Hey, Dan Rather called him an "unimpeachable source", right?

Time to buy more envelopes...

When the hell will the law stop pussy footing around and get involved. Enough of this crap...

It is now time for the Democrats to start eating their own again. It's understandable when trapped in the mountains, but unconscionable in civilized company. Mmmm

I'd put Burkett under suicide watch, you never know when he might get that Vince Foster feeling.

Well he's already been discredited, even before all this. But I think now he is gonna get seriously worked over.

CBS would have a problem painting him as a super kook since it makes them look even dumber, but all the other MSM will savage him now.

My two cents:

Careful, Careful, Careful!!!

Bill Burkett is a crank by all appearances. If his word shouldn't be trusted by CBS news then his word about his conversation with Joe Lockhart is worthless as well. The only thing that sheds light on this is the phone records. It was either a throw away call that Lockhart suggests or it was more. The length of the call will tell the tale.

Either way the words of Burkett are worthless and we must not fall into the trap of giving him credibility when he falls on "our side". He has no credibility at all. This is truth and we must be consistent.

Given that Burkett had apparently been on a years-long campaign to strike a vital blow at Bush, had requested (by his account) to be put in touch with the Kerry campaign, and himself broached the subject of how to beat Bush, how can he maintain that Lockhart was left feeling that he needed to "convince" him to turn over the documents? One wonders what point Burkett is trying to make.

The difference is we already know that Lockhart talked to the guy via CBS. We also know this guy was all about these documents...but Joe says he never mentioned it?

Nobody believes that Burkett didn't bring it up...it's like him saying the sky is blue. I'm just glad he's saying it...

Loyd, we know taht Burkett's word is worthless, which makes it even funnier, seeing as his word was good when he was attacking Bush. This is hysterical.

And there are no recorded phone records that I am aware of, only call logs.

I agree with LoydRight. Lockhart's a snake but at least he's sane.

The blood is in the water now. Sharks will be circling quickly...

Ahh, but when nobody in the situation has any credibility, then what?
I agree that Burkett is delusional. Rereading, the part that Rather snipped may be the parts where Burkett raves. But it's still fun to watch. Who knows who gets hung out like a urine-soiled sheet next? Bets?

Yes it is. :)

Gee, I hope the PR firm doesn't mind if we blog some stuff before they give us the OK. Of course, they gotta clear it with Karl first ...

OK, now, let's think this through.

Burkett hates Bush.

Saying Lockhart wanted the documents hurts Kerry, which helps Bush.

Now, if that's a lie, what's the motivation behind it?

Revenge - he's burning them because they've burned him?

That'd suggest there's now someone Burkett hates more than Bush, doesn't it?

Where's John Dean?

Guys, see update for my read on Burkett's actions.

Yes the only real credibility to this is the motivation BradDad mentions. Which I think is quite suspect but slightly persuasive. But I suspect he will essentially go from "unreliable" to "insane" in the MSM in the next day or two due to this and alot of journalists will try to argue nothing can be inferred because he is completely irrational.

Interesting, but I'll just say this: Any story based on the credibility of Bill Burkett is bound to collapse eventually. The man is probably a pathological liar. I think that in this case, I have to give Lockhart the benefit of the doubt.

If I'm Lockhart and I know that Burkett could give these documents to CBS and that they're likely to run with them, why would I want to dirty my hands with the whole thing? Having CBS take care of the smear is perfect -- plausible deniability, plus all the credibility of the Tiffany Network. Lockhart would have been begging Burkett to go the other route.

I think Burkett's still off his meds ...

Bill:
The more I think about it, the harder time I have getting beyond point 1. This doesn't deny the collusion between CBS and Lockhart. It just means that Burkett will never be a credible witness to this. If we got to see Rather's uncut interview, I think we would all discount Burkett's grasp of reality.
That being said, how much worse does it make Rather, Heywood, and Mapes look that this yahoo was their goto guy?
Like I said before this DNC angle exploded. Keep whacking CBS. It will make every news editor be a bit more consciencious. Cleland and Lockhart's credibility will erode (if that's possible) by association.

