September 11, 2004
CBS Repeats Globe Lie (UPDATED)
Posted by Bill
Unbelievable. Dr. Bouffard must be irate; I truly hope that he doesn't get more threatening e-mail or phone calls.
Wizbang catches it:
The CBS Evening News just repeated the Boston Globe Lie.
I love the mainstream media. One of them lies and the other one swears to it. I should note that this was their sole line of defense tonight and the blogosphere proved it to be a lie hours ago.
Once again, if anyone would like to contact the ombudsman for the Globe regarding their dishonesty ...
UPDATE: Some might say that this Mainstream Media Meltdown is surreal.
UPDATE: Instapundit reports that CBS even spelled Dr. Bouffard's name wrong on their web site. By the way, Professor Reynolds - they also spelled his first name wrong.
Posted by Bill at September 11, 2004 06:46 PM | TrackBack (14)
I hope Bouffard demands a retraction from both sources.
Posted by: Keith at September 11, 2004 06:50 PM
I saw it too, and my mouth just dropped open, since I'd read your blog and knew what Dr. Bouffard had said about the Globe's coverage. My question is, what if CBS continues to deny it and refuses to release the documents to independent evaluators? Who can stand up to them, say "You're lying", and make it absolutely stick even with folks who don't read blogs or conservative publications? When it comes to an impasse, what pushes it on past it? I know the MSM is covering this too, but it seems there will come an impasse if CBS doesn't break.
Posted by: susanna at September 11, 2004 06:59 PM
Some how Dr.Bouffard needs to call up FOXNews,or ABCNEWS,and tell them that the Boston Globe,has posted a false news story! Maybe its the only way to get it out in the MSM.
Posted by: Matthew at September 11, 2004 07:07 PM
Hey, Jim Pinkerton watch when this goes from derision to revolt against the MSM.
Posted by: Rich at September 11, 2004 07:10 PM
Just called Christine and left a voicemail. Hold on tight, Bill, and don't let go!
Posted by: Paul (in DC) at September 11, 2004 07:11 PM
Bill, please pass on my regards to Dr. Bouffard.
I like the idea of sending an email to both NBC and ABC, but I think the letter needs to be addressed to CBS and the BS (oops, I mean BG), ccing ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, Fox, the FCC, and the Better Business Bureau.
Posted by: Lornkanaga at September 11, 2004 07:16 PM
PS This is getting f**king ridiculous!
Posted by: Lornkanaga at September 11, 2004 07:17 PM
Man. This just doesn't stop getting uglier for CBS. Even their compatriots in the MSM seem to be smelling blood in the water.
You've got to wonder what sources Rather is protecting. And why.
I've gotta admit, a part of me hopes it is Karl Rove behind it all... I like the idea of having that kind of behind-the-scenes genius working on my side.
Posted by: krakatoa at September 11, 2004 07:23 PM
Robert Novak just repeated that the Boston Globe expert had authenticated the memos. The Doctor needs to demand a retraction or issue a clarification or something
Posted by: bethl at September 11, 2004 07:27 PM
Yeah, well, CNN's Capital Gang just covered the story without mentioning the internet at all. If you went by what they said, you'd think the Boston Globe broke the story and was the source of the controversy.
Posted by: Anachronda at September 11, 2004 07:28 PM
Bill, I bcc'd you on the email I sent to Christine Chinlund. Feel free to forward that to Dr. Bouffard.
Yeah, I'm ticked.
Posted by: Lornkanaga at September 11, 2004 07:36 PM
The San Francisco Chronicle is running the bogus Globe story online as well.
Posted by: Kermit Duncan at September 11, 2004 07:37 PM
krakatoa--I wish the VRWC had that kind of power/genius behind it.
Posted by: Lornkanaga at September 11, 2004 07:38 PM
Kermit Duncan--scroll down to the bottom of that article and you'll find a "feedback" button. I sent a comment in earlier regarding Bill's site here, but I'm sure a few more comments wouldn't hurt (hehehe).
Posted by: Lornkanaga at September 11, 2004 07:40 PM
"Deja Vu all over again" for Dan Rather. Remember his "Documentary" on Vietnam in 1988 that was totally debunked by Burkett in "Stolen Valor"? The highly hyped 1988 CBS program, "The Wall Within," purporting to tackle the issue of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), is a perfect example of the lies and distortions about Vietnam that have been fed to three generations of Americans. The program profiled six pathetic victims who it claimed were "representative" of those who served in Vietnam. It claimed that the symptoms suffered by these men were shared by hundreds of thousands of other veterans. The Dan Rather "documentary" became part of the CBS video history series on Vietnam and is graced with a formal introduction by liberal-left one-worlder Walter Cronkite.
...once a pathetic lap dog liberal liar, ....
Fantasy Headline: Dan Rather admits memos are forgeries.
In a stunning reversal, a sobbing Dan Rather admitted on 60 minutes III ^rd (can't superscript) that this was all a hoax to discredit the Bush reelection campaign and divert attention from (pick a Kerry screwup). CBS will close doors at noon on Monday and turn over all assets to INDCJournal and numerous other blogospheroids. Cash reserves will be donated to the numerous charities set up to provide for the families of victims of the war on terrorism with the majority going to the families who have lost military members in Afghanistan and Iraq....(Breaking)...
Posted by: TEWSPilot at September 11, 2004 07:44 PM
If they are deliberately misrepresenting what the guy said, doesn't that give grounds for a lawsuit now? That's the only way to make them put up or shut up, the way I see it.
