A Rant from Rich
From richslick@ev1.net:
"Last week, Matt Drudge reported Dan Blather was going to have a Special debunking his own story on forged govt documents. What was your first clue, Dan? The fact that the docs were dated 18 months after the alleged writer had retired, or maybe the fact that the docs could be exactly duplicated, spacing, fonts, etc, on a standard MS-Word computer program that had not yet been invented when they were supposedly written? Nah, none of that. Oh, I know what made you change your mind. You read the truth on a B-log. Welcome Aboard, Dan, you wascally wabbit.
"I really want to talk about voting for my mayor, but Dan Rather won’t let me. Did you notice anything strange about his 'apology.' He decided to 'break the [3-day-old] story' himself. It had been broken by bloggers and the radio talk show days earlier. He said he was sorry for putting it on the air without authenticating the documents. Duh! A better question is why did he decide to support his false claims with false documents? He just won’t come clean.
"It was more than just shoddy news reporting. Even today, he hasn’t admitted the forgeries are fakes and the 'news' story theoretical. He did not say he was sorry he didn’t accept the advice of the experts C-BS paid to analyze the phonies or apologize to them for falsely claiming they authenticated the MS Word document, even after they were on the other networks denying that they authenticated anything. He did not apologize to the people who he publicly belittled for criticizing the validity of his docs. He really seems to believe the 'documents' were copied word-for-word from real documents---if only he could get his hands of the originals.
"Anyone who believes that Rather thought he had genuine documents in his hand when his paid experts were telling him otherwise, and bloggers were identifying as forgeries almost on sight, isn’t wearing his thinking cap. Rather is at least that smart. Saying he was 'blinded' by his political prejudices, is more excuse than justification. He did it because he could. He thought because he was the head of C-BS News Dept and his NWO bosses at ViaCom would appreciate his attempt to put their man in the Oval Office. He probably expected criticism from FOX, but deeply underestimated the power of the internet. It must have shocked the Dickens out of him when ABC questioned their authenticity. Not very professional of them, to criticize one of their own, he probably thought.
"Consider this. If he really did apologize, and he was really repentant, how come he’s still saying the story is genuine, it’s just the documents that are in question? In the interview with his 'unimpeachable source', the source admitted lying about whom he recd them from, BUT Rather never asked him: who was the actual supplier, Joe Lickhard? They never revealed either name, his source or the guy or gal, he told C-BS he got them from.
"But let’s not forget, they weren’t good forgeries. They weren’t even typed on a Selectric typewriter as they claimed in their cover story, a mistake no good forger would have made. Typewriters are rarer today, but they are still available. There’s probably software out there that could duplicate a Selectric font. The experts they hired did not verify C-BS’s hopes, so they ignored them while insisting they were authenticated docs, even after the experts they hired were going on other networks to deny they authenticated the C-BS papers. That lie had to be intentional. Dates belied their veracity. Military protocol was violated. Those dates might not have been as obvious, but they too would have been exposed with a cursory check---never done, or ignored as they ignored as in the case of their handwriting experts. Who knows?
"Rather admitted he ignored pro-Bush witnesses, such as the family of Commanding Officer Stout that supposedly signed the forged documents a year and a half after he retired, but used his now 86-year-old secretary in the cover-up to say that’s what he would have written had he not retired.
"The bottom line is, Dan Rather is more of a Democratic operator than he is an objective reporter, but it gets worse. He’s in too deep to tell the truth. Forging fedl documents is a serious crime punishable with serious prison time, not a slap on the wrist like diva Martha Stewart got. Even if he did come clean, it’s too late. The Bush Haters of America are sure to continue fighting, championing Dan Rather and claiming his documents are all valid. That won’t work, and Dan/C-BS/Moonves have their own personal quagmire assuring their short comings will become their legacy: the demise of C-BS News.
"Some are calling for Rather’s scalp. Granny used to tell me, “the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know.” We know Dan Rather. He can never fool anyone again."
Join Rich's list at slickplus@lists.spunge.org.