No offense Captain Ed, but I think taht you are off your meds. :-)

Assuming that we give the Dems the benefit of the doubt that they thought that the docs were real, do you really believe Lockhart's assertion that Burkett made no mention of the documents in his big conversation set up by Mapes?

I mean, this is like the only topic the man has been raving about for years ...

C'mon.

I finally figured out who Lucy Ramirez is!

It's a code name for Jodi Foster.

The last wacko with this big of a national impact that I can think of is John Hinckley Jr, who also tried to assassinate a president. The last I heard he was getting unsupervised home visits, but still had a full time room at the nut hut. Maybe they can be roommates.

You guys are missing the point -

OF COURSE Burkett's a yahoo, and I'm not blaming the Dems for the forgeries, but when Cleland and Lockhart claim that the conversations with Burkett never mentioned documents ("documents? he never mentioned documents!"), remember that this is a crazy whose been trying to pass off this story and get in touch with campaign officials FOREVER (look at his message board postings and op ed in opinion journal).

Burkett would have talked of little else besides the documents.

Lockhart and Cleland's claims otherwise are insulting to our intelligence.

"Unimpeachable" has got to be the word of the year, and it will be a strong runner for the word of the decade.

When I read Burkett's comment:
In return, he said, Lockhart tried to "convince me as to why I should give them the documents."

I take that to mean that "them" could represent the Kerry campaign and/or CBS News...after all, the deal was for Burkett to speak with Kerry Kamp and that this would motivate him to give up the docs to CBS News.

So I think this at the least shows that Lockhart knew about the deal with CBS and clearly was trying to help it along. In fact, it can clearly be said that if not for the intervention of the Kerry Kampaign, CBS would have never gotten the docs and this story would not have aired at all. At a minimum, the Kerry Kamp facilitated the story.

It's also fun seeing Burkett now go squarely against the Kerry Kamp. They face a real dilemma here...if they attempt to discredit him, that makes CBS look bad and gives Burkett's antiBush story even lower credibility.

What is also emerging is this: the big guys from the Kerry Kamp and CBS News have no conscience: they show no reluctance to use and punish this Burkett guy, who arguably is psychologically unstable.

Bill: I agree with your take: it's absurd to think that Burkett would not have discussed the docs and their content with Cleland and Lockhart. Burkett lived, eat, and breathed nothing but the charges contained in those docs for the last several years; that was his obsession. I don't think anyone, least of all Kerry operatives, could have gotten in a word edgewise with Burkett without the topic coming up and dominating the conversation.

So this latest revelation of Burkett's crushes Lockhart's credibility.

Well bascially all this is he said she said anyway. So we got bubkis.

Its certainly not even close to far fetched since Burkett has these memos and says he wants to talk to the campaign about how to fight back against the swiftees. What do think that strategy was? Of course its the memos. He's been on this tack for years obviously he thinks this is how you fight Bush.

I think its a safe bet they talked about the memos, but at this point that's all it is, a bet.

As I said at the Politburo, (and has been noted here as well), this is essentially ENDGAME, true or false, by saying this, Burkett has moved the piece on the board that will soon reveal all.

Burkett may be claiming that Lockhart made the attempted to persuade him to turn over the documents because Burkett needs to be consistent with his own prior claim that various news outlets approached him for the documents, not the other way around.

If Burkett were to say that he freely offered the documents to Lockhart, then the obvious question is, “Why would the media have needed to chase you for them previously, as you claimed?”

Bill’s point that Burkett’s saying he was approached and solicited “enhances Burkett's sense of self-importance in the narrative; the Kerry campaign wanted his help” could also have been Burkett’s motivation for his initial claim of being approached by the media.

One other point: IMHO, it was Burkett who created the docs. Only a crazy person would create these type of forgeries in MS Word and expect them to hold water. Plus, the docs use the language of the Army, and Burkett was in the Army NG. His whole Lucy Ramirez story is crazy.

So the picture emerges: Burkett whipped these babies up. One unanswered question among many: did anyone encourage him to do so...did CBS or the Kerry Kamp contact him at some point and make it clear to him what it would mean to them if such docs existed?

