them. But in appearance, they were totally period-appropriate.

[Downwinder]

11. The IBM Executive typewriter

with proportional spacing come on the market in 1944.

[former9thward]

40. The Texas Air Guard did not have those typewriters.

Plus the secretary said she never typed the memos. That is where the story fell apart.

[olegramps]

45. Correct me if I am wrong.

I remember her stating that she didn't type those, but that the definitely reflected the commander's sentiments concerning Bush.

[former9thward]

60. Yes, that is what she stated.

Where the memo's came from is anybody's guess at this point.

[mikeysnot]

63. Rove, .... Read Fortunate Son

He purposely gave all the incriminating evidence of * to Hatfield so that they can attack the messenger and discredit the message.

The boat scene was straight out of The Godfather.

Hatfield had a criminal past. When the first publisher had gone to press, the family put pressure on the publisher stating that "the author has an axe to grind and is of dubious character"

They got cold feet and pulled the book and destroyed all copies.

Soft Skull press went to publish and NO mainstream paper would review or publish or acknowledge the book existed.

They then cut off all access to employment and credit and Hatfield committed suicide.

They made harassing calls to anyone associated with the author.

Sound familiar.

The book actually presents Bush in a positive light. But then again I read it in 2002.

[FogerRox]

64. The Original St Martins Press version includes the 2 kilos of coke story

Most of which were retained or returned. There might be 1000 in private hands, never returned.... when another publisher printed the book the coke story was not included.

& didnt Hatfield shot himself twice. In the head.

[mikeysnot]

66. I have the soft skull press version.

I think my buddy has the St Martin press version, I will ask him.

[mikeysnot]

67. More info...

First attack the messenger....

Sales of Book Alleging Bush Drug Arrest Halted

Campaign spokeswoman Mindy Tucker declined to discuss Hatfield's past but said: "He should have stuck with science fiction. He's obviously trying to sell books by peddling something that's false and untrue."

http://articles.latimes.com/1999/oct/22/news/mn-25057

Then finish him off the next day...

Publisher Pulls Gov. Bush Biography

St. Martin's Press cites author's 'questionable past' in recall decision. Book includes unproved allegations of presidential candidate's drug arrest.

http://articles.latimes.com/1999/oct/23/news/mn-25354

[FogerRox]

90. St Martins has a top flight record of double checking an authors sources

St Martins is one of the most particular publishers in the world market.

Which suggests they were fine with the initial go ahead to print, but something changed their position.

[mikeysnot]

91. but something changed their position...

Bush Crime Family...

[FogerRox]

92. I can't argue against that.

[Brainstormy]

77. I agree

I was never convinced that the documents were fake.

[wryter2000]

41. We saw much of that material here before 60 Minutes picked it up

I couldn't believe it when it turned out that person (can't remember his name) was the source He was obviously mentally unstable

[warrant46]

4. +1

[George II]

6. Good for Dan, and I knew it was true when he first reported it. But.....

....the neocon attack/rewrite of history machine was in full operation back then so he was doomed.

Glad to see that he's still feisty.

[JHB]

9. I liked what the secretary had to say...

In the interview, Ms. Knox states that she does not believe the memos are genuine. However, she confirms that the content of the memos does reflect the feelings of Lt. Col. Killian at the time and accurately portrays events that were taking place in connection with then-Lt. Bush’s Texas Air National Guard service.

“I know that I didn’t type ‘em. However, the information in those is correct,” Ms. Knox told CBS News for tonight’s broadcast.

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/cbsstatement.pdf

[DallasNE]

14. Too Bad Dan Rather Didn't Track Down Ms. Knox Before

Going with the report because then he could have incorporated her testimony into the report and simply have said that the document could not be authenticated then given Ms. Knox story.

[Eleanors38]

27. That was his mistake.

[wryter2000]

42. The "news" media skipped that part n/t

n/t

[silvershadow]

12. I gotta say, as bad as he was hosed, at least he is still around- albeit not where I would like.

I've seen him on Rachel's show a number of times, and I know he has an internet gig. And he still has his story.

