CBS Ousts 4 For Fake Bush Guard Story

“> I wonder if they'd be so stand up had it
> been faux News lying about Kerry?

LOL... "if faux news had been lying about Kerry".

Uhh... when did they stop?

It's more than a month after the election and not yet as far as I can tell!”

“Come on Nigal, how about you, you going to answer any questions about accountability, or ya gonna stick to name-calling?”

“At least Fox had the integrity to fire their chief political correspondent, Carl Cameron, for making up false Kerry quotes in his The Metrosexual and the Cowboy "story".”

“>turtleTurd's the funniest one of them all.
>they further any conspiracy out there like
>Bush having an external defibrillator or any
>other lie going yet thinks the sun rises and
>sets in Kerry's ass as if he is perfect.

I have plenty of criticisms of Kerry. In addition to believing "truth without open mindedness to falsification will lead you astray", I also don't believe in the very concept of a 'Great Leader'. *ANY* 'great' leader that rises to power will necessarily impose his views that will not be shared by someone, the 'greater' the leader, the more people who have to deal with the person.

I supported Kerry simply because I believe the government is misbehaving very badly right now, both fiscally, and morally. Jr. is bankrupting the country and hurting an awful lot of people, not to mention geopolitically destabilizing the world which is having a significant effect on the economy (according to Greenspan, geopolitical instability is biggest drag on economy right now).

I was not certain Kerry could correct these issues, I was hopeful, but I look at the numbers, the indicators, and everything else, and slaughtering people on the taxpayer's credit card just so Exxon and the Bush family can profit from oil price control instead of some dirt poor arabs is not what this country should be doing.

The tax policies which favor monopolies and inheritance babies at the expense of entrepreneurs and people who can't even eat are reprehensible. Monopolies in this country pay only 2% of the taxes!!!! If you give the inheritance babies tax-free inheritances, what happens is they sit on their butt and collect wealth, pass it down to their children who do the same, and over time you get 6 families running everything... no more American Dream as the only way you'll get ahead is to pay off some of these people.

And don't get me started on the environmental policies...

These *policies* need to be reversed. I supported Kerry because of this.

(Not to mention the dogmatic religious goons grown from the rural KKK grounds that were rounding up and bus-ing 10 year old's in to see the Passion of the Christ ... that group *REALLY* scares me! ... read the history on the Christian crusades... far worse than Nazism if you ask me!)
last edited: 1/10/05 4:55:14 PM”

“Violin... Faux News fired Cameron? I thought Cameron had done a bunch of positive pieces on Jr., that should have guaranteed him job security in my view. If they fired him that's falsification for a couple theories.

Got a news link?
last edited: 1/10/05 4:56:07 PM”

“- Sean Hannity
- Bill O'Reilly
- Rush Limbaugh
- Ann Coultier
- Bob Novak
None of these people are 'Reporters'.
All their columns are clearly 'opinion' pieces and labeled as such.
That's the problem with all you far leftie libs, you do not care to understand the difference between Commentary and News.”

“Ooops! I forgot to use my sarcasm font.”

“Stovey - that's the problem with all you ultra-righty bunker boys, you can't answer a question.
What about the reporters and news networks in general that failed to devote enough time and resources to exploring whether their were WMDs in Iraq. Around the world there was plenty of coverage of this.
What about those who derided French and Russian truths that there were no WMDs in Iraq. How many times will you ignore questions you don't like stovey?
Do these people need to be held accountable for their actions?”

“LOL@Y2
...and I 'ain't gonna', because that isn't part of the thread subject. ;-)”

“"Rich Redneck Who Hid In The National Guard During Vietnam Era Starts War For No Reason -- Thousands Killed, (With More On The Way...)"


[you still can't top that one, dude]”

“But stovey, you told me what the subject was here look!!!