Then of course there are the questions of just how much the Kerry Kamp knew about this, and what they did to fully facilitate this story for CBS.

One thing we know about Burkett: he doesn't like to feel double-crossed.

He reminds me of the Hulk and his famous line: don't get me angry...you wouldn't like me very much when I'm angry...

If CBS and the Kerry Kamp have tried to make Burkett a fall guy, they may pay dearly for it...

AT:
Burkett probably likes to think of himself as the Hulk, too.

Look, Lockhart and Mapes were part of an unethical and possibly illegal quid pro quo. But Burkett is completely without credibility. When someone is without credibility, they can't move the story one way or the other. The only thing that happens when Burkett opens his mouth is that anyone who touched that CBS News story looks like an incompetent (almost misspelled that, never a good word to screw up) loon.

I think Burkett and Mapes are going to be the fall guys in this. Burkett is obviously a nut job, and they are trying to make sure America knows that. And we'll probably be reminded that its no doubt due to service related issues.

That's probably why they are letting him speak. And an interview with the Mercury News isn't quite the same as an interview with Britt Hume, if you get my drift.

Mapes will take the fall for being the decision maker that made the call that Burkett, plus the old secretary, plus the other Texas Air Force dude (I forget his name right now) added up to "unimpeachable". And Mapes will also take the hit for being the CBS insider who tipped off Lockhart. And Lockhart (and Dan) can claim that he put his faith in her because she did the great service to her country of exposing the prisoner abuse scandal stuff. She deserved to be listened to, right? And he had an obligation to the American people to investigate this further. What if the Commander in Chief shirked his duties, and this was the smoking gun proof? It was worth a phone call at least, wasn't it? It was his duty to get to the bottom of this, leave no stone unturned, yada yada yada. How was he to know the main source was a nut? And when he suspected as much, he hung up the phone immediately and dropped the subject all together, OK?

Pure speculation of course, and I hope its not true, because they all could skate except for Mapes and Burkett. I suspect not many people in the Democratic party would feel too bad about seeing that happen either.

I'm not certain this does force the issue. It may if people persue it. On the other hand it may be disregarded as the ravings of a deranged madman.

I do not believe its certain this will provoke a response. It may. If it does provoke a response then things may cascade as the various parties snip and sanp at each other. In such a melee probably someone will get careless and tip their hand. But I say don't be surprised if this is ignored.

Bill, your point of view is completely on target, and I believe you analysis is correct with the current amount of information we have.

The very interesting thing to watch will be in Lockhart's (or the official Kerry campaign's) next statement on the issue. I don't think they will be able to avoid saying something, because some of them have to keep talking to the press, and it's all they're going to hear about. If they were capable of it, they should stick to one story, the one that they're IMing each other about right now, but there are too many different factions, too many people building their resume for 2008, and too many versions already available.

I suspect that Mr. Burkett snuck away from his Lawyer's representation to give the interview. His lawyer has undoubtably told him to sit down and SHUT UP. If they can figure out a way to gag him, they will.

I think there's a double whammy here though.

Yes Burkett is the prototype for unreliable testimony.

But that also means that we really don't know anything about anything. The initial whole story about what happened ALSO came from Burkett and ALSO is not necessarily reliable.

I don't think Burkett is reliable when it comes to this accusation against Lockhart, but then again he's not really reliable for the story about giving the documents to Mapes in return for the call to Lockhart either.

We have forged documents but no forger. When the forger is found, then I think it will be easier to piece together what happened.

Let me be clear about the point I was trying to make.

I just wanted to make sure we don't fall into the trap of beginning to hand credibility to a crank. That is all. His claims about Lockhart are interesting but are merely leads to be followed. Confirmation of those things must be proved outside of anything having to do with Bill Burkett. Certainly any record regarding the duration of those calls would shed a little light on this. It was either a 5 minute phone call as stated by Lockhart or it wasn't. Anything more than Lockhart's description would take longer to accomplish.

