This one is down right funny.
Rather Talks of Questions On Papers
Controversy About Bush and Guard 'Not About Me'CBS anchor Dan Rather acknowledged for the first time yesterday that there are serious questions about the authenticity of the documents he used to question President Bush's National Guard record last week on "60 Minutes."
"If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story," Rather said in an interview last night. "Any time I'm wrong, I want to be right out front and say, 'Folks, this is what went wrong and how it went wrong.' "
Rather is full of so much bull he should go Moo!



Comments (8)
LOL to funny -in a... (Below threshold)1. Posted by sherry | September 15, 2004 11:21 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
LOL to funny -
in a serious note though I'm glad to see you hurricane proof and posting
1. Posted by sherry | September 15, 2004 11:21 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on September 15, 2004 23:21
2. Posted by D Carter | September 15, 2004 11:27 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I can see it coming: "Dan Rather Wins Pulitzer Prize for Breaking Story of His Own Incompetence".
2. Posted by D Carter | September 15, 2004 11:27 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on September 15, 2004 23:27
3. Posted by CT | September 15, 2004 11:47 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Dan Rather: Frequently inaccurate, never authentic.
3. Posted by CT | September 15, 2004 11:47 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on September 15, 2004 23:47
4. Posted by Chad Evans | September 15, 2004 11:50 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Rather is too late to break the story. I believe the folks at INDC, Powerline and LGF have done a fine job doing just this.
4. Posted by Chad Evans | September 15, 2004 11:50 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on September 15, 2004 23:50
5. Posted by Dan | September 16, 2004 12:00 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Did any one else see THIS? and the one below, too.
""Last week, Knox said she had no firsthand knowledge of Bush's time with the Texas Air National Guard"
This gets better and better. What next?
5. Posted by Dan | September 16, 2004 12:00 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on September 16, 2004 00:00
6. Posted by dudemasicus | September 16, 2004 12:38 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I'm not totally serious but I do think some sort of charges will end up being filed over all of this.
-d
6. Posted by dudemasicus | September 16, 2004 12:38 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on September 16, 2004 00:38
7. Posted by bullwinkle | September 16, 2004 12:38 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Ok, lets see, we pursued a man with a history of mental illness for about 5 years, pressuring him to "produce" the evidence to back up his claims. Would that about cover things in the "where we went wrong department"?
7. Posted by bullwinkle | September 16, 2004 12:38 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on September 16, 2004 00:38
8. Posted by bullwinkle | September 16, 2004 1:03 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Is this going to be Dan's claim?
http://counterspin.blogspot.com/
"Today, USA Today reports that Killian's secretary (via the Dallas Morning News) states categorically that the memos were not the actual ones Killian might have created at the time. They use the word "forgeries," but it's not clear whether or not the memos were created specifically to deceive anyone into believing they were the original memos, or were merely copying what the original source memos said. In other words, is a color photo copy of a $20 bill a "forgery," or "counterfeit," or a reproduction of the bill? It depends on what you intend to do with the copy. If you try to pass it off as legal tender...that's counterfeiting. If you use it to illustrate what a $20 bill looks like in a school report on currencies of the world, then it's not."
Will his claim be that he was simply showing us what the documents would have looked like, not really foisting them off as real documents?
8. Posted by bullwinkle | September 16, 2004 1:03 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on September 16, 2004 01:03