Rather, Dan

919 bak

color below

==

Dan Rather an early victim of thugswarm; Roger Stone, MRC, NRO, PJ media, blogs, Drudge, Freepers Gannon (Leadership Inst, freeper, rove, hannity, Moonie, Liddy, National Press Club, Plame); Fox, Fedsoc MscDougald Womble SE Lgl Fdn], Sinclair, Corsi, Sean Spicer?! must have been much later.

Moonves wanted to bomb CBS News and start from scratch "entertaining, more upbeat, fun")p 170

https://books.google.com/books?id=E6xSE4M1TqsC

The Rise of the Blogosphere

By Aaron Barlow

Greenwood Publishing Group, 2007

much on mapes, old media vs new; no reserach on the substance on the issues (ie did not try to defend, instant attack decision made), just fonts (and the speed and volume makes the author womder of attack was pre-pkg.

guk

https://yyy.theguardian.com/film/2016/mar/03/dan-rather-robert-redford-made-me-look-better-in-truth

...

The report was a disaster: because the documents used to prove the allegations could not be authenticated, and may have been outright forgeries, the story had to be retracted. After that, heads rolled. Careers were destroyed, the image of journalists was badly tarnished, and bloggers – the ones who discovered that the documents seemed to have been typed with Microsoft Word, a program that did not exist in the early 70s – got to celebrate bringing down one of the most powerful names in US news: long-time CBS anchor Dan Rather.

At the time, Rather said that, had he known what he later knew about the documents, he would not have aired the story. However, he later said this retraction was coerced. He stepped down as anchor in 2005, when it became clear that his contract would not be renewed. He left the network entirely one year later. To all intents and purposes, the controversy shipwrecked an otherwise brilliant career....

...Though the film is based on Mapes’s memoir, the conclusions one can draw from it are ambiguous. It can be viewed as a puff piece that whitewashes the controversy by lionising a woman who dared speak truth to power and was punished for her efforts by the gutless suits who had taken over the network. In this version, Mapes may have used flawed journalism to get to the truth, but in the end she got the story right: Bush received special treatment and mysteriously vanished from the military records for an entire year. But it can also be viewed as a film depicting a woman so determined to humiliate the president that she failed to nail the story.

...

Rather despises the higher-ups at CBS for the way they handled “Memogate”, accusing them of abandoning the network’s vaunted tradition of standing by its news division. To this day, he insists his team got the basic story right. “Bush, in his youth, through his father’s political influence, got put in a ‘champagne unit’ of the National Guard that ensured he did not go to Vietnam. After he got into the National Guard, he countermanded an order to take a physical, and then disappeared for a year. The sons of the less privileged were sent into the green jungle hell to die. He got a pass.”

But what about those tell-tale documents? “The process included controversial documents,” Rather says without hesitation. “But no one has ever proved that the documents are not what they purport to be. [Critics] could not attack the basic facts. No one in the Bush family has ever denied the two basic facts. Those who did not like the story picked its weakest point to attack. They changed the conversation.”

....

==

2012?

https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/truth-or-consequences/

see bak

...By all rights, Rather, who turns 81 this year, should be enjoying a few victory laps at the close of a remarkable career. And he would be, except for one report that he will never forget, because no one will ever let him: the botched 60 Minutes segment in 2004 on George W. Bush’s Texas Air National Guard service. The report, which lasted fifteen minutes, forever damaged Rather’s reputation and ended his network TV career after forty years. Its claims were potentially explosive—that Bush had received preferential treatment to enter the National Guard in 1968 in order to avoid the Vietnam draft and that he had then shirked his duty without repercussion. As evidence, Rather produced six documents that described the alleged political pressure Bush’s commanding officer was under to “sugarcoat” possibly embarrassing moments in Bush’s record, specifically his failure to show up for a flight physical and his loss of flight status. In a presidential campaign that had become a referendum on who had the credibility to take control of the quagmire in Iraq, Rather’s report could have seriously damaged Bush’s reelection effort. But he went at the king—and he missed.

Almost as soon as the broadcast aired, a swarm of right-wing blogs assailed Rather’s documents, claiming their typeface and spacing was inconsistent with any known typewriter of the early seventies. Within days CBS was reeling as Bush allies accused Rather and his longtime producer, Mary Mapes, of using forgeries to tip a presidential election in favor of the Democrats. Twelve days after the story aired, CBS backed down, forced Rather to apologize, and established a special panel to investigate what went wrong. Forty-three days later, Bush was reelected, beating Senator John Kerry by a two-point margin in the pivotal swing state of Ohio. By the time Mapes and three other producers were ousted by CBS, the Bush National Guard story was dead and buried, with Rather’s reputation as the tombstone.

Eight years later, Bush is back in Texas, keeping a low profile and building his presidential library. Rather is still a newsman, hosting a program called Dan Rather Reports on HDNet, a niche cable and satellite channel. But he is also a man who cannot stop reliving his worst moment. This month he will publish Rather Outspoken: My Life in News, his fourth memoir but the first since his downfall. Not surprisingly, he uses the book to defend the details of his report, sharpening his ax for Bush, as well as former colleagues at CBS and its parent company at the time, Viacom, whom Rather believes caved under political pressure from the Bush White House.

“The story we reported has never been denied by George W. Bush, by anyone in his close circles, including his family,” says Rather. “They have never denied the bulwark of the story, the spine of the story, the thrust of the story.” (In fact, Bush officials have indeed denied it, repeatedly. In a conversation I had with former White House director of communications Dan Bartlett in 2007, he told me, “We believe the story is inaccurate, both the general thrust of it and the questionable sources they used.”)

Rather tried making his case in a 2007 lawsuit against his former bosses, but it was thrown out of court two years later. Nonetheless, he remains convinced that he did nothing wrong. “I believed at the time that the documents were genuine,” Rather says, “and I’ve never ceased believing that they are genuine.”

This is nearly impossible to know. The documents were Xerox copies, which in forensics is a dead end—nothing can be proved, or disproved, without an original. Since the report, Rather has hired lawyers and private investigators to get to the bottom of the mystery, to no avail. Strangely, he has made only one attempt to contact the man who initially gave the documents to CBS, the former Guardsman and West Texas rancher Bill Burkett, who, after initially lying about where he got them, told a dubious tale of receiving them from shadowy characters at a cattle show in Houston—and then went stone silent. Burkett refused to talk to Rather.

But the CBS documents that seem destined to haunt Rather are, and have always been, a red herring. The real story, assembled here for the first time in a single narrative, featuring new witnesses and never-reported details, is far more complex than what Rather and Mapes rushed onto the air in 2004. At the time, so much rancorous political gamesmanship surrounded Bush’s military history that it was impossible to report clearly (and Rather’s flawed report effectively ended further investigations). But with Bush out of office, this is no longer a problem. I’ve been reporting this story since it first broke, and today there is more cooperation and willingness to speak on the record than ever before. The picture that emerges is remarkable. Beyond the haze of elaborately revised fictions from both the political left and the political right is a bizarre account that has remained, until now, the great untold story of modern Texas politics. For 36 years, it made its way through the swamps of state government as it led up to the collision between two powerful Texans on the national stage.

And by the time it was over, no one—not Dan Rather, not George W. Bush—would be left unbloodied.

...

==

https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/dan-rather-thoroughly-dismantles-sinclair-broadcastings-orwellian-propaganda

==

http://www.alternet.org/media/lie-lie-lie-dan-rather-shreds-wsj-editor-reluctance-call-out-trumps-dishonesty

Legendary CBS newsman Dan Rather lit into the Wall Street Journal’s editor-in-chief for saying he was reluctant to call out obvious lies by Donald Trump by saying one had to consider the president-elect’s “moral intent.”

On Sunday’s Meet The Press, WSJ’s Gerard Baker was asked about Trump’s penchant to blurt or tweet things off the top of his head that have no basis in reality. According to the Baker, calling those things a “lie” would be going too far.

“I’d be careful about using the word, ‘lie.’” Baker said. “‘Lie’ implies much more than just saying something that’s false. It implies a deliberate intent to mislead…I think if you start ascribing a moral intent, as it were, to someone by saying that they’ve lied, I think you run the risk that you look like you are, like you’re not being objective.”

On Facebook, Rather blasted Baker by opening with “A lie, is a lie, is a lie.”

“Journalism, as I was taught it, is a process of getting as close to some valid version of the truth as is humanly possible. And one of my definitions of news is information that the powerful don’t want you to know,” Rather wrote. He continued:

“It is not the proper role of journalists to meet lies—especially from someone of Mr. Trump’s stature and power—by hiding behind semantics and euphemisms. Our role is to call it as we see it, based on solid reporting. When something is, in fact, a demonstrable lie, it is our responsibility to say so,” he continued. “As I have said before and will say as long as people are willing to listen, this is a gut check moment for the press. We are being confronted by versions of what are claimed to be ‘the truth’ that resemble something spewed out by a fertilizer-spreader in a wind tunnel. And there is every indication that this will only continue in the Tweets and statements of the man who will now hold forth from behind the Great Seal of the President of the United States.”

Rather concluded by warning news consumers, “You as the paying, subscribing public, can use your leverage and pocketbooks to keep those who should be honest brokers of information, well, honest."

==

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/cbs-bans-ads-dan-rather-832635

redford Truth

==

NEW YORK – The typography expert who played a key role in ending the career of CBS News anchor Dan Rather has told WND he has strong suspicions the Obama birth certificate released by the White House is fraudulent.

Joseph M. Newcomer, who exposed the “Killian documents” as fraudulent in 2004, has told WND the Obama birth certificate released by the White House April 27 is a “highly suspicious” document that deserves professional forensic examination.

==

5/14 analysis:  Rather contributor to legendary 60 minutes news magazine, became famous for ambush interview, but legit investigative journalism.  Presumably for a long time his reputation for toughness and integrity, as well as the rep, popularity and presumably the profitability of show protected him.  CBS had mixed record of stading up to attacks? Tobacco, food lion?

 Note the formidable array of attackers from the almost respectable Weekly St'd, but what brought him down was bloggers, presumably before he or almost anyone else understood their potential.

By the following day, questions about the authenticity of the documents were being publicized by the Drudge Report, which linked to the analysis at the Powerline blog in the mid-afternoon,^[58] and the story was covered on the website of the magazine The Weekly Standard^[59][60] and broke into mass media outlets, including the Associated Press and the major television news networks. It also was receiving serious attention from conservative writers such as National Review Online's Jim Geraghty.^{[61]  ESCALATOR}

In final analysis they got the story right, but relied on recreated documents? Left has a bad habit of doing the honorable thing for the greater good, but right does not ? (eg gore steps aside in 2000)

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/the-untold-story-behind-dan-rathers-departure-from-cbs_b122529

==

boss 

Rather prouducer mary mapes had broke abu ghraib (rather had done tough interview of b1 1988 as vp

col killian said tough to sugercoat b2 bad actions as nat guard pilot

harry macdougal said forgeries b/c font too new (not tried; KR organized blogger attack on dan; protege dan bartlett wrangled ex-guard in defense.

The initial analysis appeared in posts by "Buckhead," a username of Harry W. MacDougald, an Atlanta attorney who had worked for conservative groups such as the Federalist Society and the Southeastern Legal Foundation and who had helped draft the petition to theArkansas Supreme Court for the disbarment of President Bill Clinton.^[56] MacDougald questioned the validity of the documents on the basis of their typography

extensive chronology http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=dan_rather

“It was clear he wanted to use his size to project a strong or menacing sense of himself,” says Wayne Slater, Austin bureau chief for the Dallas Morning News. Indeed, Allbaugh’s propensity to turn bright red when enraged led Bush to give Allbaugh the nickname “Pinky.” But if anyone other than W. dared to call him by that name, Allbaugh would whirl around and growl, “I will pinch your head off,” and make pinching motions with his fingers.

