Bush documents fake, CBS apologizes

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
They were fakes after all!

CBS Apologizes Over Bush Guard Duty Memos

18 minutes ago

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer

NEW YORK - CBS News apologized Monday for a "mistake in judgment" in its story questioning President Bush's National Guard service, claiming it was misled by the source of documents that several experts have dismissed as fakes.

The network said it would appoint an independent panel to look at its reporting about the memos. The story has mushroomed into a major media scandal, threatening the reputations of CBS News and chief anchor Dan Rather.


It also became an issue in the presidential campaign. The White House said the affair raises questions about the connections between CBS's source, retired Texas National Guard officer Bill Burkett, and Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites)'s campaign.


Rather joined CBS News President Andrew Heyward in issuing an apology Monday.


"We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry," Rather said. "It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism."


Almost immediately after the story aired Sept. 8, document experts questioned memos purportedly written by Bush's late squadron leader, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian, saying they appeared to have been created on a computer and not on the kind of typewriter in use during the 1970s.


CBS strongly defended its story. It wasn't until a week later — after Killian's former secretary said she believed the memos were fake — did the news division admit they were questionable.


Burkett admitted this weekend to CBS that he lied about obtaining the documents from another former National Guard member, the network said. CBS hasn't been able to conclusively tell how he got them, or even definitely tell whether they're fakes or not. But the network has given up trying to defend them.


"Based on what we now know, CBS News cannot prove that the documents are authentic, which is the only acceptable journalistic standard to justify using them in the report," Heyward said. "We should not have used them."


The Associated Press could not immediately reach Burkett for comment. Rather was set to interview Burkett Monday night on CBS' evening news program.


Heyward told The Associated Press it was not clear what, if any, disciplinary action would be taken against CBS News employees. Besides tainting the network's flagship broadcast, "60 Minutes," the report was a damaging blow to Rather, 72. Some have suggested the scandal, along with the low ratings of the "CBS Evening News," could hasten Rather's retirement.


"Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully," Rather said.


Alex Jones, director of Harvard University's Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, said it appeared to be an honest mistake by CBS, not a willful attempt to deceive. But he said the network was too slow to respond.


"I think that their delaying and obvious resistance to acknowledge the evident realities has kept the story alive a lot longer than it needed to be and was a lot more damaging to CBS than it needed to be," he said.


For "60 Minutes," it's the biggest ethical mess since the 1995 incident captured in the movie "The Insider," which depicted the newsmagazine caving to pressure from CBS lawyers and not airing a whistleblowing report from an ex-tobacco executive.


Jones said questions will probably center on the story's producer, Mary Mapes. She's one of the network's top investigators and broke the story of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal photos. Her immediate boss is Josh Howard, recently named executive producer of the "60 Minutes" Wednesday edition.


White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the White House appreciated CBS's expression of regret but that there were still serious questions about Burkett.

"Bill Burkett, who CBS now says is their source, in fact is not an unimpeachable source as was previously claimed," McLellan said. "Bill Burkett is a source who has been discredited and so this raises a lot of questions. There were media reports about Mr. Burkett having senior level contacts with the Kerry campaign."

The Kerry campaign has said it had nothing to do with the story.

Burkett, a Democrat, sent an e-mail last month to several Texas Democrats, saying he had passed along information to former Georgia senator and Kerry supporter Max Cleland about information that would counter criticism of Kerry's Vietnam War service.

Cleland said Monday that he does "not have any knowledge" about documents used to support the "60 Minutes" story.

Heyward told The AP he has "no reason to believe either the Kerry campaign or the Bush campaign was involved in this."

"A lot of reporting went into this story," Heyward said. "It's not as if one person's account was taken at face value."

The call for an independent review was reminiscent of CNN's "Tailwind" scandal in 1998. The cable network retracted a story that the U.S. military had used nerve gas in Laos during the Vietnam war.

CNN appointed independent panels to look into the "Tailwind" story and the missed election calls of 2000. Both panels helped to restore trust in the network and resulted in real changes to the networks' operation, said Tom Johnson, CNN's chief executive at the time.

"As with all professions, we screw up at time," Johnson said. "We need to admit it when we do."

The so-called Killian documents indicated he was being pressured to "sugarcoat" the performance ratings of a young Bush, then the son of a former Texas congressman, and that Bush failed to follow orders to take a physical. Killian died in 1984.

Heyward said he did not think CBS' story was the result of any bias against Bush. The National Guard service story was "a legitimate area of inquiry" that several news organizations were pursuing, he said.

"The story of how this happened is going to be a much more interesting story than the veracity of these documents," Jones said, "and I hope CBS will tell it."
 
Last edited:
That's usually why people fake documents because there aren't any real ones that say what they want because they don't exist and aren't true.
 
U2democrat said:
just because the documents were fraud doesn't mean the contents are.

Do you want news sources perpetuating stories for which they have no evidence??

I'll take a dozen swift boat veterans to a fake document any day.
 
Scarletwine said:
I'd say his secretary is collaborative evidence enough.

:up:

The documents may be false...but I still think there is validity to the alegations.

The whole campaign has come down to swift boat captains and a national guard secretary!

:rolleyes:
 
So a single democracrat secretary means that while the documents may be fake, their intention is real. This is postmodern bullshit artistry at its finest, along the lines of "It's the truth because although its fake, it tells part of a bigger truth".
 
LOL... If a "credible" news organization starts using forgeries with false accuations to push stories then we might as well accept all tabloids as mainstream media. Facts be damned if Col. Staudt's reputation is brought down or he's made to look like an ass. That's the man mentioned by pseudo Killian, in the forged documents, who told Killian to "sugarcoat" things.

Of course to some people. Any means necessary to bring down Bush. Right?