[alp227]

15. Video

[Kingofalldems]

26. Where in that video did he deny a double standard?

Looks like he was saying neither he nor Logan should be fired over one incident.

[4bucksagallon]

16. The RWNJ's view being combat dodging a heroic act.

That is why so many of them were cheerleaders for the war but very few every put on the uniform and even fewer ever made it into a combat zone. The exception to that would be the lifer, who mostly were Republicans, they however had "jobs" in the rear areas and bigger bases. Very few self proclaimed Republican military men were ever involved in combat unless they asked for it, or had pissed someone off. For them there were options for the rest of the population there were not so many. That was my experience and opinion. Of course Bush got out of serving in Nam because his father or mother pulled a few strings, like I said it was considered an act of courage like Mittens serving his country by going to France.

[creeksneakers2]

18. Bill Burkett forged the documents

Before Burkett provided the documents to CBS, Burkett hung around a message board dedicated to GW Bush's National Guard records. One of Burkett's posts contained his mistaken way of calculating when Bush's physical would have been due. The same miscalculation was used in the forged documents.

The documents also used terms that were used in Burkett's branch of the Guard but were not used in Bush's.

Bill Burkett was previously caught fabricating a story about Bush operatives destroying Bush's military records. Burkett subsequently retracted his story. Later, in an on-line interview, Burkett said he over-retracted. That means he gave three different accounts of his story.

Burkett first gave CBS a source for the documents, who was the same person who previously vouched for Burkett's character during the previous falsehoods. After the documents were called into question, CBS contacted the source and the source denied having anything to do with the documents. Burkett then changed his story to a far fetched yarn about receiving the documents from an anonymous source who passed them to Burkett from behind a gate (or something like that) and Burkett couldn't see the person.

I ask those who aren't convinced to follow this analogy. You are a police officer and you call in the license plate of a suspicious vehicle. The vehicle is reported stolen, so you pull it over. You recognize the driver as a convicted car thief. At first the the suspect claims that he knows the owner and the car was just borrowed. The owner is contacted and says he never met the suspect and didn't lend the car to anybody, it was stolen. So the suspect then changes his story to say he was walking down the street and somebody he never saw before and can't describe gave him the keys and told him the car was his.

What, as a police officer, would be your hunch about what really happened? This is the same situation that took place with Burkett and the documents.

The documents were proven false by many facts. One of which was the supposed letter from one officer to another was dated a year and a half after the officer supposedly writing it had retired from the service.

Still, there are many who believe what they want to believe. There was a tragic result of that though. The day before the 60 Minutes report aired, 60 Minutes turned copies of the documents to the White House staff member who handled all but Bush National Guard issues. The staff member contacted somebody from the military and was told that night that the documents were forgeries. The staff member also asked Bush himself about it the next morning. Bush said he didn't remember everything very well but was certain that he never been ordered to take a physical. One of the forgeries was an order to Bush to take a physical. So the White House knew before the 60 Minutes story aired that it was a hoax.

Yet, the White House never told CBS that. When asked to respond, they just offered the same non-denial they'd always given, that George Bush got an honorable discharge.

Its obvious that the White House wanted CBS to swallow the hook, so they could finally get Dan Rather. Further evidence of this is that the White House faxed 500 copies of the documents to reporters around the country. If there was any chance the CBS story was true, why would the White House publicize it?

Because the left refused to look at facts and Dan Rather refused to follow where the story led and instead concentrated on trying to save his own ass, the White House got away with the plot to destroy Rather.

What if Rather and CBS has fought back by blaming the White House for not alerting them to the falsehood of the story? Republicans wouldn't cared because they believe that there is no duty for the subject of a journalistic investigation to notify investigators when they have a false story. But the press might have rallied around Rather's side, because if they can't check facts on stories they can never be safe writing anything. I think Rove and the White House especially liked that part of the situation.