His loyalty to Bush, a man who prizes that quality above all others in his subordinates, was unquestioned. “There isn’t anything more important than protecting him and the first lady,” Allbaugh once told the Washington Post from the governor’s office. “I’m the heavy, in the literal sense of the word.”

Ironically, the other heavy was a small, refined woman by the name of Harriet Miers, hired, as was Allbaugh, by the tough Dallas lawyer Jim Francis, then Bush’s campaign chairman and a longtime friend of Bush’s father. As general counsel, Miers was in charge of fending off legal problems that threatened Bush with adverse publicity.

In 1999, Allbaugh left the governor’s office to take over the daily management of Bush’s presidential campaign. He headed up a staff of 180, controlled spending, and spoke with Bush several times a day.

One potential problem facing the campaign was the rumor that Bush’s father had pulled strings to get his candidate son out of Vietnam service and into a safe Texas Air National Guard unit in 1968. There were even reports that Bush went AWOL long before his compulsory flying days were up.

The key players in keeping the lid on the National Guard story were Allbaugh and Miers. In 2004, a year before Bush nominated Miers for the Supreme Court, Allbaugh told The New York Times, “She’s the kind of person you want in your corner when all the chips are being played.” Assigned to “investigate” Bush’s Guard service, Miers gave the governor a clean bill of health.

As part of his job, Allbaugh communicated directly with Adjutant General Daniel James III, the head of the Texas National Guard (later appointed by President George W. Bush to run the federal Air National Guard). What remains unclear is whether he ordered James to dispose of any old Bush military files that might prove embarrassing, an order former Lieutenant Colonel Bill Burkett, head of a Guard efficiency task force, claims to have heard Allbaugh issue in a conversation on James’s speakerphone. Whatever was or was not done, the unexplained gaps in Bush’s National Guard service never became a central topic in the 2000 election. With his “iron triangle” of Rove on strategy, Hughes on P.R., and Allbaugh as the enforcer (plus an assist from the U.S. Supreme Court), Bush triumphed.

==

BIO

http://www.danrather.com/story/

my early teens I came down with rheumatic fever. At the time, the only treatment was protracted bed rest. To guard against permanent and perhaps fatal heart damage, I was literally bedridden for several years. The radio was my constant companion. I listened daily to the "Murrow Boys:" Edward R. Murrow, Eric Sevareid, Charles Collingwood, and the rest of his excellent eyewitness reporters. These journalists brought the battles of World War II vividly to life for a boy who couldn't do anything more strenuous than look out his window. It was my first understanding of "boots on the ground" reporting. You had to go with where the news was made.

scrawny kid cut brush, football

The man who hired me was a guy named Cal Jones, who had come to KHOU from KDKA. Cal had come from one of the best broadcast news outfits in the country, but KDKA was in Pittsburgh. He knew a lot about television, and nothing about hurricanes. When a large storm system started forming in the Gulf of Mexico in September 1961, I had to convince Cal to send me to the National Weather Bureau station in Galveston. As the storm, now named Carla, neared the Gulf Coast, I suggested that we superimpose an area map over the radar image so we could show where it might hit. This is common practice today, but it had never been done before. We all gasped when we first saw it. By now Carla was huge, and the combined image slammed home the enormity of the threat to the Texas coast. As a result, evacuations were ordered for Galveston and the surrounding communities. Many lives were saved. I broadcast from the weather bureau throughout the storm, earning myself the nickname "Hurricane Dan."

After that, I was offered a job at CBS News. I started there in February 1962, and continued to March of 2005, covering everything from the Kennedy Assassination, to the space race, to political conventions, to wars in Vietnam, Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and the horrific attack on New York City on September 11.

After leaving CBS, I signed on with Mark Cuban and HDNet in 2006. Putting on an hour of Dan Rather Reports every week means I am constantly scrambling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy

Further information: Killian documents authenticity issues and George W. Bush military service controversy

Charles Johnson's animated GIF image comparing what CBS claimed to be a 1973-era typewritten memo with a proportional-spaced 2004-era Microsoft Word document made with default settings

The Killian documents controversy (also referred to as Memogate, Rathergate or Ra^thergate^[1]) involved six documents critical of President George W. Bush's service in the Air National Guard in 1972–73. Four of these documents^[2] were presented as authentic in a 60 Minutes Wednesday broadcast aired by CBS on September 8, 2004, less than two months before the 2004 Presidential Election, but it was later found that CBS had failed to authenticate the documents.^[3][4][5] Subsequently, several typewriter and typography experts concluded the documents are forgeries,^[6][7] as have some media sources. No forensic document examiners or typography experts have authenticated the documents, and this may not be technically possible without original documents.^[8] The provider of the documents, Lt. Col. Bill Burkett, claims to have burned the originals after faxing copies to CBS.^[9]

CBS News producer Mary Mapes obtained the copied documents from Burkett, a former officer in the Texas Army National Guard, while pursuing a story about the George W. Bush military service controversy. The papers, purportedly made by Bush's commander, the late Lieutenant Colonel Jerry B. Killian, included criticisms of Bush's service in the Guard during the 1970s. In the 60 Minutes segment, anchor Dan Rather stated: "We are told [the documents] were taken from Lieutenant Colonel Killian’s personal files"^[10] and incorrectly asserted that "the material" had been authenticated by experts retained by CBS.^[11]

The authenticity of the documents was challenged within hours on Internet forums and blogs, with questions initially focused on alleged anachronisms in the documents' typography and content soon spreading to the mass media.^[12] Although CBS and Rather defended the authenticity and usage of the documents for a two-week period, continued scrutiny from other news organizations and independent analysis of the documents obtained by USA Today and CBS raised questions about their validity and led to a public repudiation on September 20, 2004. Rather stated, "if I knew then what I know now – I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question,"^[13] and CBS News President Andrew Heyward said, "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. We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret."^[13][14]

Several months later, a CBS-appointed panel led by Dick Thornburgh and Louis Boccardi criticized both the initial CBS news segment and CBS' "strident defense" during the aftermath.^[15] CBS fired producer Mary Mapes, several senior news executives were asked to resign, and CBS apologized to viewers. The panel did not specifically consider whether the documents were forgeries but concluded that the producers had failed to authenticate them and cited "substantial questions regarding the authenticity of the Killian documents." ?

[edit] Background and timeline

The memos, allegedly written in 1972 and 1973, were obtained by CBS News producer Mary Mapes and freelance journalist Michael Smith, from Lt. Col. Bill Burkett, a former US Army National Guard officer.^[16] Mapes and Dan Rather, among many other journalists, had been investigating for several years the story of Bush's alleged failure to fulfill his obligations to the National Guard.^[17]

Burkett had received publicity in 2000, after making and then retracting a claim that he had been transferred to Panama for refusing "to falsify personnel records of [then-]Governor Bush",^[18][19] and in February 2004, when he claimed to have knowledge of "scrubbing" of Bush's TexANG records.^[20][21] Mapes was "by her own account [aware that] many in the press considered Burkett an 'anti-Bush zealot,' his credibility in question."^[22]

Mapes and Smith made contact with Burkett in late August, and on August 24 Burkett offered to meet with them to share the documents he possessed, and later told reporters from USA Today "that he had agreed to turn over the documents to CBS if the network would arrange a conversation with the Kerry campaign,"^[23] a claim substantiated by emails between Smith and Mapes detailing Burkett's additional requests for help with negotiating a book deal, security, and financial compensation.^[24] During the last week of August, Mapes asked Josh Howard, her immediate superior at CBS, for permission to facilitate contact between Burkett and the Kerry campaign, and Howard and Mapes subsequently disputed whether such permission was obtained.^[25]

Two documents were provided by Burkett to Mapes on September 2 and four others on September 5, 2004. At that time, Burkett told Mapes that they were copies of originals that had been obtained from Killian's personal files via Chief Warrant Officer George Conn, another former member of the TexANG.^[26]

Mapes informed Rather of the progress of the story, which was being targeted to air on September 8 along with footage of an interview with former Lieutenant Governor of Texas Ben Barnes, who would publicly state for the first time his opinion that Bush received preferential treatment to get into the National Guard.^[27] Mapes had also been in contact with the Kerry campaign several times between late August and September 6, when she spoke with senior Kerry advisor Joe Lockhart regarding the progressing story. Lockhart subsequently stated he was "wary" of contact with Mapes at this stage, because if the story were true, his involvement might undermine its credibility, and if it were false, "he did not want to be associated with it."^[28] Lockhart called Burkett on September 6 at the number provided by Mapes, and both men stated they discussed Burkett's view of Kerry's Presidential campaign strategy, not the existence of the documents or the related story.^[29]

[edit] Content of the memos

The documents allegedly showed that Bush disobeyed orders while in the Guard, and had undue influence exerted on his behalf to improve his record, and included the following:

1. An order directing Bush to submit to a physical examination.^[30]
2. A note that Killian had grounded Bush from flying due to "failure to perform to USAF/TexANG standards," and for failure to submit to the physical examination as ordered. Killian also requested that a flight inquiry board be convened, as required by regulations, to examine the reasons for Bush's loss of flight status.^[31]
3. A note of a telephone conversation with Bush in which Bush sought to be excused from "drill." The note records that Bush said he did not have the time to attend to his National Guard duties because he had a campaign to do (the Senate campaign of Winton M. Blount in Alabama).^[32]
4. A note (labeled "CYA" for "cover your ass") claiming that Killian was being pressured from above to give Bush better marks in his yearly evaluation than he had earned. The note attributed to Killian says that he was being asked to "sugarcoat" Bush's performance. "I'm having trouble running interference [for Bush] and doing my job."^[33]

USA Today also received copies of the four documents used by CBS,^[34] reporting this and publishing them the morning after the CBS segment, along with two additional memos.^[35] Burkett was assured by USA Today that they would keep the source confidential.^[36]

[edit] CBS investigations prior to airing the segment

Mapes and her colleagues began interviewing people who might be able to corroborate the information in the documents, while also retaining four forensic document experts, Marcel J. Matley, James J. Pierce, Emily Will, and Linda James, to determine the validity of the memos.