I think its sad that people justify the use of forgeries to attack/ critique a President/ person. If Rather wanted to make a hit piece, then he should have gonr to the secretary in teh frist place. Of course, her interview wouldn't have had as big or as negative an impact those "memos" had. CBS/ Rahter just got even more pathetic.
 
Last edited:
A_Wanderer said:
So a single democracrat secretary means that while the documents may be fake, their intention is real. This is postmodern bullshit artistry at its finest, along the lines of "It's the truth because although its fake, it tells part of a bigger truth".

LOL. And if this had been something Bush had been caught faking on Kerry the people here would be all over it like stink on shit instead of trying to make excuses.
 
Rather was trying to be a good journalist and do a story. His problem was that he didn't fully question the motives behind his "unnamed source" for these documents. If we attack Rather, we should attack Novak for the same thing. A Republican outed the wife of a Democratic rival as a CIA agent and rather than questioning the motive, Novak ran it as is, risking the country and Valerie Plame's life -- much harsher than the documents in this case.

And it still doesn't answer the big question: WHERE WAS BUSH? Even he hasn't been able to answer that question after years of denying he did anything wrong. PROVE IT!

Texans for Truth will pay $50,000 to anyone who can prove Bush served in Alabama. The money, after several weeks, is still up for grabs.
 
Hmm, interesting - the obviously fake documents are run but it was the fault of ignorance and not bias by Rather and CBS that let it happen.

On an unrelated topic a journalist ran a story that had more damaging effects but this one helped Republicans therefore we should forget about the fake documents and attack Bush.

Simple really.
 
Dan Rather and CBS obviously cut corners to air a critical story regarding Bush. It came back to bite them in the ass. They owe Bush an apology. If Kerry had been the target instead of Bush there would be a hundred thousand outraged iberals marching on the capital calling for investigative hearings.
 
Outing a CIA agent for political gain is NEVER right, and Novak should no longer have his job... Novak should have been fired, but CNN won't do that because he gets them ratings.

Anyone who says Dan Rather wasn't aware the documents were suspect at best is absolutely kidding themselves. This isn't some network lackey... this is Dan F'ing Rather. He should at least be suspended, it not fired. But again... CBS won't do that, because he gets them ratings.

Maybe it's all a vast right wing conspiracy led by Bill O'Reilly and Ruper Murdoch :madspit:
 
sharky said:
Rather was trying to be a good journalist and do a story. His problem was that he didn't fully question the motives behind his "unnamed source" for these documents. If we attack Rather, we should attack Novak for the same thing. A Republican outed the wife of a Democratic rival as a CIA agent and rather than questioning the motive, Novak ran it as is, risking the country and Valerie Plame's life -- much harsher than the documents in this case.

And it still doesn't answer the big question: WHERE WAS BUSH? Even he hasn't been able to answer that question after years of denying he did anything wrong. PROVE IT!

Texans for Truth will pay $50,000 to anyone who can prove Bush served in Alabama. The money, after several weeks, is still up for grabs.

Two words: Honorable Discharge


Get over it.
 
MaxFisher said:
Dan Rather and CBS obviously cut corners to air a critical story regarding Bush. It came back to bite them in the ass. They owe Bush an apology. If Kerry had been the target instead of Bush there would be a hundred thousand outraged iberals marching on the capital calling for investigative hearings.

CBS won't appologize to Bush. Their statement was heavily laced with "we are a victim".




What will be interesting is the developing story on the connection between the fake memo and the Kerry campaign.
 
nbcrusader said:


Two words: Honorable Discharge

+ and a whole lot of black marker. dont forget the black marker.

that this is even an 'issue' is comical but...
 
MaxFisher said:
Dan Rather and CBS obviously cut corners to air a critical story regarding Bush. It came back to bite them in the ass. They owe Bush an apology. If Kerry had been the target instead of Bush there would be a hundred thousand outraged iberals marching on the capital calling for investigative hearings.

Really? Because I still haven't seen any apologies from the news organizations that let those Swift Boats guys run their mouths and pass that off as truth. Many reporters were dupped into thinking those guys were impartial when they obviously weren't.

And NB -- honorable discharge? So what? Bush still has not proven that he ever set foot on an Alabama base other than to get his teeth checked. Prove he was there with documents and collect the $50,000.
 
But the Swift Boat Vets accusations have not been adequately countered, Kerry did actually meet with North Vietnamese officials and did level charges against those he served with that were lies. The questions about his medals are in my opinion just as valid as those questioning Bush's guard duty.
 
sharky said:
And NB -- honorable discharge? So what?


The Honorable Discharge creates the presumption that GWB completed his service.

The burden of proof rests on those who continue to believe that he should not have received an honorable discharge (and no using fake memos :shame: ).
 
Re: Oh, this will be rich

nbcrusader said:

The link seems not to work (but I think you are referring to this page: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-09-20-cbs-documents_x.htm )

Still, these stories do not tie the Kerry campaign to the fake memos. They state that the source (Burkett) wanted to talk to the Kerry campaign in exchange of handing the documents over to CBS. CBS agreed with that, so CBS contacted the Kerry campaign. There were no actions on the Kerry campaign on this, they were the ones who were called. It does not look good on CBS, but I don't see where the Kerry campaign can be tied with these documents...

From the same USA Today article you quoted:
But Burkett said Monday that his contact with Lockhart was indeed part of an "understanding" with CBS. Burkett said his interest in contacting the campaign was to offer advice in responding to Republican criticisms about Kerry's Vietnam service. It had nothing to do with the documents, he said.

"My interest was to get the attention of the national (campaign) to defend against the ... attacks," Burkett said, adding that he also talked to former Georgia senator Max Cleland and Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean during the past 45 days. "Neither the Democratic Party or the Kerry campaign had anything to do with the documents," he said.
 
Back
Top Bottom