“Accountability of news people is the subject.”
StoveStomper
4:13:09 PM
1/10/05

there, look. But you don't want to talk about that do you. You just want a cheap dig at the "lefties" huh.
Obviously I took your direct quote of what was the subject at hand an used "liberal bias" in quoting it back to you.”

“Commentary isn't news dude.”

“Is it true that DAN RATHER took today off on the broadcast?
I don't watch CBS News so I don't know for sure.
I guess he couldn't stand to report this 'NEWS' if it's true he skipped out today.”

“He took the day off to help Mary Mapes clean out her desk.”

“I say again - What about the reporters and news networks in general that failed to devote enough time and resources to exploring whether their were WMDs in Iraq. Around the world there was plenty of coverage of this.
What about those who derided French and Russian truths that there were no WMDs in Iraq. How many times will you ignore questions you don't like stovey?
Do these people need to be held accountable for their actions?”

Or have you changed ya mind, some might even say flip-flopped on what is the subject matter at hand. Rather like the administration on the reasons for going to war?
;op
[b][b]”

“The people have spoken. Bush is President. End of story.”

“We're gearing up for 2008 UP. That's yesterday's news ;op”

“Y2, answer my question if Dan took today off.
Avoiding it, aren't you? ;-)”

“you first Stovey ;op”

“LOL... I watched the CBS report.

4 People fired, story retraction, media circus, freepers with their panties in a wad, calls of bias, blah blah blah, etc.

But *STILL* not one fact wrong in the story!!!!

They did *NOT* say the documents were forged or change *ANY* of the facts in the story!!!

LOL. Well, I have to respect the repiglicans, they did a number on Rather... got to have the sacrificial lamb I before the election I suppoes, but STILL not one fact was said to be wrong!! They said the guy who was the source didn't like Bush and they rushed the story out without enough verification...

BUT NOT ONE FACT IN THE STORY WRONG.
last edited: 1/10/05 6:02:15 PM”

“So, did Dan skip today's broadcast?”

“[they're still pissed that Nixon got popped, <VBG>]”

“Did Tilt say something?”

“CBSNEWS veteran Don Hewitt called Dan Rather's disappearance from Monday's Evening News 'really stupid' during a damage control meeting on Monday...

LOL
Can't stand the fire when the news is about himself!”

“The fact that CBS got caught getting false documents directly from the Kerry campaign sort of got burried in the story.

Imagine if Kerry had won the election and these lies and corruption had not come out. No doubt the liberals will continue to defend main stream media as completely fair.”

“I don't think there is anyone who is happy with 'mainstream media' as of right now. LOL, that's probably about the only thing you and I agree about bbw.

As to the forged documents straight from the Kerry campaign. Uhh.. could you provide some proof for your claims please? Or at least a link to the Faux News site claiming this?
last edited: 1/10/05 8:44:27 PM”

“Is TrailTurtle, Tilt????

BB just posted, probably BB.
last edited: 1/10/05 8:54:47 PM”

“I'm no one but myself ;)”

“Looks like this thread just pushed poor little victim BB over the edge.
http://www.thebackpacker.com/trailtalk/thread/35801,3.php”

“CBSNEWS veteran Don Hewitt called Dan Rather's disappearance from Monday's Evening News "really stupid" during a damage control meeting on Monday, sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

One top source inside the CBS Broadcast Center claimed Rather was told to stay off the air on Monday, as a form of punishment, while the "Report of the Independent Review Panel" was being released!

A Rather intimate strongly denies Rather was told to stay off the air. "He is jet-lagged [from asia]," the source said late Monday. But the source quickly added, "It was not the worst day to sit out."

Chief Washington Correspondent Bob Schieffer was called in to anchor the damaged ship.

MORE

CBS staffers were shocked Monday when CBS president Les Moonves suddenly tied Rather's upcoming resignation to the phony document flap, a departure from CBS's official storyline.

Moonves explained in a memo: "Dan Rather has already apologized for the segment and taken responsibility for his part in the broadcast. He voluntarily moved to set a date to step down from the CBS EVENING NEWS in March of 2005... after examining the report and thinking about its implications, we believe any further action would not be appropriate."

