Dan Rather and the killed story

[Omaha Steve]

Remember after the Rathergate fiasco CBS said it was going to wait on another story about the President that could be very damaging. This would be a good time for CBS to tell all. Any ideas what the story was?

[Dora]

1. The Plame Investigation, I think it was

[Nordic]

2. I believe it involved WMD's and Iraq

[rainy]

3. it was the yellow cake story

[drunkdriver-in-chief]

11. Talk about forged documents

Bush used forged docs to get us into war but the media gave that scant coverage; OTOH the press went after dan rather for using possibly forged docs in the bush NG scandal.

[TexasBushwhacker]

4. It was about the fake docs re: the yellow cake uranium ....

in Niger. You can read all about it here:

http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2004/09/29/cbs_wmd/

"By relying on documents that could not be absolutely authenticated from a blind source to make the otherwise irrefutable case that George W. Bush shirked his National Guard duties in the early 1970s, CBS anchor Dan Rather dealt the credibility of journalism a "body blow," according to Washington Post ombudsman Michael Getler. But just how damaging was that blow?

One measure of the debacle is a "60 Minutes Wednesday" segment that millions of viewers now will not see: a hard-hitting report making a powerful case that in trying to build support for the Iraq war, the Bush administration either knowingly deceived the American people about Saddam Hussein's nuclear capabilities or was grossly credulous. CBS News president Andrew Heyward spiked the story this week, saying it would be "inappropriate" during the election campaign.

The importance that CBS placed on the report was evident by its unusual length: It was slated to run a full half hour, double the usual 15 minutes of a single segment. Although months of reporting went into the production, CBS abruptly decided that it would be "inappropriate to air the report so close to the presidential election," in the words of a statement that network spokeswoman Kelli Edwards gave the New York Times.

The real reason, of course, was that because of CBS's sloppy reporting on the Bush National Guard story, the network's news executives believed they could no longer report credibly on the heart of the Iraq nuclear issue, involving another set of completely forged documents: those purporting to show that Iraq had purchased yellowcake uranium from the African country Niger.

On edit: The big question now is, why has CBS still not aired this well researched, important story?

[Hobbes199]

5. It's after the election...

Might be a good time : )

[New Earth]

6. don't laugh

but could someone explain to me what this Rather story was about? There was a period of time i didn't follow the news or politics for while.

[Omaha Steve]

7. 60 minutes story

Well CBS did a segment on 69 Minutes II that was critical of the President's national guard service. It turns out the documents were forged. That is a quick version.

[TruthIsAll]

9. Show me your proof that the documents were forged. There is none.

They are most likely authentic.

You have been brainwashed, as have 100 million others.

[Omaha Steve]

10. the source of the memos is questionable

Well the original authentication was not done very well. Then consider the person that got them to CBS didn't get them from a reliable source. Somebody called him on the phone early this year and said I have these. He didn't know them, and can't find them now. It casts big doubts on the documents. The secretary that would have typed them said she didn't do them. But the press ignored the fact she said they were accurate.

[Straight Shooter]

12. No proof the documents were legitimate or illegitimate

Naturally the MSM sided with bush.

The conclusion, however, was clear: Even if the document was forged, the contents were accurate and truthful.

This was a conspiracy -- yeah, that word! -- between Rove and Buckhead (of Free Republic) and a nasty Repub operative named Roger Stone, to defuse the issue of bush's questionable TANG service. Rather got set up in a very nasty way.

You would think there would be some ethical journalists who would have stood up for Rather. But, no, they're all bushie-whipped.

[txindy]

13. The memos may be legitimate

The media circus directed the focus towards who gave the memos to CBS, NOT who wrote them. Somehow that was completely forgotten. What. A. Coincidence.

It was never established that the memos were forgeries. Never. Killian's secretary said that the info. in them is absolutely true. That alone is d*mning evidence against Junior.

[proud2BlibKansan]

14. The point to remember is

that there is a pile of documents proving * was AWOL, and ONE that may or may not have been forged. I find it rather significant that no one questioned the rest of the documents. But the MSM has given the impression that this ONE document is the only one that would convict * of being AWOL. Those dirty bastards.

[Scout1071]

17. The little told story

Actually, I saw an interview with the secretary who typed the originals. She said that the documents were not originals. She said that the font was different. HOWEVER, she said that they reflected verbatim what she did originally type and that her boss told her on more than one occassion that he was upset with the kid-glove treatment that Bush was getting. She said that he discussed with her the pressure he was getting from "above" and she confirmed that the documents accurately reflected word for word what she did originally type. Where was the media on this interview?

[txindy]

18. That was the Dan Rather interview

I saw that, too. Yes, she said exactly that which is why that testimony alone should have been enough for the SCLM to carry this forward. The fools. Just because Killian's secretary said that SHE wasn't the source of those memos, that certainly doesn't mean that Killian didn't have them someplace else. He was covering his rear. Why would anybody believe that he only covered it through his secretary?

The MSM proves itself disposable yet again.

[KoKo]

8. It was Josh Marshal and Linda Rozen's story about Niger Yellowcake

and the forged documents. Salon Mag. featured an article on it after "60 Minutes" canned it. The whole "60 Minutes" show was going to be devoted to it with Ed Bradley walking the audience through what happened. The Salon article was almost from the script of the show...it looked like it would have been excellent. But, it was pre-empted because Rather wanted to do the AWOL story. I've wondered about Rather ever since...was he threatened to pull "a stunt?" Just to kill the Bradley piece?

It was Josh's article that was supposed to "shift the tectonic plates" in DC. I don't think that 60 Minutes Piece will ever air, unless something else big comes down the pike...and given the silence and lock down on news unfavorable to this administration...it's not likely.

When journalists are cut out of getting information the public needs to hear...then we know "the take over" is complete. :scared:

[ccarter84]

15. back to rathergate for a sec

who else read the dailkos post linking Rove to the overall strategy and found it truly impressive?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/23/15201/7818
:hi:
-CC

[shelley806]

16. Thanks for the link; bookmarked, skimmed, and will read later

when time allows.

Welcome to DU!

[Omaha Steve]

19. Thank you newbie stands corrected

I've only been here a couple of weeks, so I'm playing catch up on events before the election.