Posted by: Tanker Schreiber at September 11, 2004 07:45 PM
Tanker's right. It's time (as I just posted over on Wizbang) for the good Doctor to get himself a real mean junkyard dog of a lawyer who can sink his teeth into the collective butts of CBS and the Boston Globe until they publish retractions. Bill, next time you speak to Dr. Bouffard, I think you should tell him just that.
Posted by: Joe at September 11, 2004 07:47 PM
CBS is digging in refusing to respond unless one of the other major non-liberal based media heavy hitters calls them out. ABC and the Washington Post along with some Chicago papers are starting to lead in the articles with the debunking instead of the nefarious lies. MSNBC is still front loading their articles with all the same lies put forth in the first place and continues to state that "Even if the memo's prove "unreliable" (love the soft soap euphamisms for "fraudulent") CBS has confirmed the statements concerning Bushes service from unimpeachable sources." ...Pretty easy to be unimpeached when no one knows who you are.
Besides its a lie. With everything thats transpired in the past 24 hours including a complete angry refutation by their point guy Hodges, no one can figure out who these sources are and what exactly they've said in CBS's defense. Basically the CBS/DNC/Rather camp are not going to give over anything including the original documents nor their sources unless CBS decides to damage control feeling they've been had by the Kerry camp or someone files a complaint with the FCC/Federal campaign commision and they are faced with large fines and or jail time....
Btw I think a brief could be filed alledging Illegal interference in a National election etc. by a group of private citizens...Any Lawyers out there have any thoughts on this?
Posted by: Hunter at September 11, 2004 07:48 PM
I just watched Fox News Watch. Their theory is that the MSM rushed to push news damaging to Bush because of their bias against Kerry on the Swift Boat Vets. Just like a basketball referee compensating for a bad call by making another bad call to balance things out.
I swear I'm not kidding.
Posted by: leslein at September 11, 2004 07:50 PM
...Johnny Cochran, call your office....
Posted by: TEWSPilot at September 11, 2004 07:58 PM
Tanker Schreiber said:
Is O'Neill busy now that the SwiftBoat stuff is winding down?
Posted by: Lornkanaga at September 11, 2004 07:59 PM
Why, if he's this upset, isn't Dr. Bouffard contacting media outlets himself? He is deliberately being misquoted by the imbeciles at the Boston Globe, now the nitwits at CBS are posting the same misquoted remarks--Dr. Bouffard should have been the first person in contact with them or any other media outlet to set the story straight.
Posted by: drea at September 11, 2004 08:08 PM
"I truly hope that he doesn't get more threatening e-mail or phone calls."
Yes, but it's time for him to step forward more publicly. This is about more than his personal incovenience. It is an attack on our republic.
His knowledge and credibility are unique. He needs to report for duty.
Posted by: Molon Labe at September 11, 2004 08:16 PM
Agreed, drea, but some people aren't as assertive as they would like to be, nor do they have the time to make phone call after phone call and send email after email.
The poor man got involved with this as a nicety to INDC Journal and has become a national sensation. He's being innundated with emails and phone calls, and the man does have a life (he retired to devote time to his family).
Posted by: Lornkanaga at September 11, 2004 08:18 PM
You hit it on the head. He's got extraordinary family obligations. He doesn't owe anyone anything.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 11, 2004 08:20 PM
Is it by coincidence that James Carville and Paul Begala, well known Clinton operatives, recently joined the Kerry campaign, and a major torpedo on Hillary's behalf has been launched?
Posted by: bob ward at September 11, 2004 08:22 PM
Well if repeating Dr Bouffard from the Boston Globe is the best that CBS has, well start shoveling the dirt into their grave.
This is big enough now and they've had the time to prepare a legitimate response if they had one. Obviously, they got nada.
Keep in mind this is all new territory for Dan and the Gang. Before the internet and bloggers, at most, they might have to stress on whether or not to let Andy Rooney followup up on it in a cutesy piece.
And while menioning Andy Rooney, ever notice that typewriter on his desk? Know where I'm going with this? Any special th keys on that puppy?
Posted by: PC at September 11, 2004 08:26 PM
Sorry Bill....can't agree with you on this one...He put himself front and center when he acted as an unwitting stooge ( not ment disrespectfully ) and is one of the key exhibits for one of the most blatent tries by the Liberal spinpress to effect the outcome of a Presidential election. He doesn't have to inconvienience himself all that much....Just go on several Major network Newscasts and debunk the CBS/Rather yellow journalism...Hodges should do the same...
Posted by: Hunter at September 11, 2004 08:26 PM
Yeah, why doesn't the good DR speak up? How difficil is it for the man to make the call?
Posted by: tom at September 11, 2004 08:26 PM
By the way, while mentioning Andy Rooney, try to catch reruns of his interview with Da Ali G. Almost as much fun as with Gore Vidal.
Off topic I know, I apologize.
Posted by: PC at September 11, 2004 08:28 PM
I understand where you're coming from, Bill, and I understand that Dr. Bouffard originally got himself involved as a favor to you, but I think that the situation has now developed to a point where he _can't_ sit back in the shadows anymore, as much as he might want to. The twistings of his words in the Globe and on CBS have the potential to hurt his professional reputation. I still say he needs to get ahold of a mean, tough, articulate professional - whether lawyer or PR type - who can hammer on the MSM for him.
Posted by: Joe at September 11, 2004 08:31 PM
Talk about sliding straight down the ladder of success. Question is who ends up with most splinters in their backside. Rather or Kerry?
Posted by: DJ at September 11, 2004 08:33 PM
Sometimes individuals have personal committments that DON'T MAKE IT EASY to spend a lot of time calling press conferences. I've been in touch, but SHUT UP about what Dr. Bouffard NEEDS to do.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 11, 2004 08:34 PM
Hey. Rather has always been a far left liberal inserting bias into everything he "reports" on. Just followed in Walter's footsteps.