Either way Burkett is poison and we should basically disregard much of what he says. The only things worth checking out are things that are factual and verifiable with real data. Everything else is junk.

Neither Lockhart's nor Burkett's are particularly credible. The interesting thing will be the fallout of this. Because although LoydRight is correct, public opinion is not always so discrimintating. So the parties involved may feel obliged to respond.

LoydRight -

Agreed, Burkett's a crank. It also seems apparent that to at least some degree or another, Lockhart is also dishonest.

OK. Pretend you're Burkett for a moment.

Burkett is former military and unbalanced.

For years, he's also been digging for something. Planning, going over options. Preparing.

Wouldn't such a person be likely to have kept records of his contacts and efforts, if for nothing else, to 'prove' what he wants, follow up on ideas and to keep from going over the same stuff again and again?

Sometimes unbalanced people record phone calls.

Now he's suffered a few seizures, maybe more frequently.

Whom does he trust to give his stuff?

Yeah, Bill's a whack job, but so's Rather. Lockhart I can't tell, but if he a typical Democrap campaign flack, he has the morals and ethics of a syphilitic goat. Tertiary.

Yeah, Bill's a whack job

I resent that.

Why you picking on syphilitic goats?

- "I feel the earth move under my feet, I feel the sky tumbling down, tumbling down..." uh uh ....

- The precipice is getting kind of narrow.... someones going to have to take a header soon.... and here comes the Bolivian Bloggers 111th cavalery.....

Did Mapes give Cleland's cell phone number and, when Burkett was blown off, contact Lockhart directly?

I don’t see that “Burkett just moved the piece on the board that forces the issue.” Nothing Burkett said to the Star-Telegram -– even if it’s all true -– brings us to a climax.

Still, the Star-Telegram interview seems significant. For starters, Burkett is again signaling that he’s on a quest to clear his name, and the fact the interview happened shows he’s taking steps to get his story out. With only about five weeks to go, the Kerry campaign’s catch-up effort can ill afford to share media space with any major story, let alone a negative one. Burkett may have been aiming at George Bush, but by his own persistence going forward from here will end up being an even bigger help to Bush than he already has been.

Further, there’s a new angle to help keep this on our TV screens and make all the participants look bad: Burkett vs. Dan Rather and CBS. Putting a messy tangle of events in terms of personalities and “wronged little-guy fights megacorp” is packaging that lends itself to popular writing and coverage in all sorts of media that would otherwise largely shy away for fear of boring their readers and viewers. Now, a writer doesn’t need to struggle with flowcharts, recitations and analysis. The human interest angle will sell to exponentially more consumers, and it’s so much easier to initiate and develop. Watch for it at your supermarket checkout stand.

- I still think Burkette was just the conduit for Heldt...and I think he hihanded Mapes and would'nt give her the docs until he talked to the DNC...and then when he did he gave them to the DNC who in turn gave them to CBS...He's ome free because he didn't type the fales...He can claim he had know way of knowing they were bogus.... But I still think theres someone out there with copies of memo's or something and they're just waiting for the best time to drop the hammer...

- read Emails for memo's

4th CBS Expert James Pierce Recants Authentication

BummerDietz has it at http://scyllacharybdis.blogspot.com/

Careful. Back to basics. Who gave Burkett the forgeries? Who made the forgeries? Just as his health and personality profile add to the suspicion that Burkett forged them, it also adds to attractiveness of targeting Burkett as a shill. Look at the conundrum now. If Burkett is not the author of the forgeries, he still delivered the bomb while wreaking significant and effective obfuscation. There is a sophistication to these forgeries betrayed only by their font and format. Beware the temptation of coming to a premature conclusion about what is really going on here. Just getting Burkett on the phone and pumping him for information and phrases, and then typing them up, with or without Burkett's knowledge, could create the forgeries in question. Why would Burkett type forgeries that didn't look right? Why wouldn't Burkett accept the wrong look/format if sounded right and came from an authority that called upon him complete an important and glamorous mission? Remember, there is another CBS ANG source who did not repudiate the forgeries when read to him over the phone, but immediately renounced them as forgeries when finally he saw them.