In the emotional speech to the CBS newsroom first announcing his resignation last November, Rather was very clear to co-workers that his departure from the evening news was not because of the Bush story.

"No matter what you hear elsewhere, this was a mutual decision," Rather explained. "The timing has to do with wanting to separate the decision to leave the anchor chair from the 60 MINUTES report."

MORE

'This is a rude awakening for CBS News,' Moonves said, 'and the CBS News culture has to change'...

CBS source to Tuesday NY TIMES: 'We have no juice. We're a dying business, and this didn't help us. Some people feel like CBS News could be out of business in five years'...
last edited: 1/10/05 10:18:51 PM”

“Crash bang, you should have been involved in our discussions about the “liberal” media.

Facts never got in the way of people like y2. I can present all the information that is available, and it still won’t convince the dogmatically correct leftists y2. What about you, crash bang? I don’t care about the bias of pundits like Rush or O’Reilly. We know where they stand. They do not disguise their bias. Bias is inexcusable when it presents itself as straight news reporting. Anyone who has studied this issue knows that it’s not only how they present the news, it’s what they decide to report AS news (and by inference what they choose not to report).

The fact that Goldberg’s book BIAS described Dan Rather’s and Mary Mapes’ “liberal” leanings long before this CBS fiasco doesn’t make any difference to people like y2. They can’t admit that they were wrong in their views about “liberal” journalistic bias.

Yeah the new report says they couldn’t prove political bias. Did anyone see THE NEWS HOUR last night? The two who ran the investigation (Louis D. Boccardi, retired chief executive officer of The Associated Press and Republican Attorney General Dick Thornburgh) said they couldn’t prove political bias (Although everyone on the program wink-winked about there being a preconceived bias that caused the story to be “zealously” rushed to broadcast).

So we have two leftists. We have two Democrats (Rather and Mapes) running the story. Mapes contacts Kerry’s campaign before running the story. Rather is too busy with other “important” projects to check the bogus facts for this politically charged story right before the election. They are warned not to run the story. The tightly contested presidential election fast approaches… So, of course, the politically correct conclusion is that “journalistic zeal” was responsible. Zeal to beat their competition to the story. In the twelve days after the story runs, and is shown to be based on bogus information, CBS News can’t admit their obvious mistakes (Sound familiar?). They even run misleading news stories that try to show the “truth” of their original story. Rather goes on record as blaming the “right” for trying to discredit him. Paranoia runs rampant. Finally Rather “retires” of his own free will just because he felt the time was right…

Riiiiiiiiiiight, and Rush is a socialist.




BIAS (the book) talks specifically about Rather’s clueless “zeal” long before this happened. This egregious lack of journalistic ethics doesn’t surprise me at all. I have read many books and studies about bias in the media. But I sure love to see the head-in-sand reaction from the left. It, once again, proves that open mindedness is a quantity that is in short supply everywhere. It especially seems to be in short supply by those who define themselves as open-minded.


Interesting site about Rather’s “unbiased” journalism.

http://www.mediaresearch.org/projects/rather20th/welcome.asp”

“This is like the Food Lion story and ABC years ago.

ABC got hammered for dishonestly getting the story, but the fact remains that Food Lion WAS bleaching old meat and selling it as fresh.

Hmmmm!?

The documents that Rather used for his story were phony and CBS was sloppy but the fact remains that W did get preferential treatment, was a coke addict and did go AWOL from the guard.

In the end CBS is honest enough to do the right thing.

When will W admit to being a chicken hawk? He was and is a spoiled rich boy coward who now gets to lie to start a war and send other people's children to die for a lie.

In the end, W will get his just dessert.”

“It was a right-wing lynching to shut reporters who would criticize Jr. before the election, pure and simple. The story was true, none of the facts have been questioned, rather the right-wingers sought to attack "political bias" at CBS for *running* the story, LOL.

