the DEFINITIVE word on the CBS/DNC forged ANG documents

[patteeu]

Check out this comment posted on DGCI.nett:

http://www.dgci.net/archives/001452.html

Mary Mapes the producer of the CBS 60 minutes report was formerly a producer at a Seattle television station, she is known for being a ultra liberal with an agenda.

John Carlson is a talk show commentator for Seattle Radio Station KVI 570, http://www.kvi.com/:
Sept. 10, 2004
KVI's John Carlson said Mary Mapes use to be a News producer at KIRO TV in Seattle until moving on to CBS 60 Minutes about 10-12 years ago. He worked with her and said she was the most liberal person at KIRO and had a very leftist view when producing the news program. John said when he heard the story break at CBS, that he bet Mary Mapes is behind it. It has been announced that Mary was the one to go out and obtain the bogus documents.

Mary's father just called the John Carlson show. I was expecting him to give John He$# for talking about his daughter, but he said he is ashamed of her. He knows of her leftist views.

Posted by: Jack at September 12, 2004 09:55 AM

[Exile_In_SJ]

Originally Posted by watermock

N.B. Burkett and Heldt have both written for TomPaine.com, which is run by Bill Moyers's son. We are never more than one or two degrees of separation from Rather with either one of them.

Burkett is a charter member of the BDS (BushDerangementSyndrome) He's already been caught in one lie about Bush and anything more he says is most likely another lie.

And Bill Moyers son is as far left as Bill Moyer. Too funny.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by patteeu

There could be nothing better for Bush than to have this issue not go away. It's a big time loser for Kerry regardless of the facts of the Bush ANG matter. The fact that this has become more about CBS's dishonor and a mystery about who forged the documents is just icing on the cake. Nobody cares about Bush's ANG service except the people who are already solidly against voting for him.

I beg to differ. This issue is equally risky for Bush and Rather, imo. It's my opinion that even if the released memos are copies, the originals in all likelihood exist. If the original documents and/or substantiation of the content of those memos does, in fact, exist, it's going to vindicate Rather and CBS.... and devastate the Bush campaign. Not because of what happened 30+ years ago, but because it would indicate that he has covered it up and lied about it to this day. For a guy who's running on personal integrity and "strength of character", that would not be a welcome disclosure, I think.

It will be interesting to see how things play out.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

I beg to differ. This issue is equally risky for Bush and Rather, imo. It's my opinion that even if the released memos are copies, the originals in all likelihood exist. If the original documents and/or substantiation of the content of those memos does, in fact, exist, it's going to vindicate Rather and CBS.... and devastate the Bush campaign. Not because of what happened 30+ years ago, but because it would indicate that he has covered it up and lied about it to this day. For a guy who's running on personal integrity and "strength of character", that would not be a welcome disclosure, I think.

It will be interesting to see how things play out.

From what I've read, there were two individuals in the Texas Guard (Burkett and another guy named - I think - Coon, or something) who testified that while Bush was governor, his aides instructed commanders in the Guard to destroy any documents regarding the "bad side" of Bush's service. They saw these shredded documents in the trash. That's why my hypothesis is that Burkett tried to recreate these memos (which he had read) from memory. The fact that Killian's secretary says that such memos did exist, and did relate the same info found in the CBS docs, backs up this theory.

Interesting, isn't it? The Right is willing to tear into Kerry's record to try and prove that he didn't "earn" his Purple Hearts, but the same type of inquiry to determine whether or not Bush "earned" an honorable discharge, they consider "dirty tricks."

[Exile_In_SJ]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

I beg to differ. This issue is equally risky for Bush and Rather, imo. It's my opinion that even if the released memos are copies, the originals in all likelihood exist. If the original documents and/or substantiation of the content of those memos does, in fact, exist, it's going to vindicate Rather and CBS.... and devastate the Bush campaign. Not because of what happened 30+ years ago, but because it would indicate that he has covered it up and lied about it to this day. For a guy who's running on personal integrity and "strength of character", that would not be a welcome disclosure, I think.

It will be interesting to see how things play out.

