If you missed the show, here’s the transcript via RatherBiased
Via LGF comes the CBS’s defense of their position to their affiliates – after the jump.
]]>< 
So …
Where are the attachments?
“The 60 MINUTES Wednesday broadcast reported that it obtained six documents from the personal files of Lt. Col. Killian, four of which were used in the broadcast.” — To use technical terminology, this statement seems to be what is called a “lie.”
Who the hell is James J. Pierce? What (if any) are his qualifications? Why wasn’t he named before this?
“The CBS News report was based on a preponderance of evidence: many interviews, both on- and off-camera, with individuals with direct and indirect knowledge of the situation …” — but NOT the Killian family or Marion Knox, in spite of the fact that CBS has been working on this story for weeks or months?
“Matley says the signatures are, indeed, Killian’s.” — Odd. That’s not what he’s saying now.
“But CBS News’ background reporting determined that Staudt remained a powerful figure in the Guard for years after his retirement …” — Wanna share that background reporting with us? Or is CBS afraid of a libel suit from a living man?
Man, I hate it when I forget how to spell my own name …
So…(second in line here)…CBS provides primetime airtime and webspace to this retired lady who turns out to not have been the dedicated secretary of Killian but an available typist for an array of individuals (despite the fact that she does present herself as someone with “special relationship” to Killian), BUT CBS doesn’t provide any airtime, primetime or otherwise, to the son and widow of Killian.
I think it is safe to say that CBS and particularly Rather are desperate at this point to, as it’s said elsewhere, COVER THIER A**es.
James J. Pierce memo:
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/pierce1.pdf
Not at all convincing!
This 86 year old woman remembers that Bush did not take an ordered physical more than 30 years ago? Are they serious? Can anyone reading this remember an oil change for their car 5 years ago?
Mike G:
Anyone who’d even attempt to “authenticate” copies of “documents” doesn’t know where their feet are. Or what their feet are for.
(I realize you probably know that ^^ already, just saying, is all…)
On the other hand, what we have here with the Forgegate thing is so generally simple that it is obvious to even a basic view:
Anyone can and appears to have “created” “new” documents and then copied them mulitple times. A cut and pasted signature included, regardless of how “real” it was as an original mark, when applied as a paste and then copied numerous times, still does not an original document as to statement make.
It just means that dummy documents have been created, that they’ve been copied sufficiently enough to reduce their quality, that a set of signatures can be adjudged by some (but certainly not by all) experts to be “real” but not “real” in the sense that it just can’t be proven by examining a copied copy of a “document” whether the signature was originally applied to that document or who wrote it…
I’ve seen better forgeries in advertising in magazines. But, to my layperson perspective, any “expert” who would even attempt to evaluate a copied document of a copied document…I mean, even I would refuse such a request.
I also heard more than a few people with excellent credentials say that the signatures appear consistent as a set among some of those on some of the copies but not on all of them…
Several that I saw looked easily to be oddly different than the others, and I’ve never even worked for the FBI. The inconsistencies are so obvious as to be embarrassingly stupid.
MCR: I get the feeling tonight that the whole world is beating a dead horse that is CBS’ reality as to what is “real” and what is not.
I’m sure that the woman enjoyed her appearance on teevee and thinking back over times she’s sure she remembers well…it’s just sad, isn’t it?
Killian’s son stated that when the 60 minutes producer called him, he had told her that there were a few guys who served with Bush in the ANG whom she should interview. When he gave her the names, she said the spoke to one of them, but they were “pro-Bush.” This was a hatchet-job pure and simple and now CBS is trying to confuse Americans to the point where they won’t know which way is up. Very Clintonesque. Bernard Goldberg, who once worked for CBS and for Dan Rather, asked today on the Hannity radio show, “If the NRA had handed CBS documents harmful to Kerry, would they have done the same thing they did with this story?” The answer is NO.
Jim Kouri wrote:
Killian’s son stated that when the 60 minutes producer called him, he had told her that there were a few guys who served with Bush in the ANG whom she should interview. When he gave her the names, she said the spoke to one of them, but they were “pro-Bush.”
CBS wrote:
“Additionally, Mary Mapes, the producer of the report and a well-respected, veteran journalist whose credibility has never been questioned …”
I think it’s time for someone to start questioning her credibility! Someone with a radio show, perhaps …