OF COURSE they aren't forged. I keep telling you guys, there is a perfectly logical explanation for the memos being genuine: Karl Rove used his evil time-travelling powers to bring a computer, a printer, and a copy of MS Word back to Killian in 1972 in a fiendishly clever plot to eventually discredit Dan Rather.

Rather's appology and explanation sounds
like it was written by potus 42.

Keep on truckin', Dan. There is a special place reserved for you in the Journalism Hall of Shame.

CBS’s careful dance around not calling the documents fakes may in part be intended to leave at least some swing voters thinking that the potential for authentication still exists, and therefore the documents may still call Bush's guard service into question. (“Answer the questions, Mr. President…”) CBS can be confident that, at a later date, its fellow travelers can weave even a scantiest shred of doubt into a whole cloth of a sticky partisan attack.

Second, it protects reputations at CBS by leaving the impression that it's quite difficult to tell if the memos are fake or not. In then becomes "reasonable" to think that CBS might have erred due to the complexity of the forensic challenge and of sorting through conflicting "expert" opinion.

Continued denial might also be part of an early defense against implications of criminality. The state will have to prove that (a) the documents are forged, and (b) CBS and knew the documents were forged. CBS would want to avoid reducing either of those prosecutorial burdens.

"But the protest is notable because all of them were dressed in pajamas"-from www.Staunchmoderate.blogspot.com regarding a DC protest in front of the CBS Washington HQ
Bill!? buddy! Let's put the INDC back in the Journal. Where were you with that fantastic camera work
(and PowerRanger underoos?)

PS Yes, yes, I saw the PayPal button-I'm going there now. jeez!

From the same Tribune article, keep reading:

Rather said he had no regrets for his defense of the story.

"I believed in it," he said. "I wouldn't have put it on the air if I hadn't of believed in it. And what kind of reporter would I be if I put something on the air in which I believed, and as soon as it's attacked and under pressure, you run, you fold, you fade, you side-wind? That's not the kind of person I am, and it's not the kind of reporter I am."

"...That's not the kind of person I am, and it's not the kind of reporter I am."
-D. Rather

"...I am not a crook."
-R. Nixon

Conclusion: Dan Rather is a barking moonbat.

Circle 'em up, cowboy Dan...

http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/images/1844_1877_3.jpg

Rather said he had no regrets for his defense of the story.

So what Rather is actually saying is that he does not really owe anyone an apology, its just that this story does not quite meet the especially high standards of all of CBS's other journalism.

As long as Rather is standing by that position, CBS ought to be personna non grata for Republicans everywhere.

For discussion:
It is my theory that the documents are not "forgeries"; but that the documents are, arguably, counterfeit and if proven so, must therefore also bear forged signatures.

The documents were created, purposely conveyed and represented in the commission of fraud upon us all. The crime was committed. That we were not damaged to the extent that the perpetrator(s) intended is another matter. The investigation and prosecution should be pursued and without delay. Surely there must be a class action specialty law firm somewhere out there that is not aligned with the DNC.