Posted by: fred edwards at September 11, 2004 08:36 PM
Bill, the good doctor needs an even better lawyer. The BG has messed with his reputation, and he deserves some money out of this.
Unfortunately, that means that he will probably have to hit the news circuit.
Sucks, but it's the right thing to do. I hope he does the right thing.
Posted by: Lornkanaga at September 11, 2004 08:39 PM
The dream resolution to all of this is if Tim Russert or O'Rielly did a whole show laying out everything we already know point by point. Then did a "talking point memo"...looked into the camera and ended it with ..."All we can do is layout the truth Mr. Rather...Its been shown your documents and the "unimpeachable sources" you cited are all fraudulent...Basically with no specific details on your sources, or the original documents and their sources, you look like partisan lap dogs for the Democratic party, bent on Illegally interferring with a National Election by broadcasting lies and distortions in the guise of a "Newscast"...."What Say you".....
Posted by: Hunter at September 11, 2004 08:39 PM
At the risk of rendering another amateur opinion, here are the smoking guns as I see them now:
The document has 13-point vertical spacing and perfectly centered proportional font text (down to the twip, 1/440th of an inch). No typewriter could do either of these, and no human could (or would bother to) replicate them. MS Word does one easily and the other by default.
Posted by: TallDave at September 11, 2004 08:41 PM
Excellent point by Hunter. O'Reilly harped on "Primary Sources" when he rejected 250 Swiftboaters' (most of them sworn afadavits) and took the word of former Swiftboat crewmember, er, actually not a crewmember, former Green Beret Lt. Jim Rassman, well, actually Awards and Decorations Officer for a Special Forces field unit (hmmm?, that's a Sgt.'s job in the field, and what was he doing on a swiftboat mission), anyway who was on the #3 boat, well, then he said he was on Kerry's boat, and then he said.....
Posted by: TEWSPilot at September 11, 2004 08:47 PM
It's not about Dr. Bouffard owning something to anyone else. His words are being misrepresented to feed CBS' lie. He is angry about it, rightly so, and picking up a phone to set the record straight about the vapid morons that are using him would be the logical thing to do, (at least in my mind). I don't think the folks at FOX, or other outlets, would ignore one of the sources that has been purposely misrepresented to back up a blatantly false 60 Min. segment. You brilliant people in the blogosphere have done a spectacular job blowing this story apart--Dr. Bouffard would have less to do than that if he's furious enough to set the story straight.
Posted by: drea at September 11, 2004 08:52 PM
Does anyone know if this stunt violates any federal election laws, i.e. faking a comisioned officer's in oder to try to effect a federal election?
Posted by: Nathan at September 11, 2004 08:52 PM
Ya know, this story has kinda died on most mainstream news sources. I see no mention of it on current yahoo, nytimes, many other major news paper web sites. Methinks many news sources don't want to play up the story (as being true) yet don't want to do the work of falsifying this in the MM. I don't think (if the story remains at a stalemate in the news as it is now) this will have that much of an impact on Bush anyways. I think (well at least I can speak for myself) people are growing weary of these 35 year old stories.
Posted by: tom at September 11, 2004 08:57 PM
This Aussie has sought an explanation from the Boston Globe ombudsman. While I am on the other side of the world and can be ignored by them, I am stunned by not just this verballing of Dr Bouffard but of course your President. It is into our press now, in particular our public broadcaster, a stalinist lot at best, and there are no retractions in sight. And there never will be because our media too never misses the chance to have a go at your President. But in the end it is the American people themselves that they are attacking. Your media is committng an awful wrong against your nation.
Posted by: Ros at September 11, 2004 08:58 PM
It probably does. The problem lies with identifying the miscreant who "faked" the docs. At the end of the day, Rather, Kerry, et al can all shake their heads in sorrow on how they were "duped" along with everyone else.
Posted by: DJ at September 11, 2004 08:59 PM
CBS is also reporting this:
"n a separate development, the Boston Globe this week reported that Mr. Bush promised to sign up with a Boston-area unit when he left his Texas unit in 1973 to attend Harvard Business School. Mr. Bush never signed up with a Boston unit."
That's news to me.
Posted by: qoolalex at September 11, 2004 09:04 PM
I'm wondering how much longer the Kerry fun boys are going to be happy having their salad tossed by the fallout from this fiasco. McAuliffes limp comeback that "Rove dood it" is a tacit addmission that the whole thing is a fraud. If CBS gets the idea that the DNC is going to cut them lose and make them "take one" for the team things could get even more interesting...Tom I think They know this isn't going to go away...but when you have lemons all you can do is pucker up...Bushes camp is playing it smart by setting back and letting the Dems twist in the breeze.....
Posted by: Hunter at September 11, 2004 09:10 PM
Just FYI, I live in Boston and I have sent three increasingly irate emails to the Globe ombudsman, drawing heavily on you, The Shape of Days and Don Sensing (and crediting you all).
Since, after each of my first two complaints, the Glob (as we call it) delivered itself of another, more egregious lie, I'm wondering what tomorrow's paper will bring.
Keep up the great work!
Posted by: PL at September 11, 2004 09:13 PM
I just sent the following to the Globe Ombudsm:
Just an FYI, fact checking is not two news organizations quoting each other.
Posted by: Blake at September 11, 2004 09:17 PM
...Dr. Boufford is a standup guy...I applaud him....