Actually it's now a no lose situation for Bush. People know these memos were fake. If some other memos surface purporting to be the original REAL memos, how can anyone now trust them? Fake documents were made to smear Bush, how can anything similar now be believed? If the left and Rather would lie and do this, then anything related to this particular subject is also tainted.

You see Rather by interviewing the old lady tacitly admits the documents are fake. It's over. They were either complicit or duped. Now if they show up with the 'originals' and now say, trust us, these are the real ones.... no one, except the far far left will believe them. This avenue for smearing Bush is now closed.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Exile_In_SJ

Actually it's now a no lose situation for Bush. People know these memos were fake. If some other memos surface purporting to be the original REAL memos, how can anyone now trust them? Fake documents were made to smear Bush, how can anything similar now be believed? If the left and Rather would lie and do this, then anything related to this particular subject is also tainted.

You see Rather by interviewing the old lady tacitly admits the documents are fake. It's over. They were either complicit or duped. Now if they show up with the 'originals' and now say, trust us, these are the real ones.... no one, except the far far left will believe them. This avenue for smearing Bush is now closed.

"Smearing Bush?" I notice you slyly ignore the content of the documents, which Killian's secretary has no problem with. She distinctly remembers the conversations about Bush because they were so out of the ordinary. Face it, Bush did not "earn" an honorable discharge.

[Exile_In_SJ]

By lying about this and using the obvious forgeries, the Democrats, and make no mistake, it was the democrats, have innoculated Bush on this subject.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by Exile_In_SJ

Actually it's now a no lose situation for Bush. People know these memos were fake.

Do they? What definitive proof has been presented that they're fake? I'd like to see the evidence.

All we've seen are "expert opinions" that they're forged. And you know what opinions are like....

If some other memos surface purporting to be the original REAL memos, how can anyone now trust them? Fake documents were made to smear Bush, how can anything similar now be believed? If the left and Rather would lie and do this, then anything related to this particular subject is also tainted.

If any other memos surface, those will have to be judged on their own merit. For your argument to hold water, concrete proof that the memos were forged would have to be established, as well as a solid connection between Dan Rather and the DNC. Neither has occurred.

You see Rather by interviewing the old lady tacitly admits the documents are fake. It's over. They were either complicit or duped. Now if they show up with the 'originals' and now say, trust us, these are the real ones.... no one, except the far far left will believe them. This avenue for smearing Bush is now closed.

Wrong. The old lady asserts that she did not type those particular memos. That's all she "admitted"....

[Exile_In_SJ]

Sure he did earn the honorable discharge. Has anyone proven otherwise?

It may be your opinion, that he didn't, but that's all it is, your opinion. According to the US Government and history, he served perfectly honorably.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

I beg to differ. This issue is equally risky for Bush and Rather, imo. It's my opinion that even if the released memos are copies, the originals in all likelihood exist. If the original documents and/or substantiation of the content of those memos does, in fact, exist, it's going to vindicate Rather and CBS.... and devastate the Bush campaign. Not because of what happened 30+ years ago, but because it would indicate that he has covered it up and lied about it to this day. For a guy who's running on personal integrity and "strength of character", that would not be a welcome disclosure, I think.

It will be interesting to see how things play out.

Dream on.

[Exile_In_SJ]

the definitive proof that the documents are forged are the overlays created by several sources using ms word. The new ms word documents are exact matches for the cya document, supposedly made in 1972. That document is false.

Mrs. knox on cbs last night said the documents were fake, and she was the secretary for the officer in question. The documents are false.

Next question.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by Exile_In_SJ

Sure he did earn the honorable discharge. Has anyone proven otherwise?

It may be your opinion, that he didn't, but that's all it is, your opinion. According to the US Government and history, he served perfectly honorably.

It's my opinion that the American people deserve a satisfactory answer to the question of why he blew off his required flight physical. He hasn't denied doing that, nor has he given anything more than a lame excuse for it.

If such a question were posed regarding Kerry's service, you'd want it answered.