"Last week, Matt Drudge reported Dan Blather was going to have a Special debunking his own story on forged govt documents. What was your first clue, Dan? The fact that the docs were dated 18 months after the alleged writer had retired, or maybe the fact that the docs could be exactly duplicated, spacing, fonts, etc, on a standard MS-Word computer program that had not yet been invented when they were supposedly written? Nah, none of that. Oh, I know what made you change your mind. You read the truth on a B-log. Welcome Aboard, Dan, you wascally wabbit.
"I really want to talk about voting for my mayor, but Dan Rather won’t let me. Did you notice anything strange about his 'apology.' He decided to 'break the [3-day-old] story' himself. It had been broken by bloggers and the radio talk show days earlier. He said he was sorry for putting it on the air without authenticating the documents. Duh! A better question is why did he decide to support his false claims with false documents? He just won’t come clean.
"It was more than just shoddy news reporting. Even today, he hasn’t admitted the forgeries are fakes and the 'news' story theoretical. He did not say he was sorry he didn’t accept the advice of the experts C-BS paid to analyze the phonies or apologize to them for falsely claiming they authenticated the MS Word document, even after they were on the other networks denying that they authenticated anything. He did not apologize to the people who he publicly belittled for criticizing the validity of his docs. He really seems to believe the 'documents' were copied word-for-word from real documents---if only he could get his hands of the originals.
"Anyone who believes that Rather thought he had genuine documents in his hand when his paid experts were telling him otherwise, and bloggers were identifying as forgeries almost on sight, isn’t wearing his thinking cap. Rather is at least that smart. Saying he was 'blinded' by his political prejudices, is more excuse than justification. He did it because he could. He thought because he was the head of C-BS News Dept and his NWO bosses at ViaCom would appreciate his attempt to put their man in the Oval Office. He probably expected criticism from FOX, but deeply underestimated the power of the internet. It must have shocked the Dickens out of him when ABC questioned their authenticity. Not very professional of them, to criticize one of their own, he probably thought.
"Consider this. If he really did apologize, and he was really repentant, how come he’s still saying the story is genuine, it’s just the documents that are in question? In the interview with his 'unimpeachable source', the source admitted lying about whom he recd them from, BUT Rather never asked him: who was the actual supplier, Joe Lickhard? They never revealed either name, his source or the guy or gal, he told C-BS he got them from.
"But let’s not forget, they weren’t good forgeries. They weren’t even typed on a Selectric typewriter as they claimed in their cover story, a mistake no good forger would have made. Typewriters are rarer today, but they are still available. There’s probably software out there that could duplicate a Selectric font. The experts they hired did not verify C-BS’s hopes, so they ignored them while insisting they were authenticated docs, even after the experts they hired were going on other networks to deny they authenticated the C-BS papers. That lie had to be intentional. Dates belied their veracity. Military protocol was violated. Those dates might not have been as obvious, but they too would have been exposed with a cursory check---never done, or ignored as they ignored as in the case of their handwriting experts. Who knows?
"Rather admitted he ignored pro-Bush witnesses, such as the family of Commanding Officer Stout that supposedly signed the forged documents a year and a half after he retired, but used his now 86-year-old secretary in the cover-up to say that’s what he would have written had he not retired.
"The bottom line is, Dan Rather is more of a Democratic operator than he is an objective reporter, but it gets worse. He’s in too deep to tell the truth. Forging fedl documents is a serious crime punishable with serious prison time, not a slap on the wrist like diva Martha Stewart got. Even if he did come clean, it’s too late. The Bush Haters of America are sure to continue fighting, championing Dan Rather and claiming his documents are all valid. That won’t work, and Dan/C-BS/Moonves have their own personal quagmire assuring their short comings will become their legacy: the demise of C-BS News.
"Some are calling for Rather’s scalp. Granny used to tell me, “the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know.” We know Dan Rather. He can never fool anyone again."
Join Rich's list at slickplus@lists.spunge.org.
posted by Robert at 5:49 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home