Posted by: Hunter at September 11, 2004 09:19 PM
I'm telling you guys, right now you're not winning this battle. See also Hindrocket at PowerLine:
"I'm not as optimistic as many bloggers that just because we won the argument, we'll win the war."
In the face of power, facts are of limited use.
Posted by: the great helmsman at September 11, 2004 09:26 PM
I'm not sure how to start it but I'd be willing to contribute to a Dr. Bouffard Legal Defence (or Offence in this case) fund.
Posted by: A Ziggen at September 11, 2004 09:29 PM
CBS probably won't budge unless they are driven to the locks and stoned. Retired Maj. General Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the Texas Air Guard, has publicly said CBS misled him, tricked him, he believes the documents are forgeries, but CBS says, "Sorry, we don't care. We believed you the first time when we duped you, and you only get one chance with us." So, they may do the same to Dr.Bouffard. Such arrogance!
Posted by: TEWSPilot at September 11, 2004 09:30 PM
It’s all over, folks. CBS is going to hold out long enough for the news cycle to continue for a few more days and the allegations will fade into the dustbin of memory. None of the MSN or cable news services are going to push this story much more than they already have. Unless a reputable journalist comes up with body willing to state that he/she made the forgeries and gave them to the DNC or MSM, it’s over and will have achieved it propose: discredit the president and watch him squirm.
Posted by: Josephus at September 11, 2004 09:36 PM
Josephus, it's over _only_ if we let it be over. If the MSM is slacking off, the real answer is to keep up (and intensify) the pressure. I suggest instead of giving in to despair you get busy, write the Globe's ombudsman, contact your local CBS affiliate, and do what you can to make sure that the facts are heard.
Posted by: Joe at September 11, 2004 09:44 PM
The purpose of watching Bush squirm may never come to fruition. He's not had to squirm yet, and if asked about it he should deny it if indeed it is false. Then it becomes a war of words and then maybe the rest of the pieces fall into place... ie...it's debunked.
Posted by: tom at September 11, 2004 09:52 PM
..ie it is debunked in the MM.
Posted by: tom at September 11, 2004 09:54 PM
For one thing, you need to be clear in your own mind who you're fighting –
Pick one, you can't fight the whole world at once.
Also, experts helping you in their spare time are worthless. You need dedication, which means payment for services. Don't you think that BG sensed a hesitation when they interviewed the good Dr?
If nothing else, stop the amateur business.
Posted by: the great helmsman at September 11, 2004 10:04 PM
you are delusional. At least a dozen experts (including my source) are working this as we speak.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 11, 2004 10:07 PM
Bill - your own interaction with the good Dr shows the dilemma. Are the dozen experts willing to stake their reputation? Will they be paid for their services?
Posted by: the great helmsman at September 11, 2004 10:13 PM
While the story that Rather would apologize on air still had legs, I predicted then that even if he did, it would be a 'Yeah, but..' apology. He exceeded even my expectations.
You know, it really doesn't matter in the long run whether CBS and the Globe are successful stonewalling the forgery story. Each time the left floats the character assaults on Bush, they get disproven, debunked, or shown to be lies themselves.
Kerry tried to build a run based on comparisons of character rather than confront the most important issue - terrorism. He can't do that and keep the left happy. His reliance on his character as his primary claim to the office and exemplified by his Vietnam service imploded. It too late in the game for his campaign to change gears. To keep the contest on his terms, he and/or surrogates have to be more direct in attacking Bush's character to compensate. Each time the character assaults by the Dems themselves or the MSM are defanged - and this one has been - the public is further desensitized against believing any character assaults against Bush when they would really count. Dan Rather would open himself to derision at this point if he were to push any late October 'Look what I found out about Bush' story.
It doesn't matter how quickly the Globe or CBS try to cycle this out of the news. The damage is done and I believe the WH knows it. It's why the WH is not reacting to this with any vigor. Why should they? They've won again and the only one who fired a shot was the MSM and only then into their own foot.
Posted by: Just Passing Through at September 11, 2004 10:14 PM
I'm basically just a blog reader and really don't comment too often, but in reading this discussion, especially about deliberate attempt to tarnish, no, rust the reputation of Dr Bouffard and others who have questioned the authenticity of Rather's fairytale by the Globe, Times, CBS and MSM in general, it occurs to me that there is something very effective we could be doing that O'Reilly has demonstrated and really harm someone or some institution that is totally out of line. Remember O'Reilly asking viewers to write, call, e-mail Pepsi or was it Coke because they had signed a multimillion contract with Ludicrus (or what ever)to do commercials? All O'Reilly did was remind viewers about the kind of totally objectionable language rappers use and asked viewers to tell whichever cola company it was that they would not be buying the product as long as the felt a rapper who was totally disrespectful of women in his gangster rap was a suitable spokesman. I think it was less than 24 hours before the contract was withdrawn. This is what we can do with the sponsors of CBS evening news, 60 Minutes (both of them) advertisers in the Globe. Sure we wouldn't generate the number of letters, etc in a short period of time that O'Reilly can, but after a week, maybe two - it might just be effective.
Posted by: Jim at September 11, 2004 10:14 PM
TURN OFF CBS
It is obvious that CBS is protecting its sloppy handling of the memo (and that's being lenient).
Until CBS comes clean; i.e., let independent experts examine the originals (or if there are no originals, then give the sources of the copies so that the public can ascertain whether the sources are reliable), then we should protest.
TURN OFF CBS
Posted by: mmpost99 at September 11, 2004 10:15 PM
Let me explain how this works - of the experts I've spoken with (3), two were willing to do it for free, just because it's a national story, and it enhances their rep. In Dr. Bouffard's case he messed with it because it was interesting.