[Exile_In_SJ]

she was his secretary. His family asserts he did not type. No one has come forth to claim they typed them. No single machine has been identified that 1. could produce them, 2. that would commonly be used in an ANG outfit.

all other documents attributed to mr. Killian are effusive in his praise for Bush.

anyone who is npot an anti-Bush partisan would conclude that they are fake. And as one survey shows only 27% believe they are real, which closely alignes with the far left in this country.

The documents are fake. Most people recognize that.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by Exile_In_SJ

she was his secretary. His family asserts he did not type. No one has come forth to claim they typed them. No single machine has been identified that 1. could produce them, 2. that would commonly be used in an ANG outfit.

all other documents attributed to mr. Killian are effusive in his praise for Bush.

anyone who is npot an anti-Bush partisan would conclude that they are fake. And as one survey shows only 27% believe they are real, which closely alignes with the far left in this country.

The documents are fake. Most people recognize that.

Speculation, conjecture and opinion.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

Do they? What definitive proof has been presented that they're fake? I'd like to see the evidence.

All we've seen are "expert opinions" that they're forged. And you know what opinions are like....

Wrong, as usual. The woman who says she typed memos containing similar content for Killian says the ones presented by CBS News are fake. Add this testimony from a supportive witness (promoted by Dan Rather himself) on top of all the expert testimony and you have about as much proof as you can have, absent Killian rising from the dead and denying their authenticity to you in person.

Originally Posted by Blueflame

If any other memos surface, those will have to be judged on their own merit. For your argument to hold water, concrete proof that the memos were forged would have to be established, as well as a solid connection between Dan Rather and the DNC. Neither has occurred.

Being as open-minded as you are (sarcasm intended), you will be free to judge future memos on their own merit. However, the public at large will be understandably skeptical. The Bush ANG issue is a loser for JFKerry. By all means, let's keep it alive. Karl Rove couldn't have designed a better situation for his candidate.

Originally Posted by Blueflame

Wrong. The old lady asserts that she did not type those particular memos. That's all she "admitted"....

That's not what Rather thinks she said:

Rather said he was "relieved and pleased" by Knox's comments that the disputed memos reflected Killian's view of the favorable treatment that Bush received in the military unit. But he said, "I take very seriously her belief that the documents are not authentic.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Sep15.html

[Exile_In_SJ]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

It's my opinion that the American people deserve a satisfactory answer to the question of why he blew off his required flight physical. He hasn't denied doing that, nor has he given anything more than a lame excuse for it.

If such a question were posed regarding Kerry's service, you'd want it answered.

Why should he? the American public as a whole could care less if he did or didn't. Again, only the far left cares. This is what, GWB's 4th major election and no one has given a hoot. This whole ANG forgery flap has only helped GWB, not hurt him. It shows how shrill and hateful his opponents can be and how low they will go.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Exile_In_SJ

By lying about this and using the obvious forgeries, the Democrats, and make no mistake, it was the democrats, have innoculated Bush on this subject.

You make this sound like some kind of victory. Bush used connections to get into the Guard, then does not fulfill the service requirement, but through connections again, gets the honorable discharge anyway - and because CBS screwed up with these documents - Bush wins. And that's a good thing? Interesting set of ethics you've got working there.

[azbronco]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

It's my opinion that the American people deserve a satisfactory answer to the question of why he blew off his required flight physical. He hasn't denied doing that, nor has he given anything more than a lame excuse for it.

If such a question were posed regarding Kerry's service, you'd want it answered.

There are numerous issues regarding kerry's service that have been asked, but he won't sign the form to have his records released. The American people deserve satisfactory answers to: Was he really in cambodia, did he commit war crimes, did he commit treason by coming to the aid and comfort of the enemy, etc.?

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

You make this sound like some kind of victory. Bush used connections to get into the Guard, then does not fulfill the service requirement, but through connections again, gets the honorable discharge anyway - and because CBS screwed up with these documents - Bush wins. And that's a good thing? Interesting set of ethics you've got working there.