On September 5, CBS interviewed Killian's friend Robert Strong, who ran the Texas Air National Guard administrative office. Among other issues covered in his interview with Rather and Mapes, Strong was asked if he thought the documents were genuine. Strong stated, "they are compatible with the way business was done at the time. They are compatible with the man that I remember Jerry Killian being."^[37] Strong had first seen the documents twenty minutes earlier and also said he had no personal knowledge of their content;^[38] he later claimed he had been told to assume the content of the documents was accurate.^[39]

On September 6, CBS interviewed General Robert "Bobby" Hodges, a former officer at the Texas Air National Guard and Killian's immediate superior at the time. Hodges declined CBS' request for an on-camera interview, and Mapes read the documents to him over the telephone. According to Mapes, Hodges agreed with CBS's assessment that the documents were real, and CBS reported that Hodges stated that these were "the things that Killian had expressed to me at the time."^[40] However, according to Hodges, when Mapes read portions of the memos to him he simply stated, "well if he wrote them, that's what he felt," and he claims he never confirmed the validity of the content of the documents. General Hodges later asserted to the investigatory panel that he told Mapes that Killian had never, to his knowledge, ordered anyone to take a physical and that he had never been pressured regarding Lieutenant Bush, as the documents alleged.^[41] Hodges also claims that when CBS interviewed him, he thought the memos were handwritten, not typed,^[42] and following the September 8 broadcast, when Hodges had seen the documents and heard of claims of forgery by Killian's wife and son, he was "convinced they were not authentic" and told Rather and Mapes on September 10.^[43]

[edit] Response of the document examiners

Prior to airing, all four of the examiners responded to Mapes' request for document analysis, though only two to Mapes directly:^[44]

• Emily Will noted discrepancies in the signatures on the memos, and had questions about the letterhead, the proportional spacing of the font, the superscripted "th" and the improper formatting of the date. Will requested other documents to use for comparison.^[45]
• Linda James was "unable to reach a conclusion about the signature" and noted that the superscripted "th" was not in common use at the time the memos were allegedly written; she later recalled telling CBS, "the two memos she looked at 'had problems,'"^[45]
• James Pierce concluded that both of the documents were written by the same person and that the signature matched Killian's from the official Bush records. Only one of the two documents provided to Pierce had a signature. James Pierce wrote, "the balance of the Jerry B. Killian signatures appearing on the photocopied questioned documents are consistent and in basic agreement," and stated that based on what he knew, "the documents in question are authentic."^[46] However, Pierce also told Mapes he could not be sure if the documents had been altered because he was reviewing copies, not original documents.^[47]
• Marcel Matley's review was initially limited to Killian's signature on one of the Burkett documents, which he compared to signatures from the official Bush records. Matley "seemed fairly confident" that the signature was Killian's. On September 6, Matley was interviewed by Rather and Mapes and was provided with the other four documents obtained from CBS (he would prove to be the only reviewer to see these documents prior to the segment). Matley told Rather "he could not authenticate the documents due to the fact that they were poor quality copies."^[48] In the interview, Matley told Rather that with respect to the signatures, they were relying on "poor material" and that there were inconsistencies in the signatures, but also replied "Yes," when asked if it would be safe to say the documents were written by the person who signed them.^[49]
• Both Emily Will and Linda James suggested to Mapes that CBS contact typewriter expert Peter Tytell. Associate producer Yvonne Miller left him a voicemail on September 7; he returned the call at 11 am on September 8 but was told they "did not need him anymore."^[50]

[edit] September 8 segment and initial reactions

The segment, entitled "For The Record," aired on 60 Minutes Wednesday on September 8.^[51] After introducing the documents, Rather said, in reference to Matley, "We consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic."^[52]

The segment introduced Lieutenant Robert Strong's interview, describing him as a "friend of Killian" (without noting he had not worked in the same location and without mentioning he had left the TexANG prior to the dates on the memos). The segment used the sound bite of Strong saying the documents were compatible with how business was done but did not include a disclaimer that Strong was told to assume the documents were authentic.^[53]

In Rather's narration about one of the memos, he referred to pressure being applied on Bush's behalf by General Buck Staudt, and described Staudt as "the man in charge of the Texas National Guard." Staudt had retired from the guard a year and a half prior to the dates of the memos.

Interview clips with Ben Barnes, former Speaker of the Texas House, created the impression "that there was no question but that President Bush had received Barnes' help to get into the TexANG," because Barnes had made a telephone call on Bush's behalf, when Barnes himself had acknowledged that there was no proof his call was the reason, and that "sometimes a call to General Rose did not work." Barnes' disclaimer was not included in the Segment.^[54]??

[edit] Internet skepticism spreads

Within hours of the segment, the authenticity of the documents was questioned by posters on Free Republic, a conservative Internet forum, and discussion quickly spread to various weblogs in the blogosphere, principally Little Green Footballs and Power Line.^[55] The initial analysis appeared in posts by "Buckhead," a username of Harry W. MacDougald, an Atlanta attorney who had worked for conservative groups such as the Federalist Society and the Southeastern Legal Foundation and who had helped draft the petition to the Arkansas Supreme Court for the disbarment of President Bill Clinton.^[56] MacDougald questioned the validity of the documents on the basis of their typography, writing that the memos were "in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatino or Times New Roman," and alleging that this was an anachronism: "I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old. This should be pursued aggressively."^[57] ^FEDSOC

By the following day, questions about the authenticity of the documents were being publicized by the:{ Drudge Report, which linked to the analysis at the Powerline blog in the mid-afternoon,^[58] and the story was covered on the website of the magazine The Weekly Standard^[59][60] and broke into mass media outlets, including the Associated Press and the major television news networks. It also was receiving serious attention from conservative writers such as National Review Online's Jim Geraghty.^[61]  ^ESCALATOR

}: 

By the afternoon of September 9, Charles Foster Johnson of Little Green Footballs had posted his attempt to recreate one of the documents using Microsoft Word with the default settings.^[62] The September 9 edition of ABC's Nightline made mention of the controversy, along with an article on the ABC News website.^[63] Although the CBS story is front-page news in the New York Times and Washington Post on September 9, and on two-thirds of a full page within USA Today's news section (which notes the newspaper has also obtained copies of the documents), "There is no discussion in the major news media about whether the memos are authentic."^[12] CBS published the reaction of Killian's son, Gary, to the documents, reporting that Gary Killian questioned one of the memos but stated that others "appeared legitimate" and characterized the collection as "a mixture of truth and fiction".^[64] In an interview with Fox News, Gary Killian expressed doubts about the documents' authenticity on the basis of his father's positive view of Bush.^[65]

[edit] CBS's response and widening media coverage

At 5PM on Thursday, September 9, CBS News released a statement saying the memos were "thoroughly investigated by independent experts, and we are convinced of their authenticity",^[66] and stating, "this report was not based solely on recovered documents, but rather on a preponderance of evidence, including documents that were provided by unimpeachable sources,"^[67] In an interview, CBS News spokesperson Kelli Edwards said, "CBS verified the authenticity of the documents by talking to individuals who had seen the documents at the time they were written."^[68] The statement was replaced later that day with one that omitted this claim.^[69]

The first newspaper articles questioning the documents appeared on September 10 in The Washington Post,^[66] The New York Times^[70] and in USA Today via the Associated Press.^[71] The Associated Press reported, "Document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines...said she was 'virtually certain' [the documents] were generated by computer. Lines said that meant she could testify in court that, beyond a reasonable doubt, her opinion was that the memos were written on a computer."^[71]

Also on September 10, the Dallas Morning News reported "that the officer named in one memo as exerting pressure to "sugarcoat" Bush's military record was discharged a year and a half before the memo was written.^[72] The paper cited a military record showing that Col. Walter "Buck" Staudt was honorably discharged on March 1, 1972, while the memo cited by CBS as showing that Staudt was interfering with evaluations of Bush was dated August 18, 1973."^[73]

In response to the media attention, a CBS memo said the documents were "backed up not only by independent handwriting and forensic document experts but by sources familiar with their content" and insisted that no internal investigation would take place.^[74] On the CBS Evening News, on September 10, Rather defended the story and noted that its critics included "partisan political operatives."^[75]

• In the broadcast, Rather stated Marcel Matley "analyzed the documents for CBS News. He believes they are real," and broadcast additional excerpts from Matley's September 6 interview showing Matley's agreement that the signatures appeared to be from the same source. Rather did not report that Matley had referred to them as "poor material", that he had only opined about the signatures, or that he had specifically not authenticated the documents.
• Rather presented footage of the Strong interview, introducing it by stating Robert Strong "is standing by his judgment that the documents are real," despite Strong's lack of standing to authenticate them and his brief exposure to the documents.^[75]
• Rather concluded by stating, "If any definitive evidence to the contrary of our story is found, we will report it. So far, there is none."^[75][76]

In an appearance on CNN that day, Rather asserted "I know that this story is true. I believe that the witnesses and the documents are authentic. We wouldn't have gone to air if they would not have been."

However, within CBS, Josh Howard spoke at length on the telephone with typewriter expert Peter Tytell. Howard later told the Panel that the discussion was, "an 'unsettling event' that shook his belief in the authenticity of the documents." Producer Mapes dismissed Tytell's concerns.^[77]

A former Vice President of CBS News, Jonathan Klein, dismissed the allegations of bloggers, suggesting that the "checks and balances" of a professional news organization were superior to individuals sitting at their home computers "in their pajamas."^[78] In response, some conservative bloggers started to refer to themselves as Pajamahadeen.

[edit] CBS' defense, apology

As media coverage widened and intensified, CBS at first attempted to produce additional evidence to support its claims. On September 11, a CBS News Segment stated that document expert Phillip Bouffard thought the documents "could have been prepared on an IBM Selectric Composer Typewriter, available at the time."^[79][80] (The Selectric Composer was introduced in 1966 for typesetting and generation of camera-ready copy;^[81] according to IBM archives describing this specialised equipment "To produce copy which can be reproduced with 'justified', or straight left-and right-hand margins, the operator types the copy once and the composer computes the number of spaces needed to justify the line. As the operator types the copy a second time, the spaces are added automatically.")^[82] Bouffard's comments were also cited by the Boston Globe, in an article entitled, "Authenticity backed on Bush documents."^[83] However the Globe soon printed a retraction regarding the title.^[84] CBS noted that although General Hodges was now stating he thought the documents were inauthentic, "we believed General Hodges the first time we spoke with him." CBS reiterated: "we believe the documents to be genuine."^[79]

By September 13, CBS' position had shifted slightly, as Rather acknowledged "some of these questions come from people who are not active political partisans," and stated that CBS "talked to handwriting and document analysts and other experts who strongly insist the documents could have been created in the 70s,"(emphasis added)^[85] The analysts and experts cited by Rather did not include the original four experts consulted by CBS. Rather instead presented the views of Bill Glennon and Richard Katz. Glennon, a former typewriter repairman with no specific credentials in typesetting beyond that job, was found by CBS after posting several defenses of the memos on blogs including Daily Kos and Kevin Drum's blog hosted at Washington Monthly.^[86] However, in the actual broadcast, neither interviewee asserted that the memos were genuine.

As a result, some CBS critics begin to accuse CBS of expert shopping.^[87]

[edit] 60 Minutes Wednesday, one week later

The original document examiners, however, continued to be part of the story. By September 15, Emily Will was publicly stating that she had told CBS that she had doubts about both the production of the memos and the handwriting prior to the segment, and in interviews, Linda James stated that the memos were of "very poor quality" and that she did not authenticate them,^[88] telling ABC News, "I did not authenticate anything and I don't want it understood that I did."^[46]

In response, 60 Minutes Wednesday released a statement suggesting that Will and James had "misrepresented" their role in the authentication of the documents and had played only a small part in the process.^[89] CBS News concurrently amended their previous claim that Matley had authenticated the documents, saying instead he had only authenticated the signatures.^[90] On CNN, Matley stated he had only verified that the signatures were "from the same source," not that they were authentically Killian's: "When I saw the documents, I could not verify the documents were authentic or inauthentic. I could only verify that the signatures came from the same source," Matley said. "I could not authenticate the documents themselves. But at the same time, there was nothing to tell me that they were not authentic."^[88]

CBS interviewed Marian Carr Knox, a secretary at Ellington Air Force Base from 1956–1979 and Killian's assistant on the dates of the memos. Although Knox felt the memos reflected the truth about Bush's alleged service failures,^[89] she also stated she did not type the memos, they were not written by Killian, and that she had no firsthand knowledge of Bush's time in the Guard.^[91] Knox said, "The information in here was correct, but it was picked up from the real ones," she said. "I probably typed the information and somebody picked up the information some way or another."^[92] The New York Times' headline, including the phrase "Fake but Accurate," became a widely-used derisive comment from right-leaning critics of CBS.^[93][94]

At this time, Dan Rather first acknowledged there were problems in establishing the validity of the documents used in the report, stating: "If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story."^[95]

CBS also hired a private investigator to look into the matter after the story aired and the controversy began.^[96]

Copies of the documents were first released to the public by the White House.Press Secretary Scott McClellan stated that the memos had been provided to them by CBS in the days prior to the report and that, "We had every reason to believe that they were authentic at that time."^[97]

The Washington Post reported that at least one of the documents obtained by CBS had a fax header indicating it had been faxed from a Kinko's copy center in Abilene, Texas,^[98] leading some to trace the documents back to Burkett.