I am aware of a collaborative effort within the community of forensic experts to come up with an analysis of this doc, and MSM operations are hiring or just consulting their own experts.
This will likely be hashed out.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 11, 2004 10:19 PM
Next prediction - the gap in the polls will widen another 2-3 points this week. It will be impossible to link the change to the CBS faux pas, but that'll be why.
The most effective campaignersin this election are the far left, and they are working for the republicans.
Posted by: Just Passing Through at September 11, 2004 10:21 PM
Only someone with "standing" can fire back effectively with any serious effect. We in the blogosphere are only equipped with small arms. The Bush campaign, the RNC, other MSM big names, and the actual experts and witnesses quoted have the "big guns", e.g., credibility and clout with both CBS and the Globe as well as with the readers/viewers. Somehow they need to be persuaded to open fire for effect.
...just my $0.02
Posted by: TEWSPilot at September 11, 2004 10:23 PM
Josephus - don't be such a goddam girlie-man.
Posted by: Brian at September 11, 2004 10:36 PM
What is up...fake national guard papers & Navy investigating Kerry's "strange" DD214s....what is at work here...
Posted by: Lotex at September 11, 2004 10:44 PM
Great work to all of you who found out CBS...I just hope that the "common man" as Kerry's wife says...has the fight to push all these investigations forward, because in the end it is all of us who will suffer if the media starts trying to manipulate what we read and think..my 2 cents..
Posted by: Lotex at September 11, 2004 10:47 PM
Bill - Good, from your answer I see that you are not fighting MSM right now. Let me suggest to rule out CBS too. Let me go one step further and suggest to leave Rather alone, also for now. You know, Lenin and the useful idiots and so. That leaves DNC and Kerry. At least one way to pursue such direction is to see what can be learned about the provenance of the disputed memos. The direction is also easier on the general public which must feel snowed by superscripts, kerning and typefaces.
Posted by: the great helmsman at September 11, 2004 10:56 PM
This question is probably OT, but I was wondering whether anyone had contacted Col. Harris who is mentioned in most of the "new" documents? I hadn't seen his name come up in the press or the blogs, but could easily have missed it in the flurry. Could someone help out on this? Thanks.
Posted by: joe at September 11, 2004 11:01 PM
Maybe I'm just being stoopid, but it seems to me that this falls under the jurisdiction of the DoJ. No?
Posted by: Ron - WI at September 11, 2004 11:36 PM
Drop 'em a note. These are the only ones I have corresponded with, but on a different subject. These two work tax fraud, but I'm sure they could forward correspondence to the proper department or provide the correct names.
Evan J. Davis & Phyllis Jo Gervasio
Their mailing address is:
U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division
Posted by: TEWSPilot at September 11, 2004 11:54 PM
As one Fox News dude pointed out - Terry McAuliffe must think (or had prior knowledge) that the documents were/are fake, cuz before they've been conclusively shown to the world as fake, McAuliffe has already blamed Karl Rove. So McAuliffe thinks they're fake already huh?
Posted by: JEGjr at September 12, 2004 12:01 AM
When all else fails, use public embarrassment.
Someone needs to set up a few Laptop computers outside CBS HQ and show the Flash "CBS Busted" at
as part of a PROTEST.
TO put icing on that cake, I'll bet if you type up these memos using legacy word processors (.e.g, Wordstar 3.3 or something like that), the spacing will not be the same. If so, imagine a mechanical typewriter from 1972 producing MS Word 2002 Palatino Linotype precisely.
Killian didn;t have a Magic Typewriter, he had a time machine! Which is now broken and in the CBS Time Machine repair shop, but the shop is having trouble getting parts because they haven't been invented yet...
Posted by: Scot at September 12, 2004 12:26 AM
That should be ...
the Flash "60 Minutes Busted" at
Posted by: Scot at September 12, 2004 12:28 AM
I don't know how to imbed an image - if someone else can do it, this small graphic is *really* funny.
Posted by: Liz at September 12, 2004 12:42 AM
Doesn't matter now. It was a complete set-up by Kerry. The Globe is reporting that the people are just "recanting what they said" and believe what they said at first was true. Blather is doing the same thing. What a con.
Posted by: Dee at September 12, 2004 12:46 AM
I think we are all ignoring an important ppart of this controversy: the source!
We are talking about the PERSONAL files of an officer for the Texas Air National Guard in Houston in 1972-1973. The list of people who would possibly have access to this is NOT a long list. How many people could possibly have acces to these files. This should be easy investigative reporting. My big question (which quite frankly may have an easy answer) is this: We have heard from the man's son. We have heard from the man's widow. This woman is the STEP-mother of the son. What happened to the first wife? IS she around or alive. Seems that might be a place to start.
Of course the most likely answer is that their are no files. But still we can start crossing possible sources of the list real quick and figure out some things.
Posted by: LoydRight at September 12, 2004 12:47 AM
A lot of you are wondering what you can do next...I'd say you bloggers have already accomplished a tremendous amount! You have neutralized a lie, even if the liar won't admit his deception. Not to say you shouldn't go further, but don't think you haven't made a huge impact in many ways already.
Posted by: Mark at September 12, 2004 12:49 AM
I dunno I have to agree with a few of the other comments. I don't think alot will come of this. Probably one of the other MSM organization will have some experts debunk these obvious forgeries, Rather wil do a minor mia culpa saying we did due diligence and still got duped sorry guys. The other organizationss will crow for a day and secretly hope this goes away. They don't want any light shown on this situation. They want to see their competitors squirm but they really don't want any real examination of their practices. There will be no real consequences for anyone involved except some embarassment for a few days. The only way I see to actually have some sort of consequnce is to do something like an O'reilly boycott otherwise it will simply be swept under a rug after a week and purposely forgotten.