Burkett's been a gadfly for years on this topic. He would be easy to pump for phrases and insider terms and attitudes. Add drama, a damsel in distress and the promise of a Mission Impossible sceneario that validates Burkett's world view. Type the memos. Make the hand-off in a mysterious way. Require a mysterious ritual that destroys all traces of origin and converts the forgeries into an organic part of Burkett's world. Then wait until Burkett closes the invisible loop and brings the bomb back to you for its ultimate use. It's an untraceable weapon to destroy a sitting president. This tape will distruct in 5 secon....

Hey, HEY....

"That he wouldn't have sprung wood at the mere mention of such incendiary documents?"

Hey watch that stuff... there be little pundits in the house. :-)

What's well known by anyone is the concept of quid pro quo.There's no way Mapes asks Lockhart to do her a favor and talk to Burkett, unless there's something in it for Lockhart.

No big surprise here, but it now puts it on the record.

Possible Theory:

What if the FBI or Secret Service have ALREADY entered into an investigation on this matter?

The Feds have his computer, phone logs and log of contacts and what was said.

Then they make him a deal thru his lawyer. You work with us or you will be spending 20 to life. They could have promised Burkett the security he wanted or thinks he needs. Whether it was money, healthcare or just not spending time in jail.

The Feds ask him to set up a sting. Do an interview and drop this little tid bit. Now the Feds have the DNC, CBS, Kerry Camp wire tapped up to and including email, phone, blackberry's and IM. They want to see who is talking and about what.

Any thoughts on my possible theory?

- Ok...lets put on our tinfoil hats here....sip some koolaid and get reakky funky....

- Supposing the DNC was behind this whole thing from the begginning....Heldt had given them the doc's but they weren't sure they would pass inspection....Sooooooo

- They provide the gal to make the original call to Burkett...I think his basic motive always was the chance to get out his "story" in the big MSM in the sky....They bet his "issues" will make him jump at the idea....

- The DNC brings in a bag man from parts unknown that Burkett can't possibly know and will never see again to make the drop...

- They figure the small price of a single phone call is safe enough... They'er counting on the idea that CBS will do the heavy lifting while they stay nicely removed from it all...

- They don't count on the blogosphere...

- "Buck" somehow gets wind of it and drops the hint into the fishbowl....

- CBS is caught totally by supprise and gets nothing from the DNC as a life preserver....

- Hmmmm.... Kind of far out but certainly possible...

- On another front FOX just reprorted the kiddnapping of two Egyptian workers in Bhagdad.... will be interesting to see how the insurgents handle this one....

And what of the protential for a Mapes-Lockhart-Rather-McAuliffe collusion? Lockhart-McAuliffe can multiply viewer ratings for CBS News. I hadn't thought much about Mapes/Rather exploiting Lockhart/McAuliffe for ratings and other controversy bonanzas. It's looking more and more like a mutual prostate massage after all, with an ovary or two available to do the heavy lifting.

We need subpeona power. All we're seeing now is panicking rats. They won't start biting each other hard until they're looking at criminal indictments. That's when a true collapse could take place.

conelrad said:

Wouldn't such a person be likely to have kept records ... ?

. . .

Whom does he trust to give his stuff?

I'd suggest Robert "What suitcase?" Kardashian, but he died about a year ago.

That would leave David Van Os.

Burkett already gave all the documents to CBS prior to the call to Lockhart.

Now unless the "them" in Burkett's most recent statement means the DNC, it is a lie. If he means the DNC, and not CBS/Lockhart, we need a clarification.

What is the connection between the time at which CBS got the docs and the DNC puttng together the Fortunate Son ad that ran within 24 hrs of the Rather interview with Barnes? When did the DNC get hold of the info from the show to incorporate into the ad? If the interview was taped then CBS-DNC would have - could have shared the info prior to the airing of the show.

- I keep going back to that remarkable quick outburst of McAuliffe's....

- Just to take this mental cartwheel a little further...

- Suppose Rove somehow got hold of a set of Heldt's document's...and found a way to deposit them in the DNC camp such that they thought they'd come from a reliable Dem source and they had stubbled on the Holy Grail...