Months later, journalist Michael Isakoff was given a story about Koran's being flushed down toilets at Gitmo. Isakoff checked the story with the Pentagon and they didn't deny it. When the story fell apart, Isakoff defended himself by claiming the Pentagon should have warned him. The press rallied to Isakoff's side, and he prevailed. Rather would have prevailed too, if he'd followed that strategy. And Bush would have been known for being a dirty plotter against the press.

[brush]

28. So in your opinion was the story true or not, regardless of Burkett? nt

[On the Road]

32. Thank You

This provides much better background than I had heard before.

[duffyduff]

70. With no facts. The poster is stating opinion which has NEVER

been found elsewhere other than Free Republic.

The truth is there is NO evidence the Killian memos were forgeries. They were merely copies of the originals, and since the originals didn't exist, they couldn't be authenticated.

I am surprised misinformation is allowed to be posted here.

[On the Road]

88. Maybe That's Why I Never Heard That Version Before

Are you saying the account is made up?

[creeksneakers2]

94. There is overwhelming evidence that

the documents are forgeries. There is no evidence at all, not ever Burkett vouches for their authenticity, that the documents are genuine.

The originals don't exist because Burkett came up with a lame excuse that he burned them.

I can document everything I've claimed except I can no longer find the link that Burkett wrote an incorrect calculation of when Bush's physical was due on a blog. I can't even find the blog anymore. I'm still looking but its likely they disappeared during all the time that has passed since the incident. I don't expect you to believe me about the physical due date so I'll concede the claim to you. Is there anything else specific that you doubt? I'll keep looking for evidence of due dates for physical.

Some of the overwhelming evidence that the documents were forgeries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy

[grasswire]

55. please provide some sources for your version of events

You have made many assertions in your version that I have never seen before. And I have followed the matter closely, then and now.

Interesting that all of your assertions obfuscate the actions of the RW.

[duffyduff]

71. The allegations seemed to be pulled out of thin air.

They are not in the Mary Maye's book, they are not acknowledged by Dan Rather, and they haven't been publicly acknowledged by Bill Burkett.

The post is complete and total bullshit.

[grasswire]

81. agreed wholeheartedly

Time to keep an eye out here.

No response, either.

[duffyduff]

69. No, he didn't "forge" them.

What you are saying here without any evidence to back it up, is repeating the horseshit the Free Republic was peddling. The "lawyer" who "examined" the "forgeries" didn't know squat about IBM Selectrics or typewriters, and it showed.

What the Killian memos were happened to be copies, and therefore they could not be authenticated as genuine. They were NEVER proven to be forgeries. His secretary said merely she had never typed them. They looked like something somebody who was not a secretary would have typed, like Killian himself. There were strikeovers and letters weren't properly aligned. It's not something that can be mimicked on a computer program.

You are not telling the truth here about the documents. I followed this story closely. If you are really sure of your allegations, pass it along with CBS, Mary Mayes, and Dan Rather. Somehow I don't think you have the guts.

Bill Burkett was in possession of copies--not originals, and therefore your assertion they were "forged" is false.

[grasswire]

85. I agree something stinks here. nt

[creeksneakers2]

96. I can back up everything

except the claim that Burkett posted a mistaken calculation of when Bush's physical was due. The links disappeared over time. I don't expect you to believe me, so I'll withdraw that claim. I stand by everything else, and can provide good sources.

There were many more people who examined the documents than one lawyer. There were typewriters at the time that could do some of the things that were first alleged weren't possible then, but those typrewriters weren't in common usage and it not credible to think one was at a national guard office. Those typewriters have been located and their product doesn't match the documents.

I have to go to work. More later. Don't be so angry. This is just a discussion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy

[countryjake]

87. Are you also alleging that Bush jr. never was AWOL from service?

I do not understand the thrust of your long explanation attempting to prove that the papers that Mary Mapes received were forgeries. Neither she nor Dan Rather have ever conceded that those memos were not real federal documents. And neither did the Thornburgh report.

The entire story of the Shrub's shirking of duty was known and scrutinized, long before he ever was placed in office the first time.

Rather would never have "fought back" by blaming the White House for not "alerting" him to any falsehood, because the story, in essence, was true.