[edit] CBS states that use of the documents was a mistake

As a growing number of independent document examiners and competing news outlets reported their findings about the documents, CBS News stopped defending the documents and began to report on the problems with their story. On September 20 they reported that their source, Bill Burkett, "admits that he deliberately misled the CBS News producer working on the report, giving her a false account of the documents' origins to protect a promise of confidentiality to the actual source."^[99][100] While the network did not state that the memos were forgeries, CBS News President Andrew Heyward said,

"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. We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret."^[13][14]

Dan Rather stated, "if I knew then what I know now — I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question."^[13]

In an interview with Dan Rather, Burkett admitted that he misled CBS about the source of the documents, and then claimed that the documents came to him from "Lucy Ramirez", whom CBS was unable to contact or identify as an actual person. Burkett said he then made copies at the local Kinko's and burned the original documents.^[36][101]

On September 21, CBS News addressed the contact with the Kerry campaign in its statement: "It is obviously against CBS News standards and those of every other reputable news organization to be associated with any political agenda."^[76] The next day the network announced it was forming an independent review panel to perform an internal investigation.

[edit] Review panel establishe

Soon after, CBS established a review panel "to help determine what errors occurred in the preparation of the report and what actions need to be taken."^[102] Dick Thornburgh, a Republican former governor of Pennsylvania and United States Attorney General under George H.W. Bush, and Louis Boccardi, retired president and chief executive officer and former executive editor of the Associated Press, made up the two-person review board. CBS also hired a private investigator, a former FBI agent named Erik T. Rigler, to gather further information about the story.^[103]

[edit] Findings

On January 5, 2005, the Report of the Independent Review Panel on the September 8, 2004, 60 Minutes Wednesday Segment "For the Record" Concerning President Bush's Air National Guard Service was released.^[104] The purpose of the panel was to examine the process by which the September 8 Segment was prepared and broadcast, to examine the circumstances surrounding the subsequent public statements and news reports by CBS News defending the segment, and to make any recommendations it deemed appropriate. Among the Panel's conclusions were the following:

The most serious defects in the reporting and production of the September 8 Segment were:

1. The failure to obtain clear authentication of any of the Killian documents from any document examiner;
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;
3. The failure of 60 Minutes Wednesday management to scrutinize the publicly available, and at times controversial, background of the source of the documents, retired Texas Army National Guard Lieutenant Colonel Bill Burkett;
4. The failure to find and interview the individual who was understood at the outset to be Lieutenant Colonel Burkett’s source of the Killian documents, and thus to establish the chain of custody;
5. The failure to establish a basis for the statement in the Segment that the documents "were taken from Colonel Killian’s personal files";
6. The failure to develop adequate corroboration to support the statements in the Killian documents and to carefully compare the Killian documents to official TexANG records, which would have identified, at a minimum, notable inconsistencies in content and format;
7. The failure to interview a range of former National Guardsmen who served with Lieutenant Colonel Killian and who had different perspectives about the documents;
8. The misleading impression conveyed in the Segment that Lieutenant Strong had authenticated the content of the documents when he did not have the personal knowledge to do so;
9. The failure to have a vetting process capable of dealing effectively with the production speed, significance and sensitivity of the Segment; and
10. The telephone call prior to the Segment’s airing by the producer of the Segment to a senior campaign official of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry — a clear conflict of interest — that created the appearance of a political bias.

Once questions were raised about the September 8 Segment, the reporting thereafter was mishandled and compounded the damage done. Among the more egregious shortcomings during the Aftermath were:

1. The strident defense of the September 8 Segment by CBS News without adequately probing whether any of the questions raised had merit;
2. Allowing many of the same individuals who produced and vetted the by-then controversial September 8 Segment to also produce the follow-up news reports defending the Segment;
3. The inaccurate press statements issued by CBS News after the broadcast of the Segment that the source of the documents was “unimpeachable” and that experts had vouched for their authenticity;
4. The misleading stories defending the Segment that aired on the CBS Evening News after September 8 despite strong and multiple indications of serious flaws;
5. The efforts by 60 Minutes Wednesday to find additional document examiners who would vouch for the authenticity of the documents instead of identifying the best examiners available regardless of whether they would support this position; and
6. Preparing news stories that sought to support the Segment, instead of providing accurate and balanced coverage of a raging controversy.

[edit] Panel's view of the documents

The Panel did not undertake a thorough examination of the authenticity of the Killian documents, but consulted Peter Tytell, a New York City-based forensic document examiner and typewriter and typography expert. Tytell had been contacted by 60 Minutes producers prior to the broadcast, and had informed associate producer Yvonne Miller and executive producer Josh Howard on September 10 that he believed the documents were forgeries. The Panel report stated, "The Panel met with Peter Tytell, and found his analysis sound in terms of why he thought the documents were not authentic...The Panel reaches no conclusion as to whether Tytell was correct in all respects."^[105]

[edit] Aftermath

The controversy had long-reaching personal, political and legal consequences. In a 2010 issue of :{TV Guide:(style="background-color:#fff200"):}:, Rather's report was ranked #3 on a list of TV's ten biggest "blunders".^[106]

[edit] CBS personnel and programming changes

CBS terminated Mary Mapes and demanded the resignations of 60 Minutes Wednesday Executive Producer Josh Howard and Howard's top deputy, Senior Broadcast Producer Mary Murphy, as well as Senior Vice President Betsy West, who had been in charge of all prime time newscasts. Murphy and West resigned on February 25, 2005,^[107] and after settling a legal dispute regarding his level of responsibility for the segment, Josh Howard resigned on March 25, 2005.^[108]

Dan Rather also resigned as anchorman in 2005. It is unclear whether or not Rather's retirement was directly caused by this incident, although many believe that he had to step down a year earlier than planned.^[109] Les Moonves, CEO of CBS, stated "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 2005." He added, "We believe any further action would not be appropriate."^[110]

CBS was originally planning to show a '60 Minutes' report critical of the Bush administration justification for going to war in Iraq. This segment was replaced with the Killian documents segment. CBS further postponed airing the Iraq segment until after the election due to the controversy over the Killian documents. "We now believe it would be inappropriate to air the report so close to the presidential election," [note contrast to Cit United Hillary scam]CBS spokesman Kelli Edwards said in a statement.^[111]

After the Killian documents controversy, the show was renamed 60 Minutes Wednesday to differentiate it from the original 60 Minutes Sunday edition, and reverted to its original title on July 8, 2005, when it was moved to the 8 p.m. Friday timeslot. It was cancelled in 2005 due to low ratings.

[edit] Mapes and Rather's view of the documents

On November 9, 2005, Mary Mapes gave an interview to ABC News correspondent Brian Ross. Mapes stated that the documents have never been proved to be forgeries. Ross expressed the view that the responsibility is on the reporter to verify their authenticity. Mapes responded with, "I don't think that's the standard." This stands in contrast to the statement of the president of CBS News that proof of authenticity is "the only acceptable journalistic standard." Also in November 2005, Mapes told readers of the Washington Post, "I personally believe the documents are not false," and "I was fired for airing a story that could not definitively be proved false but made CBS's public relations department cringe."^[112] As of September 2007, Mapes continues to defend the authenticity of the documents: "the far right blogosphere bully boys...screamed objections that ultimately proved to have no basis in fact."^[113]

On November 7, 2006, Rather defended the report in a radio interview, and rejected the CBS investigation's findings. In response, CBS spokesman Kevin Tedesco told the Associated Press, "CBS News stands by the report the independent panel issued on this matter and to this day, no one has been able to authenticate the documents in question."^[114]

Dan Rather continues to stand by the story, and in subsequent interviews has articulated that he believes that the documents have never conclusively been proven to be forgeries — and that even if the documents are false, that the underlying story is true.^[115]

[edit] Dan Rather's lawsuit against CBS/Viacom

On September 19, 2007, Dan Rather filed a $70 million lawsuit against CBS and its former corporate parent, Viacom, claiming they had made him a "scapegoat" over the controversy caused by the 2004 "60 Minutes Wednesday" report that featured the Killian documents.^[116] The suit names as defendants: CBS and its CEO, Leslie Moonves; Viacom, Sumner Redstone, chairman of both Viacom and CBS Corporation; and Andrew Heyward, the former president of CBS News.^[117]

In January, 2008, the legal teams for Dan Rather and CBS reached an agreement to produce for Rather's attorneys "virtually all of the materials" related to the case, including the findings of Erik T. Rigler's report to CBS about the documents and the story.^[118]

On September 29, 2009 New York State Appeals Court dismissed Dan Rather's lawsuit and stated that the lower court should have honored CBS's request to throw out the entire lawsuit instead of just throwing out parts.^[119]

[edit] Authentication issues

Main article: Killian documents authenticity issues

No generally recognized document experts have positively authenticated the memos. Since CBS used only faxed and photocopied duplicates, authentication to professional standards is impossible, regardless of the provenance of the originals.

Document experts have challenged the authenticity of the documents as photocopies of valid originals on a variety of grounds ranging from anachronisms of their typography, their quick reproducibility using modern technology, and to errors in their content and style.^[120]

The CBS independent panel report did not specifically take up the question of whether the documents were forgeries, but retained a document expert, Peter Tytell, who concluded the documents used by CBS were most likely produced using modern technology.^[121]

Tytell concluded ... that (i) the relevant portion of the Superscript Exemplar was produced on an Olympia manual typewriter, (ii) the Killian documents were not produced on an Olympia manual typewriter and (iii) the Killian documents were produced on a computer in Times New Roman typestyle [and that] the Killian documents were not produced on a typewriter in the early 1970s and therefore were not authentic.

Dr. David Hailey, director of the Interactive Media Research Labs in the English Department of Utah State University has argued that the Killian documents were not in Times New Roman, and were produced on an unspecified typewriter, though he does not assert their authenticity.^[122]

[edit] Accusations of bias

Some critics of CBS and Dan Rather argued that by proceeding with the story when the documents had not been authenticated, CBS was exhibiting liberal bias and attempting to influence the outcome of the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election. Freelance journalist Michael Smith had emailed Mapes, asking, "What if there was a person who might have some information that could possibly change the momentum of an election but we needed to get an ASAP book deal to help get us the information?" Mapes replied, "that looks good, hypothetically speaking of course."^[123] The Thornburgh-Boccardi report found that Mapes' contact with Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart was "highly inappropriate", and that it "crossed the line as, at a minimum, it gave the appearance of a political bias and could have been perceived as a news organizations' assisting a campaign as opposed to reporting on a story,"^[105] however, the Panel did not "find a basis to accuse those who investigated, produced, vetted or aired the Segment of having a political bias."^[124] In a later interview with The Washington Post, when asked about the issue of political bias, review panel member Louis Boccardi said "bias is a hard thing to prove."^[125] The panel concluded that the problems occurred "primarily because of a rush to air that overwhelmed the proper application of the CBS News Standards".^[126]

Some Democratic critics of Bush suggested that the memos were produced by the Bush campaign to discredit the media's reporting on Bush's National Guard service. The chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Terry McAuliffe, suggested that the memos might have originated with long-time Bush strategist Karl Rove. McAuliffe told reporters on September 10, "I can tell you that nobody at the Democratic National Committee or groups associated with us were involved in any way with these documents," he said. "I'm just saying that I would ask Karl Rove the same question."^[127][128] McAuliffe later pointed out that Rove and another Republican operative, Ralph E. Reed, Jr., had "a known history of dirty tricks," and he asked whether Republican National Committee chairman Ed Gillespie would rule out any involvement by GOP consultant Roger Stone.^[129][130]

 At a community forum in Utica, New York in 2005, U.S. Representative Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) pointed out that the controversy served Rove's objectives: "Once they did that, then it undermined everything else about Bush's draft dodging. ... That had the effect of taking the whole issue away."^[131] After being criticized, Hinchey responded, "I didn't allege I had any facts. I said this is what I believe and take it for what it's worth."^[131]