- They decide to do the deed and then after the bubble bursts they suddenly realize they've been had....

- McAuliffe seemed so self-assured in his appearence's on FOX...and so impulsive and angry I'm not sure he realized he was torching CBS even as he spoke....

- Ok.... we can all return our seats to the upright possition and remove the hats and take a few deep breaths.... we'er not in Kansas anymore Dorothy...but it could have happened....

There's no doubt, as LloydRight says, that Burkett is suspect with EVERYTHING he says.

It's really fun reading all of the theories and such about DNC/CBS/Burkett connections. It's like reading a mystery novel. While all of the speculation is fun, I think there is a simpler explaination for Burkett's interview with the Star Telegram.

This may be a tactic to push for a settlement.
http://www.woai.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=5C2C9D19-B61D-4684-9F82-40F61E90DE87

CBS (and the DNC as well for different reasons) wants nothing more than to shut this guy up. This may be Burkett's shot across the bow, figuring he can intimidate CBS into settling his suit. But I find it hard to believe this line goes much further. What national or cable news network would want to fall into the same trap CBS did by giving any kind of credence to Burkett?

Instead of this being a decisive chess move or the chum that attracts the circling sharks, it's nothing but an opportunist looking for a big pay day.

Doesn't Burkett's whole vendetta against Bush have to do with money in the first place?

My prediction is that Burkett will be quietly and slowly relegated back to obscure nutcase status. He'll be known as the guy who used to spew crazy rants about G W Bush, but now propogates conspiracy theories about Dan Rather.

What a sad life.

The Kerry camp and the CBS camp have three times the brains of Burkett. They are too smart to accept forged documents from him for fear he would admit the crime inadvertently (or overtly) and louse them up.
So, he probably DID pick up the goods in a sealed envelope from a stranger at the rodeo. This works much better. He then faxed them to CBS and destroyed his copies, as instructed... He is just a broken down old soldier, not able to do picky forging with a xerox machine and computer. Some of the memos were on forms that had to be drawn or found, too.
In fact, it's probable there are only faxed copies around because there would be signs of recent creativity on the originals... Whoever did this would certainly keep Burkett in the dark about how the documents were made and who made them -- especially if the perp is as smart as any of the people at Kerry headquarters or CBS.

It makes more sense that the THEM in the quote refers to CBS. Mapes wanted the memos, Burkett had been wanting to determine how the Kerry people wanted to respond to the swift boat ads remember, he couldn't get through, so he tells Mapes that he won't release the remainder of the documents unless she gets him in touch with the Kerry people and they tell him it is consistent with how they want to respond, she gets Lockhart to call and Lockharts job is to convince Burkett to release the remainder of the memos to her. I don't think Burkett would need to be convinced to give them to Lockhart.

Burkett is certainly the author of the forgeries. The one memo where Killian gives the direct "order" to Lt Bush to report for a physical exam speaks of someone who is obsessed with authority. As a former Air Force NCO, I have NEVER seen anyone "ordered" to report for an appointment in writing. If Lt Bush missed an appointment, the first remedy by a hard-ass supervisor would most likely be a Letter of Counseling (which is a formal administrative tool).

I know it's peripheral, but if you want a good read on anal retentive personality defects and how they manifest themselves in military environments, I suggest "On the Psychology of Military Incompetence" by Norman Dixon.

It is a pretty thick volume. The first half of the book is an analysis of specific battles and the commanders involved (British). But the second half of the book is a psychological analysis of "bullsh*t" in military organizations. It provides a lot of insight into personalities like Burkett's.

Mary Mapes == Lucy Ramirez?

As an ex-military guy, keeping old records on subordinates is HIGHLY improbable. That being said it is imperative to know WHO forged the documents and WHEN were they forged. I think that the timeline as espoused yesterday is important not only for the obvious collusion between CBS, DNC and teh nutcase, but also to verify what is being stated in the present. ALL parties are lying that is the nature of CYA. We need conclusive, unimpeachable evidence i.e. phone records, but also the origination of the memos. Then we bloggers need to blog the justice department into prosecution of the conspiracy.

