During their single phone call, Joe Lockhart tried to persuade Bill Burkett to pass CBS the forged¹ TxANG documents, Mr Burkett tells the Mercury News (registration required).
In the interview Thursday, Burkett, a West Texas rancher and known critic of Bush, denied that his work with CBS was done at the behest of Democrat John Kerry’s presidential campaign.
He said, however, that during the meeting in which he gave the memos to CBS, he was also told by a producer that his phone number would be passed on to Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart.
“I was absolutely and clearly told that that was as far as anyone could go without crossing the line of (journalistic) ethics,” Burkett said.
During a single phone conversation with Lockhart, Burkett said he suggested a “couple of concepts on what I thought (Kerry) had to do” to beat Bush. In return, he said, Lockhart tried to “convince me as to why I should give them the documents” [my emphasis]
What this means, so far as I can tell (it’s hard to think when your nipples are stiff as petrified Hershey’s Kisses) is that CBS and the DNC were in fact colluding on the TxANG document story—which cuts against the grain of some of the more charitable commentary depicting CBS News as overzealous—but not intentionally partisan—in its rush to bring the story to air.
However, it now appears that Lockhart was actually able to secure the documents for CBS, and that CBS News used connections inside the DNC to net the props for its controversial worldwide exclusive. If the “well-regarded Texan” is to be believed, that is.
Symbiotic, I think the word is.
Now if you’ll excuse me, my nipples and I are going to enjoy a Guinness and some mixed nuts.
****
¹ Dan Rather replies, “Those document weren’t forged. In fact, they’re quite genuine. But until Rick Deckard is able to hunt down and kill Roy Batty, scientists in the know refuse to speak openly about the technology available to prove it. It’s an existential dilemma, ultimately. And unfortunatly CBS is caught in the middle of it right now.”
see also INDC; and Drudge has it, but no link yet.
****
update: Commenting at INDC, Captain Ed writes,
Interesting, but I’ll just say this: Any story based on the credibility of Bill Burkett is bound to collapse eventually. The man is probably a pathological liar. I think that in this case, I have to give Lockhart the benefit of the doubt.
“If I’m Lockhart and I know that Burkett could give these documents to CBS and that they’re likely to run with them, why would I want to dirty my hands with the whole thing? Having CBS take care of the smear is perfect—plausible deniability, plus all the credibility of the Tiffany Network. Lockhart would have been begging Burkett to go the other route.
“I think Burkett’s still off his meds …
Well, perhaps. But I’m going to offer as a counter assertion my wildly speculative pet theory. To wit:
Based on some identical content found in both the CBS docs and a few postings on Kerry’s website dating back to April (among them, a potentially misused AFM number), I suspect that someone in the DNC either 1) got hold of 2) took a peek at, or 3) themselves created the documents that eventually made their way to Bill Burkett and CBS News. I’m no longer convinced Burkett was the forger. He (like Mary Mapes) is simply an overzealous ideologue and patsy.
Let’s backtrack. Bill Burkett, you’ll recall, had been peddling his story of a TxANG document dump since at least February, but his own internet postings suggest he doesn’t have the documents in his possession until sometime near the end of August / early September. So. Is it possible the Dems orchestrated this entire document caper to ensure that the phony documents wound up with a receptive Bill Burkett (via “Lucy Ramirez”)? And if so, is it further possible that someone within the Democratic party then tipped CBS to Burkett and the documents?
Max Cleland, we know, had contact with Burkett, but the real wildcard here (in my opinion) is Ben Barnes, who has already been interviewed by CBS at around the time Burkett claims he received the documents (this, even though CBS tells the WaPo that the interview happened later, on September 7).
Now, CBS is on record as saying that they went to Burkett for the documents. Okay, fine. But the question then becomes, who told CBS about Burkett? Max Cleland, having had that brief conversation with Mr Burkett, is a possibility. But Ben Barnes is a big shot Texas Democrat with ties to the Kerry campaign, and he would almost certainly be in a position to know all about Bill Burkett and his obsession with Bush and the TxANG.
The reason I suspect Barnes, then, is that Barnes meets with Dan Rather at around the same time Burkett gets the documents. He could easily have tipped CBS to Burkett, and his Texas ties would be reason enough for them to take his word. From the DNC’s perspective, if the story flies, fantastic. And if not, who makes a better patsy than Burkett—a known Bush-obsessed loon?
Ultimately, though, the whole plan hinges on Burkett getting the documents to a credulous media source, because it gives the DNC deniability. Deniability, that is, unless it comes out that somebody in the DNC tried to convince Burkett to give the docs to CBS…
Anyway, wild speculation. So take it with a grain of salt. Could be the whole tale begins and ends with Burkett and Mapes.
