I couldn't agree more. But it's not like this is the first time CBS has aired fraudulent information. They've been doing it for the last year and a half!<br /><br />
<br /><br />Just because the press was caught (CBS) in the bias that any American with a brain could see, and it just happens to benefit Bush/Rove doesn't mean they were involved. The forgeries were so bad an idiot could see it and CBS was not only remiss but culpable in the spreading of rumor and slander. Just because Dan Rather is a popular figure, doesn't mean he doesn't have a hidden agenda which is far easier to prove than your above statement. CBS WAS WRONG, THEY FAILED TO ADMITT THEY WERE WRONG, AND CONTINUE TO GIVE THE STORY LEGS WITH THEIR COVER-UP.<br /><br />Of course Rove is happy, so am I, and millions and millions of other people because those liberals who would fabricate news got caught in the act. I don't even think that Kerry was involved but the fact that CBS called the DNC to trade access for documents should scare the crap out of all good conspiracy minded liberals. Just because you like the people involved shouldn't change your search for the truth.
OMG that is just ridiculous! First, you'd have to assume that Rove knew CBS would be so biased and slipshod to not even bother vetting the documents at all - when I saw the documents I laughed my @$$ off because anybody who uses Word with any regularity knows they were done in Word - It is the default template for God sake! They didn't even try to hide the fact they came from Word. When you hold it up next to known documents from the era you can't help but belly laugh.<br /><br />Second, CBS went to Burkett looking for the documents. That is documented. So, how did CBS know to go to Burkett? Think Rove tipped them off? Give me a break!<br /><br />Third, your hanging your hat on how fast the forgeries were exposed as evidence, is just silly. It says more about CBS than it does the forger. Rather recently said he believes the documents are genuine but just can't be authenticated!<br /><br />Fourth, Tony Coello has acknowledged that the "documents" were given to the Gore campaign in 2000 and they dismissed them out of hand as forgeries. Think Rove gave them to Tony in 2000?<br /><br />Fifth, Burkett is a known loon. He has self described mental problems. No self respecting reporters would use him as a source. Even Chris Mathews said he was out-to-lunch after he interviewed him. Do you think Rove would give them to a guy who nobody believes? Do you think Rove is that stupid?<br /><br />Come on PW I can usually count on you for better arguments than this...
A excuse ? No It's a comment about the editorial cartoon from mrbscott19.<br />A explaination? No only GW can try to do that. You see in Iraq they still have no WMD ,no proven links to Al Qaeda and no weapons labs.Oh but wait Iran does , only out by one letter.<br />A deflection ? While maybe, I'll tell you tell you the meaning of life... it is......<br />-<br />-<br />-<br />-<br />-<br />-<br />-<br />-<br />THIS JUST IN TERROR *TERROR ALERT*TERROR ALERT*<br />Thats a defection.Originally posted by POINTER94:<br /> Thats good .It's not like Bush isn't guilty of not checking the facts.<br /><br /><br />Is this an excuse, explaination or deflection?
<br /><br />But wasn't this thread about the potential relationship with CBS and the Kerry campaign. I still don't see how your comment relates political cartoon not withstanding?Another well informed person who hasn't even taken the time to read the 911 Commission report or even the posts here with excerpts from multiple sources.<br /><br />A bet you believe in the "secret Saudi flights" too. Do you think all the Jews that worked in the WTC were warned not to go to work on 911? Did Nixon or Johnson kill Kennedy? I'm just curious how deep it goes...
Interesting. Why would he tell her about a "meaningless" 4 minute conversation with a crackpot and why would she tell Kerry?<br /><br />[full story]<br /><br />The Kerry campaign and CBS<br /><br />Published September 22, 2004<br /><br />Soon after suspicions erupted that CBS News had relied on forgeries for a Sept. 8 story about George W. Bush's service in the National Guard, Terry McAuliffe, chair of the Democratic National Committee, offered reporters his theory on who might be the dirty trickster. As the Los Angeles Times reported on Sept. 11: "Deflecting questions about whether Democrats had given CBS the documents implicating Bush, McAuliffe suggested it might have been White House political adviser Karl Rove who did so."<br /><br />There is, in fact, a political odor rising from the debacle that has discredited CBS and its supposedly devastating story about the president. But the possible collusion in question isn't the nefarious link McAuliffe insinuated.<br /><br />On Monday, a top adviser to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry acknowledged that, before CBS aired its story, he talked with the man who gave the documents to the network. Joe Lockhart, a veteran of the Bill Clinton White House, said he called Bill Burkett, a retired National Guard officer, at the suggestion of CBS' lead producer on the story, Mary Mapes.<br /><br />That's perplexing on many levels--starting with the fact that Bill Burkett isn't just any former guardsman. As The Washington Post described him Tuesday: "The man CBS News touted as the unimpeachable source' of explosive documents about President Bush's National Guard service turns out to be a former Guard officer with a history of self-described mental problems who has denounced Bush as a liar with demonic personality shortcomings.'"<br /><br />Lockhart's explanation to The Wall Street Journal of why he contacted Burkett raised more questions than it answered: "The Saturday before the 60 Minutes' story, the CBS producer contacted me and said someone who had been helpful to them on the story had been trying to reach the Kerry campaign, wanted to talk to someone on the campaign. She gave me the guy's number. It was Burkett. I called the guy. ... We talked for three or four minutes about the swift-boat controversy. He believed our response was inadequate, that Kerry should push back about the Vietnam experience. I thanked him for his advice. End of the story."<br /><br />Not exactly. Kerry adviser Michael McCurry now says Lockhart recently told Mary Beth Cahill, Kerry's campaign manager, about the conversation. McCurry says Cahill then told Kerry.<br /><br />A trusting person would conclude the CBS producer pulled strings to do what her source couldn't: put him in touch with a top Kerry aide. But a cynical person would ask precisely what Lockhart knew about the story Mapes was reporting--and would demand to know who was telling what to whom when Lockhart and Burkett spoke. Also: As questions swirled about Burkett, who was publicly identified as a possible source of the memos on Sept. 12, why didn't Kerry's campaign quickly reveal its contact with Burkett to pre-empt any suggestion of collusion?<br /><br />Similar questions arose, and fairly so, last month when a Bush campaign lawyer resigned after revealing that he had provided legal advice to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.<br /><br />Lockhart denies a link between Kerry's campaign and the forgeries. He says he doesn't recall talking to Burkett about Bush's Guard records.<br /><br />But Lockhart isn't the only Kerry ally who spoke with Burkett before CBS aired its bogus story. Former Sen. Max Cleland (D-Ga.) has said he talked last month with Burkett, who claimed to have information about Bush that would offset criticism of Kerry's service record. Cleland has said he gave Burkett's name and number to the Kerry campaign's research department.<br /><br />Burkett has said he lied to CBS. Anchorman Dan Rather has apologized for airing the story. Time now for the Kerry campaign and CBS to come clean about all communiques between them about this story and these phony documents. Kerry has denounced what he and others say are baseless lies from swift boat veterans about his service record. It will be heartening to hear his reassurance that he has inspected his own campaign and found it innocent of any involvement in CBS' tawdry fiasco.<br /><br /> http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0409220118sep22,1,588492.story
WTH is that about .