Has anybody online ever actually seen the original documents? Has anybody online ever actually seen ph call logs of the conversation?

If the documents were forged, you all certainly seem to be doing your damndest to forge your own castles in the air. Words words words and no hard fact. Oh how sadly familar.

The investigation "committee" CBS has hired will have access to all original interview footage. They promise that all findings will be made public. In their 'forceful' discussions that were clipped out of the Rather interview we may find out who is telling the truth.

emigre -

This is speculation, not news.

Phone call logs just reveal date, numbers and call time. Lockhart and Cleland have already acknowledged what would be found with the phone logs.

The "original" documents don't exist; or at least CBS never had them.

You make no point. Without evidence to the contrary, we now have conflicting witness testimony from the involved parties. Inthis scenario, it's not irresponsible to speculate, because that's all anyone can do.

Bill

My point; speculation is all one can do when the rest of ones arguments lack substance.

And yes, speculation is irresponsible. If one has no facts, one might go looking for them to back up ones claims. Unless you'd rather continue clammering away on this blog trying to convince yourselves with ethereal half proofs.

Ummmm....Isn't it illegal for a major news network to be in contact with the Kerry campaign? Especially this close to an election...remember Mccain-Fein..stein...hopper..whatever.

Seriously, to me THAT is the big point here. Who said what to who, and the credibility of whoever just don't matter that much to me. The law was broken, so prosecute the bastards.

Cyberzombie

The last thing we need right now is for the law to get involved. We would have gag orders, no one talking because investigation going on, etc. In other words the story would be buried until next spring.

Let the cats fight until they have worn themselves out and they have carpal tunnel syndrome from finger pointing. Regards

Bill Burkett is not a purveyor of truth. Therefore, there is no doubt a thread of truth is in his account, but one would be foolish to take him on face value. Read between the lines. Burkett is probably a coward and not the forger. He sees himself as the trump card to rescue Kerry. His own e-mail in August bragged that he had to wade through a hundred kids at the campaign before he got through to a big guy (Cleland). Then,he wouldn't give up the docs till he spoke with....(in his delusional mind he probably asked for Kerry)....but what he got was Lockhart. And what do they do with the memos (now that Burkett in his pea brain thinks he's playing in the big time). They give it to their boy, old faithful, Rather. Find the forger and the whole thing unravels. (Why else would Kerry be so friggin' hysterical yesterday)? He's probably wondering how he got into this Efin mess. There is no Lucy Ramirez, unless, she's a crazy coiffed 86 year old prune.

emigre -

That's what blogs do. "Yammer away."

This case has become a sherlock holmes mystery with conflicting tales, and what should be the trustworthy investigative oversight organization in the matter(CBS) has demonstrated an unwillingness to find the truth, and looks to be a guilty party.

I don't publish unfounded speculation as fact, but I do publish it reasonably founded speculation as opinion. Lockart and Burkett have conflicting accounts, and one or both is lying. That is beyond doubt. This is a dialogue on the possibilities of this case. If it offends you, by all means, move on.

I think Burkett's motivation on outing CBS and Kerry campaign is self-preservation. He has outlived his usefulness to supreme soviet, and the party will now try to destroy him. Ask Kathleen Willey how it works.

It is quite obvious to anyone with brains that the whole thing was setup by Lockhart. He brought the papers over from the Gore campaign and was calling Burkett to make sure he received them. Mary Mapes passed them to Burkett at the horse show. Burkett was nothing but a fallguy and the Clinton dream team was the brains behind this whole scheme. Burkett will turn on them and expose the whole mess. This whole thing was setup by Clinton to make Kerry look bad so Hillary would be able to run for President in 08'.

I don't think much of that is obvious. One hole in your theory - according to Van Os, Mapes was the one that faxed the docs from Kinkos, something which should be easy to check up on if/when an investigation starts ...

