CBS Now Says Announcement Will Be Made at 5:00 p.m. Sources: Will admit docs are false but content is not.
Huh?
In a related matter, INDC Journal has an update on the Boston Globe’s antics, and Ace of Spades has the siren.
Update: Tim Blair asks,”Who knew what, when? HobbsOnline asks, “How long have Dems known about the memos? Allahpundit asks, “What’s up with the delay?
Check out the lone protester on Rathergate.com.
Backcountry Conservative is live-blogging the non-conference. It’s very exciting.
Update II (7:22 p.m.): The American Thinker has the play by play of CBS’s bizarre performance.
Corante dissects CBS’s statement.
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 24 comments }
You mean that that doesn’t make it “all okay”?
This is Hot LB! Check this out.
http://www.nyobserver.com/pages/frontpage1.asp
Let’s see…first, Noon, then 3:30 and now, 5:00. We won’t be hearing a thing about this from CBS. They’re such liars!
I see. I guess that means I can forge a deed to a house, and then say ‘yeah, the deed’s a fake, but the house is still mine’. No responsibility at all.
DaveK LOL!!! That’s funny!
Is there such a thing as ‘Reading Rage’. Reading Dan Rather say he’s just reporting the truth in all his reporting produced ‘Reading Rage’.
I started typing all fast!
Almost rolled the computer!
I had to remove my fingers from the keyboard!
Phew that was close!
I bet CBS is trying to get Killian’s former secretary who btw doesn’t like Bush at all, to say something about the comment she made about the docs being forged but the content is true.
What happened? Did I miss CBS’s announcement?
I thought it was me! But I haven’t seen nor heard anything about it.
LB Read this.
Talking to the secretary? Why? Maybe Rather’s trying to convince her she doesn’t remember typing the memos because she’s senile.
Sounds like Rather is grasping at straws! Desperate to save face.
I tire of this – there’s no intellgent life at CBS – load Photon Torpedos! Fire at will!
Well its 6:12pm and I guess nothing going to happen until the evening news. So I’m out. See you in the morning!
Of course, there is the whole “forging of government documents” thing that nobody seems to be talking about …
“CBS Now Says Announcement Will Be Made at 5:00 p.m. Sources: Will admit docs are false but content is not.
Huh?”
Somebody asked Scott Mcleland and he said he had every reason to believe they were true when they came out.
actus, you’ll have to do better than that. Citations, please.
I’ll do the heavy lifting, a la Rush (since that’s where I found the quote).
Actus, you’ve been roped by McClellan for a dope.
Between watching tonight’s 60 Minutes and monitoring several live blogrollers, all I can say is that the fat lady has yet to sing.
The longer Dan drags this out the more painful it will be for him. That tenacity reminds of a pitbull that has locked on and won’t let go until dead, no matter how much one beats him.
But this is good, and a wakeup call for journalists. Let the fisking continue.
So, we are now to believe that even though the document is a sham, the facts within are true? This despite the folly of attempting to pass a letter written in 1973 (composed on Microsoft Word, you understand) as authentic.
Meanwhile — real issues being discussed and debated in this campaign: 0
At least Cronkite had the decency to quit pretending he was an unbiased reporter some time ago.
LawWife:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/09/20040915-3.html
hit ctrl-F (find in most browsers) and look for “60″ (for 60 minutes). The white house belived they were true — which is not intended to say anything about the fact that they’re fake, more the content.
The documents aren’t forgeries, not in the conventional sense if you reason it out like they have at Counterspin Central:
http://counterspin.blogspot.com/
“Today, USA Today reports that Killian’s secretary (via the Dallas Morning News) states categorically that the memos were not the actual ones Killian might have created at the time. They use the word “forgeries,” but it’s not clear whether or not the memos were created specifically to deceive anyone into believing they were the original memos, or were merely copying what the original source memos said. In other words, is a color photo copy of a $20 bill a “forgery,” or “counterfeit,” or a reproduction of the bill? It depends on what you intend to do with the copy. If you try to pass it off as legal tender…that’s counterfeiting. If you use it to illustrate what a $20 bill looks like in a school report on currencies of the world, then it’s not.”
I think this is the excuse CBS will end up using. They will gloss over the fact that they presented them as “what they would have looked like, had they ever actually been written”,but the problem is they didn’t present them in that manner. Maybe the whole story was an “example”. The “Rove did it” theory didn’t fly, they’ll keep looking until they find something to appease the people out there not looking for the truth any harder than they were.
Keep up the good work!
“Actus, you’ve been roped by McClellan for a dope.”
If you think the president’s press secretary is a liar, say so.
“I see. I guess that means I can forge a deed to a house, and then say ‘yeah, the deed’s a fake, but the house is still mine’.” Comment by DaveK — 09.15.04 @ 4:19 pm
No, that is not what it means. Let’s say I own the house and cannot find the deed. I am too lazy or unaware to find the original or request an official duplicate, so I make one up on my computer. The fake deed is exposed. That doesn’t change my home ownership. And since I do own the house, I know anyone else’s claim to it has to be false. In fact, I would challenge anyone to prove I don’t own it.
If the documents re: Bush are fakes, then more power to anyone who exposes that. Lies are never chased away by more lies. But, why aren’t those demanding proof from CBS also demanding proof from the President about his service? I was just a Marine Corps Corporal, but I can prove (through pictures, mail, eyewitness accounts) where I was and what I was doing in my 4 years of active duty. If Bush had been honest from the very beginning about his service, this issue would have been laid to rest long ago.
(And while I respect healthy debate and differences of opinion, the fact that I served my country proudly and honorably as a United States Marine gives me every right to expect accountability from my leaders.)
John Hulsey
CPL/USMC
1985-1989
Actus, why don’t you parse what McClellan said;
Translation:
We received these documents from a
majorcredible news organization — CBS “found” them, and showed them to us for comment.We had every reason to believe that they were authentic at that time — we don’t have them already from our own collection, we naturally assume them them to be legitimate newly discovered documents that were overlooked in previous searches of multiple archives which is always a possibility in any organization, especially a governmental agency. Why should we automatically assume them to be fakes, just because we never saw them before and Bush doesn’t recall seeing them 30 years ago.
and in keeping with the spirit of releasing documents and being open about all the documents that we have, we made those documents available to everybody else so you could look at them yourselves — we have nothing to hide, so we released them w/o comment to everyone to evaluate whether Bush lied or not (We show, You decide). Bush honestly believes that he served with honor and any “shortcuts” or exceptions to published regulations were done so IAW with conventional procedures in effect at the time.
The rest of the statement is pretty straightforward. If you think the docs are legit, so be it and we’ll take our lumps. If they’re fakes, then that should be further investigated and let the chips fall where they may.
Where is the lie? One doesn’t have to lie to rope-a-dope. If you’re fixated on a pawn that is a move or two away from checking the king, why should your opponent announce that he’s set the stage so that checkmate will occur if you take the pawn?
Andy, I like the translation.
Comments on this entry are closed.