1-year gap in Bush's guard duty
No record of airman at drills in 1972-73
By Walter V. Robinson, Globe Staff ~ May 23, 2000

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/bush/articles/2000/05/23/1_year_gap_in_bushs_guard_duty?pg=full

or here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20000621001543/http://www.globe.com/dailyglobe2/144/nation/1_year_gap_in_Bush_s_Guard_duty+.shtml


The ease of Bush's entry into the Air Guard was widely reported last year. At a time when such billets were coveted and his father was a Houston congressman, Bush vaulted to the top of a waiting list of 500. Bush and his father have denied that he received any preferential treatment. But last year, Ben Barnes, who was speaker of the Texas House in 1968, said in a sworn deposition in a civil lawsuit that he called Guard officials seeking a Guard slot for Bush after a friend of Bush's father asked him to do so...

But 22 months after finishing his training, and with two years left on his six-year commitment, Bush gave up flying - for good, it would turn out. He sought permission to do ''equivalent training'' at a Guard unit in Alabama, where he planned to work for several months on the Republican Senate campaign of Winton Blount, a friend of Bush's father. The proposed move took Bush off flight status, since no Alabama Guard unit had the F-102 he was trained to fly.

At that point, starting in May 1972, First Lieutenant Bush began to disappear from the Guard's radar screen...

Officially, the period between May 1972 and May 1973 remains unaccounted for. In November 1973, responding to a request from the headquarters of the Air National Guard for Bush's annual evaluation for that year, Martin, the Ellington administrative officer, wrote, ''Report for this period not available for administrative reasons.''

Bush fell short on duty at Guard
Records show pledges unmet
September 8, 2004

This article was reported by the Globe Spotlight Team -- reporters Stephen Kurkjian, Francie Latour, Sacha Pfeiffer, and Michael Rezendes, and editor Walter V. Robinson. It was written by Robinson.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/08/bush_fell_short_on_duty_at_guard/

Bartlett, in a statement to the Globe last night, sidestepped questions about Bush's record. In the statement, Bartlett asserted again that Bush would not have been honorably discharged if he had not ''met all his requirements." In a follow-up e-mail, Bartlett declared: ''And if he hadn't met his requirements you point to, they would have called him up for active duty for up to two years."

That assertion by the White House spokesman infuriates retired Army Colonel Gerald A. Lechliter, one of a number of retired military officers who have studied Bush's records and old National Guard regulations, and reached different conclusions.

''He broke his contract with the United States government -- without any adverse consequences. And the Texas Air National Guard was complicit in allowing this to happen," Lechliter said in an interview yesterday. ''He was a pilot. It cost the government a million dollars to train him to fly. So he should have been held to an even higher standard."

Even retired Lieutenant Colonel Albert C. Lloyd Jr., a former Texas Air National Guard personnel chief who vouched for Bush at the White House's request in February, agreed that Bush walked away from his obligation to join a reserve unit in the Boston area when he moved to Cambridge in September 1973. By not joining a unit in Massachusetts, Lloyd said in an interview last month, Bush ''took a chance that he could be called up for active duty. But the war was winding down, and he probably knew that the Air Force was not enforcing the penalty."

[creeksneakers2]

93. I agree with you

That Bush was AWOL during the time he was assigned to Alabama and probably later during his enlistment. It also seems very likely that Bush received favorable treatment because of his father. Its well known that Bush misbehaved during that time in his life so its very possible he got away with more.

Dan Rather did admit that the documents didn't meet CBS journalistic standards and should not have been used. The Thornburg Commission did not look at the question of the authenticity of the documents. My guess is that was because Bill Burkett was threatening to sue CBS.

There is overwhelming evidence that the documents were fakes. For those who still believe the documents are real, I'd like them to come up with a credible explanation of how Burkett got them if they were.

Some of the evidence:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy

[colsohlibgal]

19. Of Course It Was

As is Dubya and Cheney lying to get us into Iraq, as is the war profiteering that is still going on there, but you won't hear any of that on mainstream news shows with their ridiculous false equivalency credo these days. Dystopia here we come.