Rove and Stone have denied any involvement.^[132][133] In a 2008 interview in The New Yorker, Stone said "It was nuts to think I had anything to do with those documents...[t]hose papers were potentially devastating to George Bush. You couldn’t put them out there assuming that they would be discredited. You couldn’t have assumed that this would redound to Bush’s benefit. I believe in bank shots, but that one was too big a risk."^[134]

 See also

	United States portal
	Politics portal
	Journalism portal

• George W. Bush military service controversy
• Questioned document examination

[edit] Footnotes

1. ^ The name "Ra^thergate" is used by people who believe the superscripted "th" glyphs in the memos show that they were produced on a computer. For more information, see the companion article.
2. ^ Two entitled "Memo to File," one "Memorandum," and one "Memorandum for Record," see here [1] for pdf versions at the Washington Post website.
3. ^ Dobbs, Michael and Howard Kurtz (September 14, 2004). "Expert Cited by CBS Says He Didn't Authenticate Papers.". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-14.
4. ^ Ross, Brian and Howard Rosenberg (September 14, 2004). "Document Analysts: CBS News Ignored Doubts.". ABC News. Retrieved 2008-03-14.
5. ^ "CBS ousts 4 over Bush Guard story.". Associated Press. January 10, 2005. Retrieved 2008-03-14.: "Boccardi and Thornburgh found that Mapes had said the documents were authenticated, when in fact she had found only one expert to vouch for only one signature in the memo."
6. ^ Including Peter Tytell and Thomas Phinney, as well as a Joseph Newcomer, a man with 35 years of computer font technology experience. See: Last, Jonathan. "It's Worse Than You Thought". Retrieved 2008-03-10. The Weekly Standard, January 11, 2005, and Cohen, Sandee. Making Headlines, Not Setting Them, creativepro.com, September 23, 2004.
7. ^ Also, Bill Flynn, "one of country's top authorities on document authentication.""Officer's Widow Questions Bush Guard Memos.". ABC News. September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-18. and document expert Sandra Ramsey Lines: "'I'm virtually certain these were computer generated,'" "Bush Guard Memos Questioned". CBS News. September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-12. CBS News, September 10, 2004
8. ^ "Because the memos were copies, Matley said in a recent interview, "there's no way that I, as a document expert, can authenticate them." Kurtz, Howard, et al., "In Rush to Air, CBS Quashed Memo Worries.". The Washington Post. September 19, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-12. The Washington Post, September 18, 2004. Marcel Matley was one of the four document examiners originally retained by CBS to examine the Killian documents.
9. ^ Dave Moniz, Kevin Johnson and Jim Drinkard (September 21, 2004). "CBS backs off Guard story". USA Today. Retrieved 2008-03-18.
10. ^ TB report, p. 137.
11. ^ TB report, p. 137: "This statement was without factual support...It is without question, however, that Matley [the expert referenced] did not authenticate any of the documents in question."
12. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-memmot_11-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-memmot_11-1) Memmot, Mark (September 21, 2004). "Scoops and skepticism: How the story unfolded.". USA Today. Retrieved 2008-03-21.
13. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-rather_statement_12-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-rather_statement_12-1) ^c(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-rather_statement_12-2) ^d(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-rather_statement_12-3) "Dan Rather Statement On Memos". CBS News. September 20, 2005. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
14. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-CBS_statement_on_panel_13-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-CBS_statement_on_panel_13-1) "CBS Names Memo Probe Panel". CBS News. September 22, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
15. ^ "Thornburgh-Boccardi report" (PDF). CBS News. Retrieved 2005-12-21.
16. ^ Burkett, Bill. "What do you say?". Retrieved 2008-03-12. onlinejournal.com, March 19, 2003.
17. ^ See Ripley, Amanda (September 13, 2004). "The X Files Of Lt. Bush: A flurry of contested memos and memories sheds more heat than light on his record". Time Magazine. Retrieved 2008-03-25. and Dobbs, Michael (September 12, 2004). "Gaps in Service Continue to Dog Bush". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-25.
18. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, p. 53.
19. ^ Moniz, Dave; Drinkard, Jim; and Kevin Johnson (September 21, 2004). "Texan has made allegations for years". USA Today. Retrieved 2008-03-13.
20. ^ Bill Burkett (March 19, 2003). "What do you say?". Online Journal. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
21. ^ Michael Rezendes (February 13, 2004). "Doubts raised on Bush accuser". Boston Globe online. Retrieved 2005-12-20.
22. ^ Robinson, Walter V. (December 11, 2005). "Truth and Duty: a distorted lens". The Boston Globe. Retrieved 2008-03-13.
23. ^ Johnson, Kevin; Moniz, Dave; and Jim Drinkard (September 20, 2004). "CBS arranged for meeting with Lockhart". USA Today. Retrieved 2008-03-14.
24. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp. 60–62
25. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp. 64–65
26. ^ Dave Moniz, Kevin Johnson and Jim Drinkard (September 21, 2004). "CBS backs off Guard story". USA Today. Retrieved 2008-03-14.
27. ^ "New Questions on Bush Guard Duty". CBS News. September 8, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-14.
28. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp. 90–91
29. ^ Carl Cameron et al. (September 22, 2004). "Kerry Aide Talked to Bush Guard Docs Figure". FoxNews.com. Retrieved 2008-03-14.
30. ^ "Memorandum, May 4, 1972" (PDF). CBS News. Retrieved 2006-03-17.
31. ^ "Memorandum for Record, August 1, 1972" (PDF). CBS News. Retrieved 2006-03-17.
32. ^ "Memo to File, May 19, 1972" (PDF). CBS News. Retrieved 2006-03-17.
33. ^ "Memo to File, August 18, 1973" (PDF). CBS News. Retrieved 2006-03-17.
34. ^ Moniz, Dave and Drinkard, Jim (2004-09-09). "Guard commander's memos criticize Bush.". USA Today. Retrieved 2008-03-17.
35. ^ "Bush documents obtained by USA TODAY" (PDF). USA Today. Retrieved 2006-03-17.
36. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-usatoday_cbsbacksoff_35-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-usatoday_cbsbacksoff_35-1) Dave Moniz, Kevin Johnson and Jim Drinkard (September 21, 2004). "CBS backs off Guard story". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2005-12-20.
37. ^ "Bush Guard Memos Questioned.". CBS News, Associated Press. September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2005-12-20.
38. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, p.88
39. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, p. 129.
40. ^ Michael Dobbs and Mike Allen (September 9, 2004). "Some Question Authenticity of Papers on Bush". Washington Post. Retrieved 2004-12-20.
41. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg 103
42. ^ Ralph Blumenthal and Jim Rutenberg (September 12, 2004). "An Ex-Officer Now Believes Guard Memo Isn't Genuine". New York Times. Retrieved 2005-12-20. Registration required.
43. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg 12
44. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp 84–86
45. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-rushtoair_44-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-rushtoair_44-1) Howard Kurtz, Michael Dobbs and James V. Grimaldi (September 19, 2004). "In Rush to Air, CBS Quashed Memo Worries.". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-17.
46. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-cbsnews.com_45-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-cbsnews.com_45-1) CBS/AP (September 15, 2004). "GOP Slams CBS on Bush Memos". CBS News. Retrieved 2008-03-17.
47. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, p. 86
48. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp 98–99
49. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg 101
50. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp. 108–110
51. ^ "Transcript of CBS segment" (PDF). CBS News. Retrieved 2010-05-24.
52. ^ David Folkenflik (September 13, 2004). "Rather's doubters unmoved". The Baltimore Sun. Retrieved 2008-03-17.
53. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp. 128–129
54. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg. 130
55. ^ Howard Kurtz (2004-09-20). "After Blogs Got Hits, CBS Got a Black Eye". Washington Post.
56. ^ "Nation & World: "Buckhead," who said CBS memos were forged, is a GOP-linked attorney". The Seattle Times. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
57. ^ Wallsten, Peter (September 18, 2004). "Buckhead, who said CBS memos were forged, is a GOP-linked attorney". The Seattle Times. Retrieved 2008-03-17.
58. ^ Grossman, Lev (December 19, 2004). "Blogs have their day.". Time Magazine. Retrieved 2008-03-18.
59. ^ Hayes, Stephen F. (September 9, 2004). "Is it a hoax?". The Weekly Standard. Retrieved 2008-03-18.
60. ^ Boehlert, Eric (September 10, 2004). "Swift Boat flacks attack CBS". Salon.com. Retrieved 2008-03-18.
61. ^ Jim Geraghty (September 10, 2004). "About that Bush document.". National Review Online. Retrieved 2008-03-18.
62. ^ Wallsten, Peter. "No disputing it, blogs are major players." LA Times, September 12, 2004. "”My Microsoft Word version, typed in 2004, is an exact match for the documents trumpeted by CBS News as ‘authentic,’ “ Johnson wrote, posting images of his creation and the CBS document."
63. ^ "Officer's Widow Questions Bush Guard Documents". ABC News. September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-19.
64. ^ "New Scrutiny Of Bush's Service". CBS News. September 9, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
65. ^ Rosen, James (September 10, 2004). "FOX Interviews Commander's Son". Fox News. Retrieved 2008-03-25.
66. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-somequestion_65-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-somequestion_65-1) Michael Dobbs and Mike Allen (September 10, 2004). "Some Question Authenticity of Papers on Bush". The Washington Post. p. A01. Retrieved 2008-03-18.
67. ^ "CBS Stands By Bush-Guard Memos". CBS News. September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-18.
68. ^ Moore, Art (September 9, 2004). "CBS News denies Bush docs forged.". WorldNetDaily. Retrieved 2008-03-18.
69. ^ "The Note". ABC News. September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2007-03-20.
70. ^ Seelye, Katharine Q. and Rutenberg, Jim (September 10, 2004). "Commander's Son Questions Memos on Bush's Service". The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-03-18.
71. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-APauthenticity_70-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-APauthenticity_70-1) "Authenticity of new Bush military papers questioned.". USA Today. Associated Press. September 10l 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-19.
72. ^ Slover, Pete (September 11, 2004). "More challenges about whether Bush documents are authentic". Dallas Morning News, Seattle Times. Retrieved 2008-03-24.
73. ^ Kurtz, Howard (September 11, 2004). "Rather Defends CBS Over Memos on Bush". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-25.
74. ^ "Bush Guard Memos Questioned". CBS News. September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-12.
75. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-Report_1D_74-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-Report_1D_74-1) ^c(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-Report_1D_74-2) "CBS Evening News Transcript" (PDF). CBS News. September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
76. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-look_back_75-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-look_back_75-1) "A Look Back At The Controversy". CBS News. January 11, 2005. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
77. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg 174
78. ^ Last, Jonathan (September 27, 2004). "What Blogs Have Wrought". The Weekly Standard. Retrieved 2008-03-20.
79. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-Report_1E_78-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-Report_1E_78-1) "CBS Evening News Transcript" (PDF). CBS News. September 11, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
80. ^ Latour, Francie; Rezendes, Michael (September 11, 2004). "Further scrutiny lessens doubts on Bush memos / Some skeptics now say IBM typewriter could have been used". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
81. ^ IBMcomposer.org
82. ^ IBM.com
83. ^ Latour, Francie; Rezendes, Michael (September 11, 2004). "Authenticity backed on Bush documents". The Boston Globe. Retrieved 2007-03-25.
84. ^ Globe repudiates title of September 11 article."For the Record". The Boston Globe, September 15, 2004. September 15, 2004. Retrieved 2007-03-25.
85. ^ "CBS Evening News Transcript" (PDF). CBS News. September 13, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
86. ^ Kevin Drum (September 10, 2004). "Killian Memo Update". Washington Monthly. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
87. ^ Emery, Noemie (September 21, 2004). "Dear Mr. Rather,". The Weekly Standard. Retrieved 2008-03-24.
88. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-CNN1_87-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-CNN1_87-1) "CBS' experts say they didn't authenticate Bush memos". CNN. September 15, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
89. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-60min_statement_88-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-60min_statement_88-1) "CBS News affirms its intention to continue to report all aspects of the story" (PDF). CBS News. September 15, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
90. ^ "CBS Defends Bush Memos". CBS News. September 15, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
91. ^ Robert Crowe and Julie Mason (September 15, 2004). "Ex-staffer: Bush records are fake; Secretary to military officer says she never typed the memos". The Houston Chronicle: p. A7.
92. ^ Maureen Balleza and Kate Zernike (September 15, 2004). "Memos on Bush Are Fake but Accurate, Typist Says". The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-03-24.
93. ^ "The fake but accurate media.". The Weekly Standard. September 27, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-24.
94. ^ Taranto, James (September 15, 2004). "All the News that's Fake but Accurate.". The Wall Street Journal Online. Retrieved 2008-03-15.
95. ^ Kurtz, Howard (September 16, 2004). "Rather Concedes Papers Are Suspect; CBS Anchor Urges Media to Focus On Bush Service". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-25.
96. ^ Hagan, Joe (February 27, 2005). "CBS News' Boss Hired Private Eye To Source Memos". The New York Observer. Retrieved 2008-03-24.
97. ^ "Scott McClellan briefing, September 15, 2004, at". Georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov. 2004-09-15. Retrieved 2010-05-24.
98. ^ Dobbs, Michael (September 15, 2004). "CBS Guard Documents Traced to Tex. Kinko's". The Washington Post. p. A06. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
99. ^ Jarrett Murphy (February 11, 2009). "CBS Statement On Bush Memos". CBS News. Retrieved 2011-07-27.
100. ^ Rutenberg, Jim and Prendergast, Mark J. (September 20, 2004). "CBS Asserts It Was Misled by Ex-Officer on Bush Documents". The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-03-25.
101. ^ "CBS Statement On Bush Memos". CBS News. September 20, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
102. ^ "CBS News Statement On Panel". CBS News. September 22, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
103. ^ Hagen, Joe (March 13, 2005). "Dan Rather's Long Goodbye: Who Done It?". The New York Observer. Retrieved 2008-03-24.
104. ^ Dick Thornburgh and Louis D. Boccardi, Review of the Independent Review Panel. CBS News: January 5, 2005
105. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-Thornburgh-Boccardi_report.2C_pg.175_104-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-Thornburgh-Boccardi_report.2C_pg.175_104-1) Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg. 175
106. ^ Battaglio, Stephen. "The Blunder Years", TV Guide, November 1, 2010, Pages 20-21
107. ^ Jacques Steinberg (February 26, 2005). "2 Involved in Flawed Report at CBS Resign". The New York Times: p. B18.
108. ^ "Final Figure in '60 Minutes' Scandal Resigns". Fox News. Associated Press. March 25, 2005. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
109. ^ "Who killed Dan Rather?". Salon.com. March 9, 2005. Retrieved 2007-03-23.
110. ^ Carter, Bill (January 11, 2005). "Analysis: Post-Mortem of CBS's Flawed Broadcast". The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-03-24.
111. ^ Zernike, Kate (2004-09-25). "'60 Minutes' Delays Report Questioning Reasons for Iraq War". The New York Times. Retrieved 2007-09-20.
112. ^ Mapes, Mary (November 11, 2005). ""Final Days at "60 Minutes"". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-25.
113. ^ Mapes, Mary (2007-09-20). "Courage for Dan Rather". The Huffington Post. Retrieved 2008-01-22.
114. ^ Baker, Mike (2006-11-07). "Rather defends discredited 60 Minutes segment in radio interview". Associated Press. Retrieved 2006-11-10.
115. ^ "Transcript of WPTF interview with Dan Rather". The News & Observer. Retrieved 2006-11-09.
116. ^ "Rather files $70 million lawsuit against CBS Newsman alleges network made him ‘scapegoat’ for discredited story". Associated Press. September 20, 2007. Retrieved 2008-03-24.
117. ^ A PDF copy of the suit can be found on at [2].
118. ^ Gilette, Felix (January 23, 2008). "CBS Agrees to Hand Over 'Rigler Report' to Rather's Legal Team". The New York Observer. Retrieved 2008-03-24.
119. ^ Appeals court dismisses Dan Rather's suit vs. CBS^{[dead link]}
120. ^ Kurtz, Howard Document Experts Say CBS Ignored Memo 'Red Flags' Washington Post'.' Retrieved April 2006.
121. ^ "Thornburg-Boccardi Report, Appendix 4" (PDF). CBS News. Retrieved 2005-12-21.
122. ^ David Hailey, PhD. "The Second of Two Examinations of the "Killian Memos"". Retrieved 2006-03-20.
123. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg. 62
124. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi Report, pg. 211
125. ^ The Washington Post, January 11, 2005; Page A01, washingtonpost.com
126. ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi Report, pg. 221
127. ^ Noelle Straub (September 11, 2004). "CBS; Guard memos are authentic; Dems rip Bush's service". The Boston Herald: p. 10.
128. ^ Robert Sam Anson (September 20, 2004). "Who Is Buckhead? Kerry Assaulter Seemed Prepped". New York Observer: p. 1. via Lexis/Nexis
129. ^ Matthew Continetti (October 4, 2004). "The Case of the Phony Memos". The Weekly Standard. via Lexis/Nexis
130. ^ Stephen Dinan and Bill Sammon (September 22, 2004). "Kerry camp rejects CBS link". The Washington Times: p. A01. Retrieved 2006-03-20.
131. ^ ^a(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-Brooks_130-0) ^b(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy#cite_ref-Brooks_130-1) Brooks, Paul (February 22, 2005). "Hinchey sees hand of Rove". Times Herald-Record.
132. ^ "Rove rejects charges he was CBS source". The Washington Times. September 22, 2004. Retrieved 2005-12-21.
133. ^ Kasindorf, Martin; Benedetto, Richard (September 21, 2004). "Parties lob accusations over suspect papers". USA Today. Retrieved 2005-12-21.
134. ^ Toobin, Jeffrey (June 2, 2008). "The Dirty Trickster". The New Yorker. Retrieved 2008-06-14.