Posted by: ctob at September 12, 2004 01:17 AM
PS. Leave Bouffard alone he can do whatever he wants. Maybe his mother is sick or something you have no idea what the "right" thing is in his situation. I mean it'd be great if some real consequences happend to the frigging liars at the globe, but come on just taking some time to help someone is a good deed.
Posted by: ctob at September 12, 2004 01:21 AM
Hey Bill- I'm trying to mail you but I'm getting an error? any ideas?
SMTP: The letter body is rejected by host
Posted by: Paul at September 12, 2004 01:44 AM
Too many people are worried that Dan Rather and CBS News are going to get away with these forgeries. I think CBS News has a secret nemesis: CBS Entertainment! Tens of millions of CSI junkies are not going to let this die.
Posted by: Daniel Wiener at September 12, 2004 01:48 AM
The simplest explanation that makes sense here is that Rather just plain got conned by someone he *really* loves (either personally or professionally), and either his personal embarrassment, or his loyalty to the source, is so great he can't burn them. Otherwise he would just have side-stepped and/or equivocated the issue somehow.
As for the CBS brass themselves, their actions so far can be explained by simple denial. The brass have got to be beyond embarrassed that they've been hosed by such an awful forgery. I'm mean, c'mon -- couldn't the forger at least have bothered to switch MS Word to a more type-writer looking font like Courier? If I was trying to forge a memo, I could see missing a factual detail (like where the one officer had retired before these memos were supposedly written). But if you can't bother to dig out your dad's old Selectric and fabricate docs the old fashioned way, at least pick a more convincing, non-proportionally spaced font in MS Word for god sake! (The kerning and the already retired officer point are the final nails in the coffin, IMO)
Finally, I think the fact that the docs themselves are the weakest forgeries *ever* will keep CBS and Rather in denial for longer than usual. They've been conned so bad it's got to be tremendously painful for them (boo, hoo). Converting pain like this into positive action is relatively rare, and I dare say this whole incident and its fallout will not pop CBS's leftist bubble. I predict that after the election Rather will be made "Reporter Emeritus" or something with a lot less air time, and that's it.
Posted by: P at September 12, 2004 01:50 AM
...Welcome to WAL-MART"...oh, thanks, er, uh, "DAN"...
Posted by: TEWSPilot at September 12, 2004 01:58 AM
"Someone needs to set up a few Laptop computers outside CBS HQ and show the Flash "CBS Busted" "
Or wouldn't it be a hoot to take that one step further and put it up on the big screen in Times Square!
Posted by: Becca at September 12, 2004 02:02 AM
If it's so obvious they're forgeries, why is it the White House is not holding Rather up by the short hairs, in public, now?
Maybe they'll do it tomorrow? Maybe Monday?
Maybe never, because they've got nothing, and fear keeping in the public eye the image of Bush as someone who slacked off on his duties?
How much do you want to bet that this will not end in any "gotcha!" moment, where you see Kerry, Rather and the whole "liberal" media lit like cockroaches in the night?
It'll be another Vince Foster conspiracy theory you'll be keeping alive into the Kerry administration.
Posted by: Questioner at September 12, 2004 02:07 AM
I would think another thing bloggers could do would be to create a cd rom with the animated gif of the memo as well as a point by point outline about how these memos are absolutely forged and then send them to the stockholders of CBS plus all the lazy journalists. It would seem to me if this is laid out for them in no uncertain terms they couldn't all shrug it off. I figure most are too lazy to check out the various blog sites.
Posted by: Becca at September 12, 2004 02:08 AM
CBS News acknowledged memos it received about President Bush's service in the Air National Guard were "difficult to definitively authenticate", but said they came from "solid sources."
CBS can state "with absolute certainty" that the disputed memos "could have been" produced on typewriters available in the early 1970s when the memos are purported to have been written, the network said. Rather said the typeface and style of the memos were available on typewriters since well before the 1970s.
yeah...and pigs could fly out of Rathers ass
So they were "difficult to definitively authenticate" but what the hell....they'll fuck with Bushes head so we'll run 'em anyway..... Real good investigative journalism Danny boy.....
Posted by: Hunter at September 12, 2004 02:24 AM
LGF had a poster who quoted Bush Sr.'s autobiography...apparently one of the "memos" stated Lt. Bush wanted to take leave to help on his dad's campaign....however according to the autobigraphy
“During the 1970’s, Mr. Bush held a number of important leadership positions. In 1971, he was named U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. He served there until 1973, when he became Chairman of the Republican National Committee. ”
Sorry but I don't know how to link the fancy shmancy way ....so if you know how...go for it.
Posted by: Becca at September 12, 2004 02:31 AM
ok UPDATE (at least for me) on the above post...it seems that GW was working on Blount's campaign in Alabama at this dad's request...not his dads campaign as the memo would leave you to believe.
Posted by: Becca at September 12, 2004 03:18 AM
i personally am sick of the MSM. When you try to maniuplate an election like this it should be considered a crime...I saw there will be more than a 2 point jump for Bush after this. KEEP ON SINKING ..KERRY. In truth I really believe most Dem leaders think that the average person is dumb and will believe everything, that is why Kerry is starting to play the race card again.
Posted by: Lotex at September 12, 2004 03:36 AM
Dan Rather's insulting view that we the public are too lazy to see what he has done will be his undoing.
I, for one, will not let this go.