They don't want stories run that they consider to be of 'political bias' so they went after Rather to shut him up and make an example of him. They were successful, but no one is better off for it.

Only Bush goose-steppers would celebrate *LESS* diversity in the press.

They only want what they think told, everything else needs to be suppressed... why?

Because the fantasies the Bush-lackey's and GOPper-dittoheads spout don't survive collisions with reality very well, so they have to derail the other cars on the road to make sure it is impossible for the collisions to happen, LOL.

I suppose it's fine for plutocrats and justificationists, but just remember, it is easy to scam people out of money who believe in 'one truth' and think like this ;)

They'll buy anything that justifies their beliefs... Someone paid $28,000 or something for a grill cheese with a burn mark that looked kind of like the virgin mary, LOL.
last edited: 1/11/05 8:17:55 AM”

“This seems to be a real watershed moment for right-wingers.

Enjoy...............boys.”

““Come on Nigal, how about you, you going to answer any questions about accountability, or ya gonna stick to name-calling?”

Dirty Limey! LOL! j/k

I was just tryin' to calm things down a bit with that post Y2. I don't even read 1/2 these dumbass pissing contests and I see no benefit in trying to reason with the left. My apologies buddy. :)”

“http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,143987,00.html
Bill checks in with his OPINION, also explains the difference between hard news and political commentary. Something most of you libs need to read and learn.”

“I already posted a link to the fake quotes made up by Fox's chief political correspondent, Carl Cameron, after Bush came across as a clueless psychopath in the first debate. Here is again in case you missed it the first time.

The obvious intent was to make Kerry, a heavily decorated war hero, look like some kind of homo, in the weeks before the election. Was Cameron fired?... demoted? Did Fox suffer any loss of respect (as if that were possible)?

Where is the right on this breach of journalistic ethics?”

“Citizen reporters who broke story
jump on 'independent' report

The weblogs that first revealed CBS News used phony documents as the basis for an election-season piece about President Bush's National Guard service are in full force after release of the network's independent-panel report yesterday, with most expressing surprise at its harsh, detailed criticism of news personnel but lamenting it couldn't see political bias driving the story.


Reporters staked out in front of CBS headquarters in New York City (photo: Ratherbiased.com)


"We're disappointed that the panel claimed there was not enough proof that those involved had political motivations," said RatherBiased.com co-editor Matthew Sheffield.

But he surmised, "If the panel had made such a claim, CBS more than likely would have rejected the findings all together."

The report by former Republican Attorney General Dick Thornburgh and retired Associated Press president and CEO Louis Boccardi concluded CBS News failed to follow basic journalistic principles in the preparation and reporting of the controversial Sept. 8 "60 Minutes Wednesday" segment.


CBS announced yesterday it asked for the resignations of Senior Vice President Betsy West, who supervised CBS News primetime programs; "60 Minutes Wednesday" Executive Producer Josh Howard; and Howard's deputy, Senior Broadcast Producer Mary Murphy. The producer of the piece, Mary Mapes, was terminated, the network reported.

Dan Rather, who reported the story on air, is stepping down as anchor of "CBS Evening News" in March but will stay with the network.

"We deeply regret the disservice this flawed '60 Minutes Wednesday' report did to the American public, which has a right to count on CBS News for fairness and accuracy," said CBS President Leslie Moonves.

Greg Sheffield, another RatherBiased.com co-editor, said "Rather very clearly saw the writing on the wall and decided to retire late last year, despite his and CBS's claims that he was not pressured. "

"These firings are a good start toward the path of objectivity for CBS," Sheffield said. "But if the network wants to truly show that it is serious about being fair, it needs to fire news president Andrew Heyward, who personally approved a public relations strategy of stonewalling and lying when confronted with evidence that CBS had erred."