[edit] External links

[edit] Killian documents PDF files

These are the Killian documents supplied to CBS Reports by Bill Burkett:

• Memorandum, May 4, 1972 (CBS News)
• Memo to File, May 19, 1972 (CBS News)
• Memorandum For Record, August 1, 1972 (CBS News)
• Memo to File, August 18, 1973 (CBS News)
• USA Today Killian documents (USA Today, six memos in one.pdf file)

[edit] Bush documents from the TexANG archives

Page 31 is a 3 November 1970 memo from the office of Lt Col Killian on promotion of Lt Bush:

• Bush enlistment documents (USA Today)

[edit] 60 Minutes II, September 8 transcript

• Transcript of CBS segment

[edit] Statements of the CBS document examiners

• Marcel B. Matley, September 14, 2004
• James J. Pierce, September 14, 2004
• Bill Glennon, September 13, 2004
• Richard Katz, September 13, 2004

[edit] The Thornburgh-Boccardi Report

• "The Complete Independent Panel Report on CBS News" (PDF). Retrieved 2006-03-18.
• "Exhibits and Appendices for report". CBS News. January 10, 2005. Retrieved 2006-03-18.

[edit] Document analysis

• A Pentagon memo next to one of CBS's Killian memos — The Washington Post, September 14, 2004
• The Paper Trail: A Comparison of Documents The Washington Post, September 18, 2004
• Graphic comparison of all the CBS memos with officially released Killian memos The Washington Post, September 19, 2004
• "Blog-gate" Columbia Journalism Review
• "CJR Fallacies", response by Joseph Newcomer
• "Are the Bush Documents Fake?", analysis by Richard Polt

[edit] Overview Timeline at USA Today

• "Scoops and skepticism: How the story unfolded" — timeline from USA Today — September 21, 2004

[edit] Further reading

• Truth and Duty: The Press, the President, and the Privilege of Power (ISBN 0-312-35195-X), by Mary Mapes, November 2005, St. Martin's Press, ISBN 0-312-35195-X

victim of blogsphere?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newswar/tags/rathergate.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3052618

JC Big lies on W

right refuses to debate real labor leaders b/c wd blow elite scam p9

Quecreek mine GB2 takes a bow, despite just having cut laws to protect miners 14

16 seems to say most Am get 1K tax cut, but actually top 1% get 45K, mid get 265,  60% at bot get 95

The CBS Memo story -- Buckhead and rathergate.com

Blogger Who Faulted CBS Documents Is Conservative Activist (AKA. Freeper) (9/17)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

GOP Activist Made Allegations on CBS Memos (Buckhead) (9/18)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

rathergate.com! (9/22)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

GOP + rathergate.com = vast wingnut conspiracy (9/24)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Edited on Sun Oct-24-04 12:00 PM by starroute One group currently using the services of Response Dynamics is the College Republic National Committee, which appears near the top left corner of the chart. In October 2001, the CRNC separated from the Republican Party, became a Section 527 organization, and launched into direct-mail fundraising targeted at elderly donors. (http://www.publicintegrity.org/527/report.aspx?aid=10 ) However, the CRNC had a long and not altogether savory history prior to that. In 1965-70, their on-and-off executive director was Morton Blackwell. I confess I'd never heard of Blackwell before his stunt with the purple heart band-aids at the Republican convention, but he is a person of some significance on the right -- a close associate of Paul Weyrich, co-founder (with Weyrich, Richard Viguerie, and Jerry Falwell) of the Moral Majority, and executive director since 1991 of the secretive Council for National Policy. During the Nixon years, the CRNC became notorious for offering courses in dirty tricks and political sabotage, to the point where George H.W. Bush, then chairman of the Republican National Committee, had to promise to investigage and get to the bottom of the charges. At this time, CRNC executive director was none other than Karl Rove. In 1972, Rove ran for chairman against Terry Dolan in a campaign so dirty that Bush had to step in and declare Rove the winner. Lee Atwater succeeded Rove as executive director. Eventually, Rove would introduce Atwater to George H.W. Bush and he would become Bush's 1988 campaign manager. Atwater died in 1991, but not before repenting of the many dirty tricks he had pulled along the way. Morton Blackwell went on to found the Leadership Institute, dedicated to training young Republican activists. Karl Rove is its best-known graduate. This group of dirty tricksters has two areas of connection to the CBS memos flap. One is throughRoger Stone, rumored to be the source of the memos, who was a close friend of Terry Dolan (who died of AIDS in 1986.) The other is through Mike Krempasky, who set up a "rathergate.com" site so quickly after the story broke as to raise suspicions that he had inside knowledge. Krempasky is connected in multiple ways with Roger Stone and was also employed from 1999 to 2002 by Blackwell's Leadership Institute.

HMMM

January 17, 2004 - Michael Moore "Deserter" charge, Wesley Clark supports Moore's right to say it 5 days later. http://www.factcheck.org/article131.html

End of January 2004 - Kerry says Bush's TANG records not important. Terry McAuliffe says Bush was AWOL.

February 10, 2004 - White House does document dump and says it is the full release of Bush's TANG records--but later on many more real docs show up.