Posted by: Becca at September 12, 2004 03:44 AM
Check out RatherBiased.com
Posted by: ctob at September 12, 2004 03:49 AM
Newsweek has some interesting speculations regarding the memos: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5974040/site/newsweek/
Where did the documents come from? CBS won't say. But the trail pieced together by NEWSWEEK shows that in a sulfurous season like this one, the difference between obscurity and power is small, and anyone can get a hearing. A principal source for CBS's story was Bill Burkett, a disgruntled former Guard officer who lives in Baird, Texas, who says he was present at Guard headquarters in Austin in 1997, when a top aide to the then Governor Bush ordered records sanitized to protect the Boss. Other Guard officials disputed Burkett's account, and the Bush aide involved, Joe Allbaugh, called it "absolute garbage." Burkett may have a motive to make trouble for the powers that be. In 1998, he grew gravely ill on a Guard mission to Panama, causing him to be hospitalized, and he suffered two nervous breakdowns. He unsuccessfully sued for medical expenses.
Still, in theory, Burkett may have had access to any Guard records that, in a friend's words, "didn't make it to the shredder." Fellow officers say he wasn't a crank, but rather a stickler for proper procedure—a classic whistle-blower type. Burkett was impressive enough to cause CBS producer Mary Mapes to fly to Texas to interview him. "There are only a couple of guys I would trust to be as perfectly honest and upfront as Bill," says Dennis Adams, a former Guard colleague. The White House, through Communications Director Dan Bartlett, called Burkett a "discredited source." Indeed, Bush strategists are convinced—or have convinced themselves—that the issue will backfire on its purveyors.
Posted by: Ernest Miller at September 12, 2004 03:50 AM
Forget about looking to the first wife for Killian's personal files. He didn't type, didn't keep files, was not a paper person. These are forgeries.
Where I would look as the "unimpeachable source" would be Robert Strong, who was the administrative aide at TANG. I'll bet he was the one who conspired with the DNC to have these fabricated. He's a leftist, now a political professor who has tried to remake Jimmy Carter into a hero. Of course he could claim that Killian "left" the memos at HQ when he retired and Strong stored them and had access to them. Remember he was quoted as saying the memos sound like what Killian would say and had said. Anyway, if I were on the trail that's where I would start.
Posted by: Diana at September 12, 2004 03:51 AM
Bill Burkett is a far-left loony with an agenda:
Posted by: Diana at September 12, 2004 04:31 AM
This should be solved easily by just having Hannity interview the guy....I am sure the O'reilly will wimp out again, as he is all bite and no talk, when it comes to his buddy Kerry
Posted by: reality check at September 12, 2004 04:37 AM
Upset by renewed attention to President Bush's disputed service in the Texas Air National Guard, White House communications director Dan Bartlett insists the new revelations about how strings were pulled to get Bush into the Guard, as well as to get him out, are part of "a coordinated attack by John Kerry and his surrogates on the president." There is no evidence to support that claim. But there is clear evidence confirming that the same conservative operatives who have been busily promoting the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth smears of Kerry are now engaged in pushing the story that CBS's "60 Minutes Weeknight Edition" aired forged documents in its Wednesday night report on Bush and the National Guard.
Creative Response Concepts, the Arlington, Va., Republican public relations firm run by former Pat Buchanan communications director Greg Mueller, with help from former Pat Robertson communications director Mike Russell, sent out a media advisory Thursday to hawk a right-wing news dispatch: "60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake." Creative Response Concepts has played a crucial role in hyping the inaccurate, secondhand Swift Boat allegations, with Russell serving as the group's official spokesman. A company spokesman could not be reached for comment.
Posted by: ed at September 12, 2004 07:15 AM
Recall this kind of stuff with White Water? Fan the flames! It's all they've got..... (Anytime I've asked anyone here to comment on the SUBSTANCE of Bush's obvious inexcusable military "service" all I hear is "old news" -- again, no lucid-logic feedback.... telling)
Posted by: ed at September 12, 2004 07:19 AM
You miss the issue at this point. We're not focused on the political aspect, or at least I'm, not. My goal is not defending the Bush admin, it's determining whether the media was willing to pass off fake documents and distort testimony to fulfill a narrative.
Cut out the aggression.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 12, 2004 07:21 AM
Aggression? It's more like a plea -- which is seemingly getting the boot at this point. Your reply is consistent with past ones: no answer given due to "it's off-topic"....(??) Understood, but how 'bout touching on it for just a tad? (Get ready for predictable reply #356)....
Also did you spend this much effort debunking all of the SBVT cr*p/lies? Again, a legit question.
Posted by: ed at September 12, 2004 07:37 AM
What is your feedback to the Salon posting?
Posted by: ed at September 12, 2004 07:38 AM
The WaPo did a rather fair, thorough analysis of the Swift Vets, where about half their accusations look to have been disproven or contradicted by navy documents (silver star, etc.), and half were actually bolstered (Christmas in Cambodia). I happen to think that their criticism about the war behavior was somewhat pointless compared to the post-war senate testimony, whic thet certainly have a right to be angry about.
As far as Salon's article, I am a bit busy putting 60 Minutes and the Globe on trial right now, largely tabling Presidential Politics (re: Kerry and Bush).
That's why I say "off-topic." Sorry, I don'y have to give parsing whether Dubya completed his service "equal time" right now. Plenty of sites doing that.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 12, 2004 08:21 AM
Reply as predicted.
Can't believe you cite (w/ straight face) NY Post editorials -- wow.
Posted by: ed at September 12, 2004 08:36 AM
Ed: Bush's obvious inexcusable military "service"...
I haven't seen any evidence of that. Could you please provide some?