Last fall, weblogs such as Charles Johnson's Little Green Footballs presented convincing evidence the documents, dated in the early 1970s, were produced on a modern computer word processor, but the panel report reveals Rather has not completely backed down on his original assertions, notes RatherGate.com

The report says: "Rather informed the Panel that he still believes the content of the documents is true because 'the facts are right on the money,' and that no one had provided persuasive evidence that the documents were not authentic."

Nevertheless, Kevin Aylward of Wizbang sees evidence that the panel believes Rather lied.

Among the panel's 10 "most serious defects in the reporting and production of the September 8 segment" was No. 2, the "false statement in the September 8 Segment that an expert had authenticated the Killian documents when all he had done was authenticate one signature from one document used in the Segment."

Aylward comments: "#2 is the killer. Dan Rather got on the air and flat lied to the American people. He should be fired."

The panel said a key factor explaining the failure was a "myopic zeal" to be the first news organization to broadcast a groundbreaking story about Bush's National Guard service. But Thornburgh and Boccardi said it "cannot conclude that a political agenda at '60 Minutes Wednesday' drove either the timing of the airing of the segment or its content."

INDC Journal said, "The idea that Mary Mapes and Dan Rather had no political agenda is simply ludicrous, but the media and its established analysts need to play the old 'vee know nussing' game to maintain the grand illusion of ideological impartiality in journalism."

But blogger Michelle Malkin, a WND columnist, points out the panel found Mapes' contact with Joe Lockhart, a senior staff member of the Kerry presidential campaign, "troubling."

The report said:


While it is certainly proper to receive information from a variety of sources, this contact crossed the line as, at a minimum, it gave the appearance of a political bias and could have been perceived as a news organization's assisting a campaign as opposed to reporting on a story.
Jim Geraghty, in his TKS blog on National Review Online -- formerly The Kerry Spot -- says the panel's ultimate conclusion that it could not prove political bias lacks credulity.


Does the panel really think that CBS would have acted in the same manner in a seemingly-great story that would have hurt John Kerry? Are we really to believe that it was solely 'competitive pressures' that led to this, and that no one in this process had their thinking influenced by a desire to see Bush defeated in this year's election?
Blogger and talk-radio host Hugh Hewitt said, "As disgust with the Panel's whitewash spreads across the blogosphere, expect a parallel universe to develop within MSM [mainstream media] -- a sober toned but nevertheless congratulatory nod towards the "thoroughness" of the Panel's effort and the severity of CBS' response. Thus will the wagons of legacy media circle around Black Rock. The most interesting question will be how the legacy newspapers report the whitewash in tomorrow's editions."

Hewitt notes that Geraghty and other bloggers see a "silver lining" in the report, primarily because of its harsh criticism of those responsible for the story, but Hewitt disagrees, calling it the "CBS Whitewash Report."

"By far the most important issue for the panel to investigate was the attempted manipulation of 'prestige' media to influence a presidential election," he said.

"Now CBS has a report that says 'mistakes were made' but not because its employees were attempting to bring down a president. Had the Panel exonerated Rather and Mapes, et al., at least the Panel would not have dogged the central question. But of course, no one would have believed such an obviously absurd conclusion. So the Panel provided CBS the next best thing -- a plausible cover for its political hackery. Unless and until MSM owns up to its deep seeded agenda journalism, it will never reform."

"Captain Ed" of Captain's Quarters was one who saw a silver lining.

"It appears that the full report will give the blogosphere material for much rumination and discussion over the next few days," he wrote. "Whatever else, it isn't the whitewash that most of us expected."

Powerline's John Hinderaker agreed.

"In general, the Thornburgh report is better than I expected," he wrote. "It criticizes '60 Minutes harshly,' and is a treasure trove of factual information. However, while the report is damning, the question is whether it is damning enough. In two key respects, the report walks up to the precipice, but declines to jump."

Yesterday, BoycottCBS.com founder Michael Paranzino responded to the CBS report, urging network executives to shun New York and broadcast the evening news "from the heartland" of America.”