February 12, 2004 - Bill Burkett appears on Hardball and with James Moore tells the story of how in 1997 he heard Joe Albaugh from Bush's office talk to Adjutant General David James on speaker phone, to tell him that Dan Bartlett and Karen Hughes will be down to "clean up" then-Governor Bush's TANG files. This trip was ostensibly to write a book but really to prepare for his 1998 and 2000 runs and make sure nothing embarrassing was in the records. Chris Matthews asks Burkett to swear that he is telling the truth, as if he were in court. Burkett does. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6055867/

After February 12, 2004 - Rove and Bartlett, certainly alarmed at Burkett's appearance on Hardball, presumably hatch phony TANG documents plot and create forgeries with slight mistakes on the wrong typewriter, an electric typewriter. If it was them, they would have used the Olympia Manual memos Mrs. Knox said she originally typed for Killian in 1972 and 1973. They would then have called Stone and asked him to get them to Burkett, the perfect patsy for their scheme.

After February 12, 2004 - Bill Burkett says he starts receiving calls from a lady with a Latin accent named "Lucy Ramirez", who could be Nydia Stone, the Cuban wife of GOP dirty trickster Roger Stone. "Lucy" tells Burkett she has previously unknown memos from Col. Killian and that he Burkett should get them and give them to the Kerry campaign. She also convinces him to burn the originals so she can never be identified. Burkett thinks she is trying to keep an old sexual affair with Killian secret. Burkett arranges with "Lucy" to meet her at the huge Houston Livestock Show.

March 3, 2004 - According to Burkett's second story, Unknown Man asks for him at Livestock Show, finds him and hands him envelope containing the CBS TANG forgeries without saying a word (source: Bill Burkett USA TODAY) USA TODAY confirms that ANOTHER person, an unnamed woman, said Burkett gave her papers that day which she held for him until the event was over in a box. Burkett and USA Today know who this woman is. So the likelihood is that Burkett is telling the truth when he said he was given the envelope by the Unknown Man. Burkett has never been given a photo of Stone to ID.

March to August, 2004 - For whatever reason, Burkett sits on the memos for five months until the Swift Boat ads enrage him and he calls up Max Cleland. Cleland tells him he'll talk to Kerry but no one calls Burkett back on the documents. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6055867/

August 2004 - Mary Mapes, CBS Producer following up on TANG/AWOL, asks Burkett if there is anything new on the TANG story. He tells her of the Killian memos, thinking them real and that CBS News would have them checked by experts.

August 2004 - Roger and Nydia Stone miss first Republican Convention since 1968, taking a vacation in Spain. Stone says "It's pathetic that we are fighting over John Kerry's war record in Vietnam and George W. Bush's service in the National Guard given that there are a bunch of Islamic maniacs who want to wipe us off the face of the earth. I'll be on a beach in Barcelona." http://www.jewsweek.com/bin/en.jsp?enPage=BlankPage&enDisplay=view&enDispWhat=object&enD ispWho=Article%5El1391&enZone=Articles&enVersion=0

Sept. 8, 2004 - First CBS report on Killian memos. To protect a lady's honor, Southern Gentleman Burkett intimates that an officer named Conn gave him the TANG memos but Conn denies it. They report Dan Bartlett told John Roberts in the morning that "I have no reason to doubt their authenticity" so many times in the same way Roberts notes it in his book. Presumably this was the comment decided upon by he and Rove to make that day. Bartlett also says, "The memorandum in your possession shows that he spoke to the commander who made that order to talk about his personal situation and the fact that he is going to Alabama. So at every step of the way, President Bush was meeting his requirement. Granted permission to meet his requirement. And that's why President Bush was honorably discharged." Because Bartlett had used the forged copies to say that Bush fulfilled his TANG requirements, Roberts told his superiors, the memos are authenticated. Had Roberts been "played"? The trap, whoever forged the documents, was ready to close on Rather and destroy the potency of the TANG/AWOL issue.

September 8, 2004 - Within 18 minutes of the end of the TANG report, posts from "Buckhead" appear on FreeRepublic.com, saying he thinks something is phony. Within a few hours, Buckhead is putting forth forensic analyses of fonts and proportional spacing, claiming the memos are forged and actually word-processed. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?more=25054500;name=Buckhead http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?more=22146919;name=Buckhead http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?more=22029527;name=Buckhead

September 9, 2004 - Media trumpets forgery claim, discrediting Rather and whole TANG issue.

September, 10 2004 - Jeff Gannon receives a "scoop" from unknown person that Mapes was the CBS producer responsible. BEFORE writing his own scoop, Gannon tells Sean Hannity about Mapes. Hannity: HANNITY: "Now, Jeff Gannon, who is a terrific Washington bureau chief and White House correspondent for Talon News, actually shot me an e-mail today, and he's about to break a story in an exclusive about these CBS documents." HANNITY: "And apparently they're also, according to Jeff Gannon, the -- Talon News -- this woman, Mary Mapes, this Dallas producer, is under pressure for the [CBS] network, and now there's doubts about their authenticity has taken place." [The Sean Hannity Show, 9/10/04]

Sept. 11, 2004 - Rather interviews Mrs. Knox who tells him she typed memos like the docs but those are not them. She had an Olympia manual with only a primitive superscript "th", not an electric typewriter. Total corporatist media uproar over Rather not backing down. Burkett now admits the hint Conn gave him the memos was a ruse, that he was still trying to protect the honor of Lucy Ramirez. Press uses this change in story to discredit him. (help me find transcript link)

Sept. 11, 2004 - Dallas Morning News reveals inclusion of Staudt in 1973 Killian is incorrect and proves it to be a forgery. This was one of the main tip-offs inserted presumably by Bartlett and Rove to expose the forgery. http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/washington/elections2004/stories/091104dnpolguard.1 17c8.html

Sept. 15, 2004 - Marian Knox, Killian's secretary, recounts errors in TANG forgeries for the Dallas Morning News, including the inclusion of the Staudt name in the forged "sugar-coat" memo of 1973 and the word "billets" instead of "barracks". http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/091504dnpolnatguard.1185eb4ae.html

Sept. 17, 2004 - Another Gannon story on Mapes with supposed inside source at CBS: "Sooner of (sic) later something like this was going to happen. When you see how hard they've been working this National Guard story, you know they weren't going to come up empty-handed one way or another."

Sept. 20, 2004 - Kerry starts attacking Bush heavily on Iraq War, gives 4-point plan for Iraq. Memo coverage dies down, as all pundits echo desire to get to issues of the present rather than dwelling on the past.

Sept. 20, 2004 - CBS News retracts claim of authenticity for Killian memos. Burkett admits a fellow Guard officer did not give him documents and tells of Lucy and the Unknown Man giving him the memos. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/15/60II/main643768.shtml

Sept. 21, 2004 - NY Post reports rumors that Roger Stone got the forgeries to Burkett. He has no comment. MacCauliffe repeats the Stone charge and asks the White House and RNC what they know about Stone and the documents. Stone later denies allegation but never provides an alibi for where he was on March 3, 2004, the day the Unknown Man gave Bill Burkett the envelope with the TANG Forgeries inside. http://www.democrats.org/news/200409210003.html http://www.democrats.org/news/200409210001.html

Sept. 21, 2004 - USA Today article on both parties accusing the other of forging the memos. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-09-21-cbs-parties_x.htm

Sept. 22, 2004 - Former New York Times columnist William Safire, quoting "U.S. Criminal Code, Chapter 63, Section 1343," wrote that a federal offense might actually have been committed when Rather and Mapes tried to hide their deception. "Whoever, having devised any scheme or artifice to defraud transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. At the root of what is today treated as an embarrassing blunder by duped CBS journalists," Safire wrote, "may turn out to be a felony by its faithless sources." (This was no doubt written by Safire a few days before the NY Post article on Roger Stone being the rumored source of the forgeries) http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/9/22/221524.shtml

Sept. 23, 2004 - Gannon also went after Mapes in this 9/23 Talon News story--now scrubbed: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1220416/posts

Sept. 24 2004 - After lawsuit, White House releases 1971 document showing the TANG Killian memos could have had superscript type in 1972. Republicans had been attacking TANG forgeries because they had superscript "th" and by withholding this document they had let Rather twist in the wind. Lost in the whole uproar is the fact that Mrs. Knox verified that there were original memos that she typed (on a manual with only a primitive superscript capability) and someone must have forged the CBS copies. http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=324

Sept. 2004 - GOP House members, presumably getting call from White House, or seeing Stone rumor reports, DROP calls for a Wire Fraud investigation, as does the retiring William Safire. (could use a link on original story of GOP calling for Wire Fraud investigation)

Sept. 2004 - Media ignores Stone angle and trumpets the Fall of Dan Rather. No further mention of Stone at all.

February 2005 - Bill Burkett still stands by his story of Lucy Ramirez and the Unknown Man. ((need help with finding link on this one too)

Let's work together and fill in the Missing Links!

http://www:{.libertypost.:(style="background-color:#ffff66;"):}:org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=86847

 ===

What follows is a timeline based on the research of different diaries here at dKOS.  The timeline reveals the pattern of dirty tricks perpetrated by Karl Rove and Roger Stone, and how the TANG Forgeries fit right into their M.O. of forging documents with zingers in them and then tipping off the press to blow apart their political opponents. Some of this has been proved and some is conjecture, and it should be noted that no one has yet shown the picture above to Burkett to see if he can ID Stone. Plus someone else might have seen Stone at the Livestock Show--if it was him--because the Unknown Man supposedly asked around as to where he could find Burkett. So we need to dig in here and find out what else is out there to put into this timeline. It could lead to the truth.

TANG Forgeries Timeline or "Lucy, You Got A Lot Of 'Splainin To Do!"

1972 - 1973 - Col. Killian has Mrs. Knox type numerous memos for his personal file on the problem of George W. Bush and James Bath skipping their medical exam, not showing up for duty and trying to get special favors.  The memos are typed on an old Olympia manual, which had an early "th" superscript--one unlike the forged CBS Killian memos.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/091504dnpolnatguard.1185eb4ae.html

1972 - Roger Stone and Chuck Colson work together in the Dirty Tricks Department of the Nixon White House. "Stone first made news in the Nixon Watergate scandal, when it was revealed that the 19-year-old apprentice McCarthyite had infiltrated George McGovern's 1972 presidential campaign as part of CREEP's sabotage plan."  http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Feb04/Ireland0221.htm

1986 - Rove allegedly bugs his own office to smear Democrat Mark White in Texas Governor race. FBI Agent Rampton investigates but no charges are ever brought.  The bug's battery use indicated it had operated for ONLY 15 MINUTES before it was discovered.  http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2000-09-29/pols_naked3.html

http://www.documentaryfilms.net/Reviews/BushsBrain/

1990 - Rove destroys Jim Hightower in TX by having FBI Agent Rampton investigate all TX Democrat elected officials. http://www.documentaryfilms.net/Reviews/BushsBrain/

1992 - Phony Buchanan baby story hurts Pat in 1992 and in 2000, when he thought about the Reform Party. Mattie Lovlar betrays Stone and says they worked on it together.  Stone denies it with his typical statement: "If there was a flyer, it wasn't from Roger Stone."