Posted by: Jim at September 12, 2004 08:45 AM
Jim, um, OK, are we parsing words here? I perhaps typed too quickly, but I believe you get my meaning. Of course, your reply is par for course (don't actually answer the question(s), but rather ask a question to the question, shift, squirm, dodge, delay, hope it fades away, etc.)
Posted by: ed at September 12, 2004 08:51 AM
Now you've crossed over the line to "asshole."
I am a single man, a blogger, spending volumes of time working a single angle in a story that is largely unrelated to political partisanship right now (the angle I'm working, not the story).
I don't KNOW enough about Bush's record at this moment(the new charges), and I don't have time enough to research it this second as I do the other 10 hours of work already on my plate today.
Cut me some fucking slack.
I am not the NY Times news section, I am not required to comment on every aspect of this story, as I am only one man. Come back after CBS and the Globe are villified or vindicated, and I promise we'll have a discussion about Bush's Nat'l Guard service, okay?
Otherwise, don't be a jerk. I'm really not being intellectually dishonest here.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 12, 2004 09:02 AM
Yikes! A-hole fleeing; not to worry, will allow you to concentrate on your oh-so-big story (though as a MARRIED man, trust me, your SINGLE man status directly means you have MUCH more free time than me.... I was barely able to type this out without a request for more SpongeBob)
Posted by: ed at September 12, 2004 09:06 AM
Actually, I was looking for evidence that Bush's military record is shady, inexcusable, what have you. I'm not squirming. I'm interested in facts, truth, etc. Could you please provide the evidence? You've claimed in a public forum that there's something wrong with his record, so you must have some evidence of this.
Posted by: Jim at September 12, 2004 09:11 AM
To use Bill's line: "Sorry, I don'y have to give parsing whether Dubya completed his service "equal time" right now. Plenty of sites doing that."
As he says, PLENTY of sites documenting this -- you'd have to be in the same cave as Osama to not have a clue re this.
Posted by: ed at September 12, 2004 09:15 AM
...shift, squirm, dodge, delay, hope it fades away, etc..
Posted by: Jim at September 12, 2004 09:26 AM
Hey Ed -
Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 12, 2004 09:31 AM
"discredited source." Right, always believe the PR dept of any bureaucracy. That's exactly what my editor tells me to do. That way you can be like a blogger, a stenographer of lies and rumors.
You're a joke buddy, and wrong, untrained, and getting paid what your journalistic impersonation is worth: 0.
Posted by: mark_y1 at September 12, 2004 10:48 AM
Thanks mark_y1, takes a lot of guts to leave a nasty ad hominem attack anonymously and without an e-mail address.
Just like a journalist with an editor - no sourcing.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 12, 2004 10:55 AM
Bill, I find "mar_y1" hysterical.
He says you are "untrained"!
Well, I guess someone like Dan Rather is "trained" pretty well, no?
"mar_y1" get over yourself. "Training", for a journalist, is a joke. But, since they obviously don't require either common sense or an ability to reason in order to become a "trained" journalist, I imagine you'd be perfect in the job.
Posted by: jag at September 12, 2004 12:04 PM
Not to mention, how does he or she know that I wasn't trained as a journalist?
Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 12, 2004 12:18 PM
The only use of the term "discredited source" on this page was by Newsweek. So, what is mar_y1 talking about?
Posted by: Jim at September 12, 2004 12:41 PM
CBS has another research problem that the MSM has yet to pick up on.
Ben Barnes claims that while he was Lt. Governor he helped "pull strings" to get get Bush into the TANG.
Barnes was sworn in on Jan. 21, 1969.
Barnes hadn't even been elected to the office yet to use it to help Bush, and by the time he was, Bush had been in for 8 months and didn't need the Lt. Governor's help. Preston Smith was Lt. Governor when Bush enlisted, not Barnes.
Lt. Governors of Texas: http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ref/abouttx/ltgov.html
Barnes' bio: http://www.klru.org/texasmonthlytalks/archives/barnes/bio.asp
Ben Barnes video claiming he pulled strings for Bush WHILE he was Lt. Governor.
Bush enlistment date: (using CBS itself for this one but there are many) http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/14/politics/main600360.shtml
Posted by: Kathleen at September 12, 2004 12:42 PM
If military service is the topic de jour again, I suggest some review of Kerry's again. In 1966 he signed a contract with the Navy for 6 years -5 active, 1 reserve. That means he was scheduled for an honorable discharge in 1972. He didn't get one then.
In 1970 his status was changed from active duty to active reserves -meaning he should have reported to a base somewhere and reported for drills. He did not. Instead he was traveling around the country organizing anti-war protests, perjuring himself before the Senate and meeting secretly with the enemy in Paris.
Then he wanted to run for office and figured out an honorable discharge might be important. In 1972 he signed up for the Reserves and finally received an honorable discharge in 1978 -a full 6 years AFTER he should have received one. Originally Kerry's site claimed he received an honorable discharge in 1970 but was forced to take that down when his own records revealed only his status was changed from active duty to active reserves -and not discharged at all. No comment about those missing years when Kerry was still under obligation to the Navy between 1970-1972.
The reason Kerry refuses to release all his records is because they would show HE is the one who failed to fulfill his commitment and it required an additional 6 years to get an honorable discharge.
Posted by: Kathleen at September 12, 2004 04:40 PM
IF John Kerry was a member of the Armed Forces of The United States in any capacity, or a member of the Congress or Senate, and met with the enemy for any reason, would that not be against the LAW? That is unless he was authorized to do so by the President or State Department.
Posted by: Josephus at September 12, 2004 06:38 PM