“How about the Armstrong Williams story? Does anyone wonder if other pundits are being paid with taxpayer dollars to shill for the administration? Does that bother you?

I mean... if they were willing to pay him $240,000 on a rather minor initiative (Williams claims there were others) what do you think they might pay for favorable press on tax cuts... war... social security?”

“Stovey?”

“Well, Vileman, you had no problem with Mary Mapes' contact with Joe Lockhart, a senior staff member of the Kerry presidential campaign, so why should you have a problem with Armstrong Williams?”

“When did I say that Stovey? From what I know of the story, I think CBS took appropriate action.

If you have any memory, I said at the time that if the memos were forged, that would be 'gross'.

I don't watch television news (or much tv at all) because I can read from several newspapers (print and online) and get far more news from different perspectives in the time it takes to watch the evening news.

I never really liked the way Dan Rather pontificates.


Some may like this: Yes, CBS screwed up badly in ‘Memogate’ — but so did those who covered the affair”

“So what about Cameron and Williams, Stovey?

Are you a patriot or a partisan suck-up?”

“I choose not to debate you, violin, because you have no credibility with me due to your past actions and posts.”

“In other words, you're nothing but a hypocrite and a pu$$y.”

““In other words, you're nothing but a hypocrite and a pu$$y.”
Violin
10:51:14 AM
1/11/05


I win!!!!
Name calling!
Thanks for illustrating my point and reasons perfectly.”

“Report Says Dan Rather Personally Involved in CBS News Campaign to Destroy President Bush; Accuracy in Media (AIM) Says CBS "Rathergate" Scandal Far Worse Than Previously Known


Accuracy in Media said today that the newly released report on how CBS News handled the Bush National Guard story contains a bombshell that further undermines the credibility of CBS News anchorman Dan Rather and his close collaborator and associate, producer Mary Mapes.

The report reveals on page 130 that Mapes, one of those fired because of the scandal, had documented information in her possession before the controversial September 8 broadcast that George W. Bush, while in the Texas Air National Guard, "did volunteer for service in Vietnam but was turned down in favor of more experienced pilots." This information is critical because Dan Rather, in the broadcast, insinuated that Bush was among the "many well-connected young men [who tried to] pull strings and avoid service in Vietnam."

AIM Editor Cliff Kincaid explained the significance of the panel's revelation: "Mapes, who was very close to Rather and enjoyed his confidence, had the evidence exonerating Bush of this malicious charge. The report shows that there were multiple credible sources to prove that Bush did not try to avoid Vietnam by going into the National Guard and that he was in fact willing to go to Vietnam as a pilot. However, CBS News deliberately kept this information from its viewers and conveyed an opposite impression because Rather, Mapes & Company were trying to depict Bush as a coward who, as Commander-in-Chief, was sending American soldiers to their deaths in Iraq."

The report reveals that Rather assured CBS News President Andrew Heyward that he, Rather, had not "been involved in this much checking on a story since Watergate," and that it was "very big." The report says that Rather assured Heyward that the story was "thoroughly vetted" or documented and verified.

Kincaid explained, "Rather saw this as a Watergate-style story that could damage the Bush campaign and sink the President's chances for re-election, as Americans were fighting and dying in Iraq. He seemed to be making a virtual guarantee that the story would be a smoking gun that would usher John Kerry into the White House. Instead, the story backfired, implicating Rather and his associates in a sleazy political operation, with links to the Kerry campaign, that was intended to mislead and misinform the American people as they prepared to vote on issues of war and peace. Even Al Jazeera couldn't have concocted a more sinister and dishonest attack on the President of the United States."

The "Rathergate" affair involved Dan Rather narrating a pre-election September 8 CBS "60 Minutes" story, based on forged documents, charging that President Bush not only used connections to join the Texas Air National Guard to avoid service in the Vietnam War, but didn't fulfill the terms of his Guard service.