Yes, I guess I can see your point. But what I find real interesting is how eager you are to get Bush to admit to something most of us already think happened (i.e. getting favorable treatment regarding his Vietnam-era service) but you show absolutely no interest in getting to the bottom of a brazen attempt to defraud the voting public. At best, this scandal includes a major news organization that didn't do their due diligence when they allowed a renegade partisan to perform this hoax and at worst it represents collusion between that news organization and the dirty tricks branch of one of our major political parties. Talk about an interesting set of ethics.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Yes, I guess I can see your point. But what I find real interesting is how eager you are to get Bush to admit to something most of us already think happened (i.e. getting favorable treatment regarding his Vietnam-era service) but you show absolutely no interest in getting to the bottom of a brazen attempt to defraud the voting public. At best, this scandal includes a major news organization that didn't do their due diligence when they allowed a renegade partisan to perform this hoax and at worst it represents collusion between that news organization and the dirty tricks branch of one of our major political parties. Talk about an interesting set of ethics.

Like I've said a couple of times already, I have yet to see any connection whatsover to this doc flap and the DNC. From what I've seen, this is between Burkett and CBS. I imagine they're both going to pay for it, depending on how it all washes out. If the docs are proved to be false, Rather is history at CBS. I don't know what happens to Burkett. Fraud charges?

Now, on the other hand, if Bush didn't actually "earn" an honorable discharge by fulfilling the service requirements - and this, after receiving preferential treatment to get in the Guard - what happens to him? Shouldn't the discharge be rescinded - at least?

I don't really care about the preferential treatment. That's a moot point -
proven beyond all doubt. Now the question is, "Did Bush earn an honorable discharge?" The media were willing to rip Kerry apart over the question of whether or not he earned his Purple Hearts based upon the testimony of men, some of whom - O'Neill, for instance - were not even there. Are they willing to exercise the same diligence toward Bush's fulfillment of the service requirement?

[watermock]

They just don't get it.

Over 250 veterans willing to sign Name, Rank and Serial Number.

Dan Blather drags some 86 year old woman out.

Oh man, it's just so damn funny.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Wrong, as usual. The woman who says she typed memos containing similar content for Killian says the ones presented by CBS News are fake. Add this testimony from a supportive witness (promoted by Dan Rather himself) on top of all the expert testimony and you have about as much proof as you can have, absent Killian rising from the dead and denying their authenticity to you in person.

Excuse me, but that is the secretary's opinion, is it not?

Being as open-minded as you are (sarcasm intended), you will be free to judge future memos on their own merit. However, the public at large will be understandably skeptical. The Bush ANG issue is a loser for JFKerry. By all means, let's keep it alive. Karl Rove couldn't have designed a better situation for his candidate.

Perhaps that's precisely what Rove did... and perhaps it's provable, too.

That's not what Rather thinks she said:

Rather said he was "relieved and pleased" by Knox's comments that the disputed memos reflected Killian's view of the favorable treatment that Bush received in the military unit. But he said, "I take very seriously her belief that the documents are not authentic.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Sep15.html

OK, so now you've presented Rather's opinion of the secretary's opinion.

Again, the focus is on the diversion and not the substance of the memos. It's not the authenticity or lack thereof that is key here; it's the newly-disclosed information that Bush allegedly defied a direct order to report for that flight physical, requiring a CYA memo to be written. And this new info has not been addressed, much less contested.

[watermock]

Excuse me, but that is the secretary's opinion, is it not?

That is Dan Blather's credible source. Noone threw this 86 year old woman into the fray noone other than Dan Rather.

[watermock]

OK, so now you've presented Rather's opinion of the secretary's opinion.

Unbelievable. At this point, Rather hasn't even declared this womans story. Rather is the one presenting a story of "opinion"

so we have an opinion of a opinion in your own words.

[Rohirrim]

I saw the "old woman" on 60 Minutes the other night. She looked pretty sharp, and extremely credible to me. She said she doesn't believe in the authenticity of the documents, but does believe in their content.

The Texans for Truth, Gary Trudeau, and various others have now contributed to a reward equaling (by now) somewhere around $75,000 for anyone who can come forward and testify that Bush showed up in Alabama. So far, no takers. He was supposed to sign up for duty in Boston also. Records show he did not do that. Records also show he did not take the flight physical. So, who gave him the honorable discharge?