Dan Rather Files $70M Suit Against CBS

[elucidator]

All right then! For fifty cents: Who’s buried in Grant’s Pass? Remember to phrase your answer in the form of a triangle.

[Frank]

@Frostillicus

Fixed your post.

Were I a moderator of the Pit, you’d be getting an official warning for altering an attributed quote.

[Starving_Artist]

@elucidator

All right then! For fifty cents: Who’s buried in Grant’s Pass? Remember to phrase your answer in the form of a triangle.

]oooooooBite

meooooooooooooooluci

[Bricker]

@Frostillicus

False. That was easy.

Question: what’s your position on global warming?

I ask because if you contend that those documents were not forgeries, and you accept the general consensus on global warming, it seems pretty clear to me you’re not applying the same standards of rigor to your judgement on both issues.

Honestly: why do you get irritated (if you do) at people who obstinately reject the overwhelming evidence about global warming, and then turn around and do manifestly the same thing with respect to the judgement on the authenticity of these documents?

[Plan_B]

@Frostillicus

Fixed your post.

If you have anything substantial about those years, why are you keeping it a secret? IIRC, GWB volunteered for A 10 training at a time when A 10 pilots were going to VN and getting killed. When the war was winding down there’s the possibility that he didn’t have 100% attendance at busy work weekends. You got something more? Please tell us.

[Governor_Quinn]

The one item I’m wondering is his timing. His complaints would seem to be applicable to any point in the last two and half years, and I can’t really think of any reason to bring these complaints now compared to when he was, for instance, still under CBS contract.

(This has been an edition of IMHO. We now bring you back to your regularly scheduled BBQ Pit.)

[elucidator]

@Plan B

…When the war was winding down there’s the possibility that he didn’t have 100% attendance at busy work weekends…

This is a beauty! I’m going to press it into my scrapbook. Because, I mean…Wow!

[BobLibDem]

Rather’s complaint (Danger, Will Robinson! PDF File!) shows the suit has much more meat than the corporate media is reporting.

Regarding the Abu Ghraib story:

Despite the story’s importance, and because of the obvious negative impact the story would have on the Bush administration with which Viacom wished to curry favor, CBS managment attempted to bury it. As a general rule, CBS executives do not take a hands-on role in the editing and vetting of a story. However, CBS News President Andrew Heyward and Senior Vice President Betsy West were involved intimately in the editing and vetting process of the Abu Ghraib story. However, for weeks, they refused to grant permission to air the story, continuously insisting that it lacked sufficient substantiation. As Mr. Rather and Ms. Mapes provided each requested verification, Mr. Heyward and Ms. West continued to “raise the goalposts” insisting on additional substantiation.

The panel never concluded that the documents were fake:

Significantly, the Panel never concluded that the Killian Documents were forgeries; or that the substance of the Documents was inaccurate; and it did not question the underlying fact that P…t Bush had received preferential treatment in connection with his acceptance and service in the TexANG.

In addition, CBS failed to fulfill its contractural obligations to Rather in the post-anchor period. I think Rather has an excellent case.

[Lemur866]

Y’know, the argument that the contents of the documents were accurate, despite the documents themselves not being the real documents, is just about the dumbest argument I’ve heard here on the Dope, and that includes Lekatt blathering on about near-death experiences.

Let’s see. Yes, it’s true that during the Vietnam era the national guard was a way to avoid real service. Yes it’s true that the politically connected had strings pulled to get them into the guard. Yes it’s true that Bush was one of those people. Yes it’s true that lots of people in the Vietnam-era guard didn’t even have to fulfil those minimal duties. And it seems very likely that again, Bush was one of those people.

Since all this can be demonstrated, why do you base your story on fake–excuse me “recreated” documents? Fake but accurate. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

[BobLibDem]

The panel never concluded that the documents were forgeries. But what of the other item in his complaint- that CBS/Viacom tried to suppress the Abu Ghraib story?

[elucidator]

Lemur, that’s not what the story was about. The story was about the reaction of Bush’s commanding officer at TANG, and his assessment of Bush. Just as you say, most of this stuff was already established. It was dearly hoped by certain elements that the weakness of this story might be exploited to undermine the entire narrative by playing the Liberal Media ploy. In this, they were entirely successful with those who already agreed.

IMO, Rather screwed up in headlong pursuit of a Big Story, and was deservedly rebuked.

[Plan_B]

Is Dan Rather’s lawsuit a forgery?

Satire via Power Line:

Is Dan Rather’s lawsuit a forgery?

[elucidator]

What? Humor at PowerLine? Another sign pending Apocalypse…oh. Reprint. Whew!

[Mr.Moto]

Thread updated because of new developments - an appeals court has thrown out Rather’s suit against CBS.

Link.

[Gfactor]

Never mind.

[Mr.Moto]

That’s a pretty late scolding.

[Gfactor]

@Mr.Moto

That’s a pretty late scolding.

Withdrawn. Thanks for pointing that out.

[Starving_Artist]

A question, Gfactor. Is it permissible to alter a quote by striking through part of it, replacing the struck through part with something else, and then saying something along the line of “There, fixed that for ya” if the quoted portion being altered is posted without quotation marks?

I was advised in another thread that the omission of quotation marks might make such alterations possible.

Thanks.

[gonzomax]

@Lemur866

Y’know, the argument that the contents of the documents were accurate, despite the documents themselves not being the real documents, is just about the dumbest argument I’ve heard here on the Dope, and that includes Lekatt blathering on about near-death experiences.

Let’s see. Yes, it’s true that during the Vietnam era the national guard was a way to avoid real service. Yes it’s true that the politically connected had strings pulled to get them into the guard. Yes it’s true that Bush was one of those people. Yes it’s true that lots of people in the Vietnam-era guard didn’t even have to fulfil those minimal duties. And it seems very likely that again, Bush was one of those people.

Since all this can be demonstrated, why do you base your story on fake–excuse me “recreated” documents? Fake but accurate. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Really. The secretary said the document was not the one she remembered, but she said she saw them with the same message. So while it was a possible forgery, it had the facts correct.

[BrainGlutton]

I thought Dan Rather had filed this lawsuit years ago.