[merrily]

20. At the time, I happened to watch the show during which Rather proved the story was true.

I was convinced.

Years later, I heard the Republican blogger who allegedly noticed the justified margins as he was heading out to work and "exposed" Rather.

I was not convinced.

I believe the documents were planted and this blogger given the job of "exposing" them.

[Hissyspit]

21. Does anyone have a link to an article about the segment that 60 Minutes decided not

to run that night, instead running the Bush AWOL segment? I believe it was about doubts about WMD.

[countryjake]

72. Right here...

The Story That Didn't Run Thursday, September 23, 2004

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0923-02.htm


60 Minutes Niger story that never aired... Let's get it aired! Thu Aug 25, 2005

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/08/25/141255/-60-Minutes-Niger-story-that-never-aired-Let-s-get-it-aired


ACTION ITEM: '60 Minutes' Niger story that never aired Thu Aug-25-05

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2034421






My link to Isikoff's story at Newsweek no longer works, but you can read it at CommonDreams.


(on edit)
Adding yet another link to the other article mentioned at Daily Kos, by Mary Jacoby:

The Cowardly Broadcasting System Wednesday, Sep 29, 2004

http://www.salon.com/2004/09/29/cbs_wmd/

[Hissyspit]

76. Excellent! Thank you so much.

[undiegrinder]

22. For anyone interested ...

Though I'm hardly in any position to determine its accuracy, the most comprehensive, well-researched and well-sourced investigation into the Dan Rather/Bush documents scandal appears to be this lengthy article from Texas Monthly (May, 2012):

http://www.texasmonthly.com/story/truth-or-consequences

[BlueMTexpat]

23. Thanks for the informative link! eom

[adirondacker]

47. Excellent article! nt

[niyad]

53. well that was certainly depressing reading. the whole flight deck landing story was, and remains,

absolutely absurd.

[calimary]

54. Welcome to DU, undiegrinder!

Glad you're here! Interesting screen name!

Equally interesting link! I've bookmarked it for later reading - may not be able to get through the whole thing at the moment. I think the GOP was generally gunning for Dan Rather and set him up. This reeks of the rovian touch, and he learned it from people like donald segretti and lee atwater and other republi-CON dirty-tricksters. They hated Dan Rather and wanted payback for Nixon. Heck, they want payback for EVERYTHING.

[Indi Guy]

24. My understanding was that...

...Rather had seen the original documents and knew them to be authentic. When he saw the docs to be published, he recognized the texts and gave the final OK to go to air -- without realizing that pages themselves were copies that could be discredited.

Was I right on this?

[marshall]

29. Rather is correct in pointing up the similiarities and differences

The foundation of both instances are the same, it is the network's handling of the fallout that is different.

In both cases a shadowy figure who wanted some limelight injected themselves into a major event by creating a false narrative that nonetheless lead to an accurate conclusion. But whereas Rather got his head chopped off, Logan merely got a polite spanking.

[Gothmog]

30. Rather is right

His story on bush was accurate as to the facts

[Calista241]

33. differences

The difference between the two stories, in my opinion, is that Dan Rather's report was in the middle of an election, and was a blatant attempt to move polls / votes from one candidate to another.

Logan's story was an attempt to embarrass Obama and Clinton, but other than one or two news cycles, nothing substantial happens.

[Enthusiast]

48. We had a right to the truth about AWOL Bush before we cast a vote.

He was spoiled brat POS. A war criminal traitor whose lies cost the lives of hundreds of thousands. He is almost single handedly responsible for the national debt.

Logan's story was a complete fabrication.

[blackspade]

51. It definitely was not a blatant attempt to move polls/votes from one candidate to another

Bush was running on his 'war service' against Kerry, who was a real combat veteran.
Rather's story was both relevant and appropriate given the giant crap that Bush was laying on Kerry's service.

But nice try anyway....