When questions surfaced about the authenticity of the documents, CBS stonewalled, covered-up, and eventually apologized. An "Independent Review Panel" was formed to investigate. Former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh and former Associated Press president Louis Boccardi were in charge of the probe.

Now, three months later, the findings have been issued and four mid-level employees have been fired. They are Senior Vice President Betsy West, "60 Minutes Wednesday" Executive Producer Josh Howard, Senior Broadcast Producer Mary Murphy, and producer Mapes.

However, other major players in the fiasco were not fired. They are Heyward, Rather, and CBS News White House correspondent John Roberts. Rather is retiring in March and Roberts is said to be in the running as Rather's successor.

Kincaid noted that CBS chairman Les Moonves, who issued a statement on the matter, insists that Heyward should stay in his job "during this challenging time." Kincaid said, "It's like rewarding the skipper of the Titanic for promising not to hit an iceberg again. Heyward was the captain of the CBS news ship and he and Rather have survived only because Moonves has thrown the women and children overboard."

Kincaid was amused by several references in the report to how hard Dan Rather was working at the time, as if this gets him off the hook for narrating the discredited report. "I understand it is par for the course in network news magazine shows for a network star to put his face on the work of others," Kincaid said. "But the report also quotes Heyward as saying that Rather had assured him that the story was solid, documented and verified. So why are Rather and Heyward still in their jobs?"

While the report claims no hard evidence of anti-Bush political bias on the part of CBS News, Kincaid said the report is full of evidence of such bias. "Why is it that CBS News and so many other news organizations cited in the report were so anxious to do a story attacking President Bush's National Guard service?" asked Kincaid. "Why is it that the same news organizations were not eager to attack Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's failure to release all of his military and medical records? The answer is simple: they wanted Kerry to win and Bush to lose. This is partisan political bias, pure and simple."

The report notes that other news organizations on the Bush story were the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Boston Globe, Associated Press, and USA Today (which published a story using the same dubious documents that the dubious CBS source, Bill Burkett, had given to CBS. USA Today has not apologized for running this story.)

The survival of CBS News White House correspondent John Roberts, rumored as a possible successor to Rather, is also curious. The report says that Roberts had interviewed Burkett for a February 12, 2004 CBS Evening News broadcast―months before the anti-Bush hit piece aired―and aired a portion of that interview, even though Roberts had found Burkett "unreliable."

As we have explained in a previous release, Roberts was the personal representative of CBS News, sitting in for Dan Rather, in a meeting with White House communications director Dan Bartlett, at a critical time when CBS News was developing its fake "story." In the meeting with Roberts, Bartlett was told that he was supposed to confirm or deny authenticity of the National Guard documents that turned out to be bogus. When Bartlett did not immediately denounce them as forgeries, Roberts provided that information to "60 Minutes" producer Mary Mapes, as if Bartlett's refusal to disavow the documents meant that they were authentic. This was seen as the critical green light for Mapes (and Rather) to go ahead with the bogus story.

Bartlett later explained that CBS News provided documents that CBS News had said had "come from the personal file of a former commander" in the National Guard and that Roberts expected Bartlett "to authenticate them." The White House received the documents only three and one-half hours before Bartlett was interviewed by Roberts about them. Bartlett commented that "CBS had the obligation to authenticate them before they were used. They could have also given them to the White House much earlier so we had more time to verify them as well."

Kincaid commented, "John Roberts was in a position to stop this fraudulent story before it aired. He did not."

The new panel report sheds some light on this controversy, noting that Roberts said the Bartlett interview had "gone well and that he had not disputed the authenticity of the documents…" The panel said "this reaction" by Roberts and CBS "seriously misplaced responsibility for making sure that the documents were authentic."

So John Roberts, the likely successor to Dan Rather, was guilty of helping to perpetuate this journalistic fraud. The facts are clear.”

“Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.”

“Hey Ultra - Stick your Moony source in your arse and light it.
last edited: 1/11/05 11:14:15 AM”