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0420,barrett,53586,6.html

1994 - Rove apparently starts whispering campaign about TX Governor Ann Richards being a coke-snorting lesbian.  George W. Bush wins.http://www.documentaryfilms.net/Reviews/BushsBrain/

1996 - Stone's sex ad story in Enquirer and Star.  Also reported that the Stones frequented DC sex club called The Capitol Couple.  Stones deny the allegation, blaming a sick and disgruntled individual, but admits reveal that his own credit card paid for the ad.http://www.southcoasttoday.com/daily/09-96/09-13-96/a04wn026.htm

1996 - New Republic: Dana Milbank: "There were photos of her in a black negligee and him bare-chested, and there was an enumeration of her personal measurements. Stone said he had been set up, but he was forced to step down as an adviser to the Dole campaign."  Stone goes on Today Show to deny it all. http://www.tnr.com/010300/milbank010300.html

1996 - According to someone who worked with him, in 1996 Karl Rove created flyers viciously attacking his own candidate, Harold See, running for Alabama State Supreme Court. The resulting backlash against the Democrat allowed See to win the race.  http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_10_10.php#003688

2000 - According to James Moore, after losing NH primary, Rove apparently resorts to push-polling on McCain in the SC primary, intimating that McCain was mentally unstable, his wife was a drug addict and he had a black love-child from a prostitute.  Bush campaign denies responsibility. http://www.documentaryfilms.net/Reviews/BushsBrain/

2000 - According to Jeffrey Toobin, Miami riot led by Stone, MacDougald also summoned by Baker.  Nydia and her mother Olga help recruit Cubans for the Courthouse Riot and march advertised on Radio Mambi. From Dec. 4, 2000, Time Magazine: The organizers in the RV outside, who G.O.P. protesters have told Time were led by hardball Washington strategist Roger Stone, had phone banks churning out calls to Miami Republicans, urging them to storm downtown, while Stone directed the action with a walkie-talkie. (Stone could not be reached for comment.)  - Jeffrey Toobin, Too Close to Call

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375761071/103-7025856-3836615?%5Fencoding=UTF8

http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/2000/1204/cover_riot.html

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0405,barrett,50745,1.html

Nov. 13, 2000 - Stone starts campaign to recall Democratic FL State Supreme Court Justices hearing the Gore vs. Bush case.  Illegal campaign contributions eventually draw the attention of the FEC. http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/03/09/15_recount.html

2001 - According to Toobin, Cheney calls Roger Stone to thank him for Miami Courthouse Riot, asks him what he would like as compensation (Jeffrey Toobin, Too Close to Call).

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0405,barrett,50745,1.html 

Feb 13, 2001 - Enquirer article on The Vault sex club in NYC says Roger and Nydia Stone used to be frequent customers. http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/4616/enq0213.html

2002 - Stone given lucrative Indian casino political consulting contracts.  Stone allegedly does political dirty trick hit on BIA official standing in way of his casino clients.  http://www.indianz.com/News/archive/001861.asp

2002 - According to James Moore, Rove said to be behind GA Senate race ad associating Max Cleland with Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.http://www.documentaryfilms.net/Reviews/BushsBrain/

2003 - Stone calls up Al Sharpton and offers to manage his campaign and help him fundraise.  http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0405,barrett,50745,1.html

January 17, 2004 - Michael Moore "Deserter" charge, Wesley Clark supports Moore's right to say it 5 days later. http://www.factcheck.org/article131.html

End of January 2004 - Kerry says Bush's TANG records not important.  Terry McAuliffe says Bush was AWOL.

February 10, 2004 - White House does document dump and says it is the full release of Bush's TANG records--but later on many more real docs show up.

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/021004_bushmil.pdf

February 12, 2004 - Bill Burkett appears on Hardball and with James Moore tells the story of how in 1997 he heard Joe Albaugh from Bush's office talk to Adjutant General David James on speaker phone, to tell him that Dan Bartlett and Karen Hughes will be down to "clean up" then-Governor Bush's TANG files.  This trip was ostensibly to write a book but really to prepare for his 1998 and 2000 runs and make sure nothing embarrassing was in the records.  Chris Matthews asks Burkett to swear that he is telling the truth, as if he were in court.  Burkett does. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6055867/

After February 12, 2004 - [MY SPECULATION:] Rove and Bartlett, certainly alarmed at Burkett's appearance on Hardball, presumably hatch phony TANG documents plot and create forgeries with slight mistakes on the wrong typewriter, an electric typewriter.  If it was them, they would have used the Olympia Manual memos Mrs. Knox said she originally typed for Killian in 1972 and 1973.  They would then have called Stone and asked him to get them to Burkett, the perfect patsy for their scheme.

After February 12, 2004 - Bill Burkett says he starts receiving calls from a lady with a Latin accent named "Lucy Ramirez", who could be Nydia Stone, the Cuban wife of GOP dirty trickster Roger Stone [REGEN MAN'S SPECULATION].  "Lucy" tells Burkett she has previously unknown memos from Col. Killian and that he Burkett should get them and give them to the Kerry campaign.  She also convinces him to burn the originals so she can never be identified.  Burkett thinks she is trying to keep an old sexual affair with Killian secret.  Burkett arranges with "Lucy" to meet her at the huge Houston Livestock Show..

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/23/cbs.documents/

March 3, 2004 - According to Burkett's second story, the Unknown Man asks for him at Livestock Show, finds him and hands him envelope containing the CBS TANG forgeries without saying a word (source: Bill Burkett USA TODAY)  USA TODAY confirms that ANOTHER person, an unnamed woman, said Burkett gave her papers that day which she held for him until the event was over in a box.  Burkett and USA Today know who this woman is.  So the likelihood is that Burkett is telling the truth when he said he was given the envelope by the Unknown Man.  Burkett has never been given a photo of Stone to ID.

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/23/cbs.documents/

March to August, 2004 - For whatever reason, Burkett sits on the memos for five months until the Swift Boat ads enrage him and he calls up Max Cleland.  Cleland tells him he'll talk to Kerry but no one calls Burkett back on the documents.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6055867/

August 2004 - Mary Mapes, CBS Producer following up on TANG/AWOL, asks Burkett if there is anything new on the TANG story.  He tells her of the Killian memos, thinking them real and that CBS News would have them checked by experts.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-09-21-cover-guard_x.htm

August 2004 - Roger and Nydia Stone miss first Republican Convention since 1968, taking a vacation in Spain.  Stone says "It's pathetic that we are fighting over John Kerry's war record in Vietnam and George W. Bush's service in the National Guard given that there are a bunch of Islamic maniacs who want to wipe us off the face of the earth. I'll be on a beach in Barcelona."http://www.jewsweek.com/bin/en.jsp?enPage=BlankPage&enDisplay=view&enDispWhat=object&enDispWho=Article%5El1391&enZone=Articles&enVersion=0

Sept. 8, 2004 - First CBS report on Killian memos.  To protect a lady's honor, Southern Gentleman Burkett intimates that a fellow National Guard officer gave him the TANG memos.  CBS reports Dan Bartlett told John Roberts in the morning that "I have no reason to doubt their authenticity" so many times in the same way Roberts notes it in his book.  Presumably this was the comment decided upon by he and Rove to make that day.  Bartlett also says, "The memorandum in your possession shows that he spoke to the commander who made that order to talk about his personal situation and the fact that he is going to Alabama. So at every step of the way, President Bush was meeting his requirement. Granted permission to meet his requirement. And that's why President Bush was honorably discharged." Because Bartlett had used the forged copies to say that Bush fulfilled his TANG requirements, Roberts told his superiors, the memos are authenticated.  Had Roberts been "played"?  The trap, whoever forged the documents, was ready to close on Rather and destroy the potency of the TANG/AWOL issue.

September 8, 2004 - Within 18 minutes of the end of the TANG report, posts from "Buckhead" appear on FreeRepublic.com, saying he thinks something is phony.  Within a few hours, Buckhead is putting forth forensic analyses of fonts and proportional spacing, claiming the memos are forged and actually word-processed. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?more=25054500;name=Buckhead http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?more=22146919;name=Buckhead http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?more=22029527;name=Buckhead

September 9, 2004 - Media trumpets forgery claim, discrediting Rather and whole TANG issue.

September, 10 2004 - Jeff Gannon receives a "scoop" from unknown person that Mapes was the CBS producer responsible.  BEFORE writing his own scoop, Gannon tells Sean Hannity about Mapes.  Hannity: HANNITY: "Now, Jeff Gannon, who is a terrific Washington bureau chief and White House correspondent for Talon News, actually shot me an e-mail today, and he's about to break a story in an exclusive about these CBS documents." HANNITY: "And apparently they're also, according to Jeff Gannon, the -- Talon News -- this woman, Mary Mapes, this Dallas producer, is under pressure for the [CBS] network, and now there's doubts about their authenticity has taken place."   [The Sean Hannity Show, 9/10/04]  

Sept. 11, 2004 - Rather interviews Mrs. Knox who tells him she typed memos like the docs but those are not them.  She had an Olympia manual with only a primitive superscript "th", not an electric typewriter. Total corporatist media uproar over Rather not backing down.  Burkett now admits the hint Conn gave him the memos was a ruse, that he was still trying to protect the honor of Lucy Ramirez.  Press uses this change in story to discredit him. (help me find transcript link)

Sept. 11, 2004 - Dallas Morning News reveals inclusion of Staudt in 1973 Killian is incorrect and proves it to be a forgery.  This was one of the main tip-offs inserted presumably by Bartlett and Rove to expose the forgery.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/washington/elections2004/stories/091104dnpolguard.1 17c8.html

Sept. 15, 2004 - Marian Knox, Killian's secretary, recounts errors in TANG forgeries for the Dallas Morning News, including the inclusion of the Staudt name in the forged "sugar-coat" memo of 1973 and the word "billets" instead of "barracks".  http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/091504dnpolnatguard.1185eb4ae.html

Sept. 17, 2004 - Another Gannon story on Mapes with supposed inside source at CBS: "Sooner of (sic) later something like this was going to happen. When you see how hard they've been working this National Guard story, you know they weren't going to come up empty-handed one way or another."

Sept. 20, 2004 - Kerry starts attacking Bush heavily on Iraq War, gives 4-point plan for Iraq.  Memo coverage dies down, as all pundits echo desire to get to issues of the present rather than dwelling on the past.

Sept. 20, 2004 - CBS News retracts claim of authenticity for Killian memos.  Burkett admits a fellow Guard officer did not give him documents and tells of Lucy and the Unknown Man giving him the memos. 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/15/60II/main643768.shtml

Sept. 21, 2004 - NY Post reports rumors that Roger Stone got the forgeries to Burkett.  He has no comment.  MacCauliffe repeats the Stone charge and asks the White House and RNC what they know about Stone and the documents. Stone later denies allegation but never provides an alibi for where he was on March 3, 2004, the day the Unknown Man gave Bill Burkett the envelope with the TANG Forgeries inside.http://www.democrats.org/news/200409210003.html

http://www.democrats.org/news/200409210001.html

Sept. 21, 2004 - USA Today article on both parties accusing the other of forging the memos.http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-09-21-cbs-parties_x.htm

Sept. 22, 2004 - Former New York Times columnist William Safire, quoting "U.S. Criminal Code, Chapter 63, Section 1343," wrote that a federal offense might actually have been committed when Rather and Mapes tried to hide their deception. "Whoever, having devised any scheme or artifice to defraud transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.  At the root of what is today treated as an embarrassing blunder by duped CBS journalists," Safire wrote, "may turn out to be a felony by its faithless sources."  (This was no doubt written by Safire a few days before the NY Post article on Roger Stone being the rumored source of the forgeries)http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/9/22/221524.shtml

Sept. 23, 2004 - Gannon also went after Mapes in this 9/23 Talon News story--now scrubbed:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1220416/posts

Sept. 24 2004 - After lawsuit, White House releases 1971 document showing the TANG Killian memos could have had superscript type in 1972.  Republicans had been attacking TANG forgeries because they had superscript "th" and by withholding this document they had let Rather twist in the wind.   Lost in the whole uproar is the fact that Mrs. Knox verified that there were original memos that she typed (on a manual with only a primitive superscript capability) and someone must have forged the CBS copies.http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=324

Sept. 2004 - GOP House members, maybe getting call from White House, or seeing Stone rumor reports, DROP calls for a Wire Fraud investigation, as does the retiring William Safire. (could use a link on original story of GOP calling for Wire Fraud investigation)

Sept. 2004 - Media ignores Stone angle and trumpets the Fall of Dan Rather.  No further mention of Stone at all.

February 2005 - Bill Burkett still stands by his story of Lucy Ramirez and the Unknown Man. (need help with finding link on this one too)

Let's work together and fill in the Missing Links!