[Calista241]

58. Believe

I'm not saying Rather's story isn't correct, he just couldn't prove it with the documents he had. The PERCEPTION was that Rather was trying to influence the election with a bunch of crap documents.

No matter how we hate that twisted fuck, Karl Rove, the man is a fricken genius.

And it's not like Rather was strung up and left to die, he's still in the news business. The same thing will happen to Laura Logan.

[grasswire]

59. remember, we had the TANG documents in 2000!

In the run-up to election 2000, a group of citizen journalists at salon.com's message board had the evidence of Bush's absence from his duty during wartime in the Texas Air National Guard. The evidence had been obtained through FOIA by a farmer, and brought to the research group. These were National Guard records.

For months, the members of this group tried to break this story to the MSM and to Democratic officials. There were hundreds of contacts made via email, phone calls, letters, and even personal visits.

The facts were unassailable. They were ignored. The Boston Globe finally ran a story about Bush's National Guard record. But it was not picked up.

Until the Friday prior to the election, when Senator Bob Kerrey called a press conference to ask George W. Bush to explain his absence from duty.

Simultaneously, the story of Bush's DUI was broken by a FOX affiliate. The DUI story blew the AWOL story out of the news.

Someone was a genius at media management.

[heaven05]

34. of course it was true

Logan is an infotainment specialist, Rather searched out the truth about shrub and his alcoholic cowardice(he never heard a shot in any war) and was fired for it. The PTB wanted a war and shrub was the idiot with the capacity to lie that got us TWO. We're still in 1and1/2 wars 10 years later.

[Kingofalldems]

35. Kick this one.

[KansDem]

36. It still is...

[ffr]

39. Doesn't that look just instill confidence, security and comfort in you?

Yeah, me neither.

An incompetent buffoon! He must be thinking about the writing on the wall (PDB 08/06/01). Uh-oh!

[KansDem]

56. And this was *after* he was told America was under attack...

Why he wasn't at least impeached and removed from office for incompetence is anybody's guess...

[davidthegnome]

37. Yes.

Personally, I have always preferred candidates who have military experience. We're talking about the Commander in Chief - and if he or she is going to command our Nation's military, then I believe they should have first-hand knowledge of how it operates. This is one of the reasons why I like John Kerry.

When I was a boy, my Grandfather respected the elder Bush as a war veteran - and may have voted for him for that very reason. The younger Bush was more or less a pampered rich boy who managed to evade service by having political connections and a powerful Father. I can't imagine my Grandfather, card carrying republican that he was - I can't imagine him having voted for the younger Bush. He almost definitely would have voted for Kerry specifically because of his military service. Unless he'd been led astray by the swift boating.

Things were different for my Grandfather's generation. The Great Depression, the global threat of the Nazi Regime, the enormous social and economic differences overall... I can't help but admire the man for living through everything he did and somehow maintaining both his sanity and his integrity. As a Marine, he fought on foot in some of the most dangerous, hellish areas of World War II. He watched friends maimed and killed, he charged over barricades and fought for his life against hopeless odds and somehow survived. He did things I imagine were both heroic and things that also caused him shame and kept him up at night.

I don't think he would have supported the Iraq invasion - he had lived through the hell of war and would have understood that it is basically evil, at times a necessary evil, but evil nonetheless. It should never be entered into without dire need.

Bush the younger, a man with no military experience, led our Nation into two separate wars that we are still struggling to recover from. I think my Grandfather would have despised him.

I speak of him now because he is one of the men I admired most throughout my life. A veteran, and a republican... but not a fucking idiot like so many of them (republicans) are today.

[ffr]

38. Yup. We miss your level headed pragmatic journalism Mr. Rather.

Too bad corporations and the wealthy can sway what, who and where most Americans get their news from today.

[jsr]

43. Recommend

[Enthusiast]

44. Of course the story is true.

With the Bush clan there is a operating rule of thumb. Imagine the worst, then double it.

As in G H W Bush's involvement in the Kennedy assassination. Just figure he pulled the trigger. You won't be far from the truth.