As the 12th Century Arab
philosopher, Har Deehar,
has written in a newly
discovered 13th Century
parchment,typed on a 15th
Century IBM Selectric and
now part of the Dead Dan
Sea Scrolls:

"Curses be upon your lying beards, infidels. May
your mangy camels have
plenteous fleas, for it is
truly said that news is too
important to be left to
journalists."

beards, infidels

Sign the petition againt Rather and CBS.
www.rathergate.com

Saying Joe Lockhart might now have a credibility problem is like saying it *might be possible( that the sun will rise in the East tomorrow.

With no offense to Michael Moore, could the whole story be called a "Docu-Drama"?

Agreed with posters Another Thought and Ram that the “they” to whom Burkett needed to be convinced to give the documents likely refers not to Lockhart alone but instead to CBS or to both CBS and Lockhart.

If Burkett did in fact tell CBS he would only give CBS the doc’s in exchange for talking to the Kerry campaign, it makes sense that he’s not going to hand the doc’s over to CBS on a promise; he’ll turn them over only after the call happens, and only if the call is meaningful - i.e. that his bombshell is actually going to be used by the Kerry campaign in some significant way to help kick the legs out from under George Bush. The “convincing” Burkett mentions would then be Lockhart trying to satisfy Burkett that yes, the documents will play a vital role.

One wonders, why not give the doc’s to CBS straightaway? Why did Burkett hold out to also talk to the Kerry campaign? After all, CBS can certainly do a proper job on its own of using the memos to hit Bush. Perhaps Burkett felt slighted after being given the runaround earlier on during his attempts to talk to key democratic players, and breaking through to the top would reaffirm his worth and show the little twits who jerked him around a thing or two.

Could also be that the need to talk to key Democrats goes back to Burkett’s financial problems. Burkett may have felt that the political machine would be in a much better position than CBS to compensate him (with employment, book deals, speaking engagements and so on.)

Even if it turns out that the phonecall from Lockhart to Burkett was Lockhart’s own initial involvement, that doesn’t preclude the possibility that other DNC or even CBS operatives or surrogates may have coached or induced Burkett to produce the memos in the first place, either by promising rewards or making it clear that Burkett would finally have his chance to damage Bush.

Kbiel, right you are that Lockhart now has a credibility problem. This issue is a Tarbaby, and everyone who got near it is going to look bad. In the old days, a person’s limited association with scandal might have quickly disappeared into the pages of some little-read book or article. From here on, though, the tar is going to bubble up with every google search, forever.

Burkett and Lockhart have contradicting statements. Lockhart denies the mention of the fabricated report, during his conversation with Burkett. Yeah, right! So, what did they talk about?---the weather?

NEW INFo: As per the Kerry Spot

The Fort Worth Star Telegram is retracting its story that Burkett claimed that Lockhart "tried to convince [Burkett] to give them the documents."

The Star Telegram has now posted:

This article has been corrected from the version published in the newspaper and online Friday morning to reflect that Bill Burkett was referring to conversations with CBS when he said, "They tried to convince me as to why I should give them the documents." The earlier version incorrectly reported that he had discussed the documents with Joe Lockhart of the Kerry campaign.

So strike that one off the list of connections.

- Van Os did a phone spot on FOX today .... Says he's no longer representing Burkett due to health problems.... didn't make clear who's health problems he was talking about...

I'm interested in the genesis of that retraction. Wholly internally fueled, or did someone get a phone call?

I'm not terribly interested, mind you, just mildly. A lot of folks had speculated that the "them" was CBS news. The contact arranged with Lockhart was the quid in that quid pro quo, so the story goes -- so it makes some sense.

It's worth noting that the correction doesn't refute the possibility that Burkett and Lockhart discussed the documents - it just means that, during this interview, Burkett apparently didn't claim they did. But, as poster Another Thought said, "it's absurd to think that Burkett would not have discussed the docs and their content with Cleland and Lockhart."

Numerous points, issues and questions raised in this thread remain valid, and no doubt we'll have new occasions to revisit them. The retraction is irritating as hell, though.

I wonder if rather should get a show of hos own and call it UNRELIABLE SOURCES but come to think of it the whole news media save for FOX is a unreliable source for real news