[UTUSN]

49. R#167 & K n/t

[hughee99]

50. Isn't "the complaint" not just that "where you got to the truth was flawed", but

that they presented evidence, the most damning piece of evidence, that they knew (or should have known) was not genuine, or at the very least, that they knew they couldn't authenticate.

The easiest way to discredit a journalist is to make it look like they are willing to forget about journalistic standards because they have a personal agenda. Rather and his producer made this easy for the repukes to do this to them.

[kpete]

57. Dan Rather

We KNEW you were right all along....


peace,
kp

[Old and In the Way]

61. It's threads like this that make me wish we had had keyword search capability on the archives.

I remember reading a lot of informative threads about this issue when it was going down. I'm sure that DU has lots of posters that were still in grade school when this happened. Can you imagine having the capability of posting threads and adding keywords, like, Bush, TANG, Rather, etc? Not only for this, but 9/11, the secret energy meetings, Katrina, 8/5/01 PDB, the run up to the invasion of Iraq, etc...

Really should be something that gets consideration for implementation on the next version to DU.

[duffyduff]

74. There is one assertion on this thread that is totally unsubstantiated

by any known facts, with nothing to back it up.

It makes an assertion not known to CBS, to Dan Rather, and to Mary Mayes but sounds like it could have come from Free Republic although even FR didn't make that assertion to my knowledge.

The fact is the FR "expert" wasn't an expert at all on typewriters but was an attorney, and he was just pulling stuff out of his ass to try and cast doubts on Rather's story. I was old enough to have worked with IBM typewriters, so I knew what this guy was claiming was utter bullshit.

When I read somebody claiming Burkett claimed he "forged" something for which there was NEVER any originals that surfaced, I have to call bullshit.

Repeat: The Killian memos were NEVER proven to be forgeries. What Burkett had were copies, and because they were copies and not originals, they could not be authenticated.

End of story.

[countryjake]

75. Dan Rather's producer's name is Mary Mapes. Her book...

"Truth and Duty: The Press, the President, and the Privilege of Power" published in 2005.


Fired CBS Producer Stands By Documents Showing Bush Neglected National Guard Service
http://www.democracynow.org/2006/2/9/fired_cbs_producer_stands_by_documents

The Press, The President and the Privilege of Power: Part II Of Our Conversation With Fired CBS "Memo-Gate" Producer Mary Mapes
http://www.democracynow.org/2006/2/10/the_press_the_president_and_the

[Brainstormy]

78. Right on! nt

[Hissyspit]

79. Yes, everyone here at DU at the time knew this and were pointing it out.

It didn't matter. The mainstream narrative was set and was being sold.

It's like the anti-war protests. The largest anti-war protests EVER in the history of humanity were held, and they were made to seem as if they never happened by the gate-keepers.

The truth didn't matter.

I still remember some asshole newsreader on CNN going to the trouble after interviewing a ground observer in Iraq before the bombing started (deliberately disparagingly referred to as a "human shield&quot of saying that her thoughts did not reflect mainstream opinion. Pure garbage propaganda.

The powers that be and the American people were going to get their war blood no matter the truth.

[yurbud]

62. yep

[marble falls]

68. Maybe if that whole "What's the frequency, Keneth?" thing hadn't happened prior.....

[Hissyspit]

80. So?

"What's the frequency, Kenneth?" is people's Benzedrine, apparently.

[marble falls]

89. Just a joke about why Dan got fired. I haven't liked him since his Houston weatherman days ....

and the time he was dumb enough broadcast in a hurricane in Galveston that seems to be the event that made CBS think he was talking head talent. Did like very much his report on George "No-show" Bush and the imaginary military career.

[daybranch]

73. Why

did he not say this before? Neglecting to do so helped elect a horrible man.

[Boomerproud]

82. He has said it many times before. Rather has never backed down about the story.

He got Roved. A very high-profile victim.

[Kingofalldems]

83. Let's keep this story on the front burner.

[JEFF9K]

86. The trashing of Rather's true story has cost our country dearly.

[Kingofalldems]

95. I undid my rec and then recced again.