****
update 2: Reader Hank Racette notes, “You said:
…Joe Lockhart tried to persuade Bill Burkett to pass CBS the forged¹ TxANG documents…
But the snip from the Mercury News suggests that Lockhart spoke to Burkett after Burkett passed the docs to CBS, and the them in
Lockhart tried to “convince me as to why I should give them the documents”
refers to the DNC, not CBS. You’ve been had by an ambiguous pronoun. (Was it good?)”
Yes, as a matter of fact it was. If by “good” you mean “like having raw sewage forced deep into your ear canal with a tampon.”
Oh well. Looks like I allowed my zealotry to get the better of me. In my defense, however, it should be noted that John Kerry fought in Vietnam. So stop questioning my patriotism.
throblling?
Almost beats having your nipples pierced!
OOooooo
throbbing, throblling…it’s all good.
Did you see “Scarborough Country “ tonight? Lawrence O’Donnell looked like a deer caught in the headlights.
Roadkill!
Cheezit, don’t go making your nipples sound tasty.
Actually, roadkill with a crazy grin on it’s face…
God, I’m going to have to make some chocolate pudding, in order to have something to roger with my semi-permanent thrill hammer.
Now hold on, here. Burkett’s not that unimpeachable a source, I don’t think. It’s been fairly well established that his undeniable suffering from his tropical disease and his obsessive hate for Bush have unbalanced him. The poor schnook is practically receiving Radio Saturn on his bridgework. He may have passed CBS’s cred test, but as for this, I’ll need some proof.
And if you keep going on about your nipples, someone’s going to photoshop your face onto an Eighties picture of Madonna, with those Kaiser helmets on her bosom.
I’m with Sanity Inspector. I refuse to believe anything coming from the mouth of Mr. Unimpeachable at this point, just because it’s something I’d like to believe.
Welcome to nippletalk! All the strange and wacky things you ever wanted to know about nipples. We have in our studio an AMAZING pair of nipples. They can actually talk! Jeff’s nipples! They not only can talk but can cut glass!!! LOOK! they are throbbing even as we speak!
We all know why. The Rather/Memo story! If Dan Rather resigns I’m guessing these babies are gonna burst!!!!!!!!!!
Ok…ahem.. sorry.. NOW, where was I..oh, yeah. Why does it matter if Lockhart urged Burkett to give them to CBS?
So you’ve gone from diamond drill bit nipples to rock candy nipples to weaponized nipples to petrified Hershey’s kisses nipples. Dammit, I want cold war escalation. Weaponization to fossils is not escalation. Now lasers, yeah. Or particle beams. Or gravity waves, now that’s escalation. But then they’re your nipples. Modify them as you see fit. Or as situations dictate.
Mark
P.S. That’s the most I’ve written the word nipple since middle school.
Ok…. Roy Batty is definitely either Burkette or Sen Kerry. e.g. “I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe…” … 5’ll get you 10 those words have come out of their mouths multiple times in the past 30 years.
But who is Deckard?? Because I would have sworn that should be Dano himself. I can’t really see anyone else in this farce dreaming of Unicorns or pushing Aldroid Gorebot against the wall and planting a rough kiss on him.
Out of morbid curiosity, how many shirts have you torn through with those needle-nips of yours?
You said:
But the snip from the Mercury News suggests that Lockhart spoke to Burkett after Burkett passed the docs to CBS, and the them in
refers to the DNC, not CBS. You’ve been had by an ambiguous pronoun. (Was it good?)
But you’re still a genius.
Back to your original subject, you say that you no longer believe Burkett is the forger. Yet based on analysis by the military-minded portion of the pajama brigade, the memos apparently have an Army-lingo slant which fits with Burkett’s background.
Just co-inky-dence?
I find this sorta leans towards Burkett as the originator. That plus his story about the mysterious (read: ridiculous) manner in which he “obtained” the papers leads me to believe he’s either smarter and trickier than he appears (an act, and a good one if true) or he’s the buffoon and partisan nutjob he lives his day-to-day life as. Occam’s razor says idiot/nutjob to me, thus he’s the forger.
I now return you to your regularly scheduled nipples.
(I hated to go off-topic like this; nipples are good too. I certainly like ‘em.)
Is anyone gonna answer my question?
Remember, it’s not the crime. It’s the cover-up…and the nipples.
BEAVIS: Nipples! Heh Heh Heh. He said “nipples”.
BUTTHEAD: Oh, fuck off!
Interesting story, IF Burkett is telling the truth, which is open to question. That guy is so loopy and his reliability is so questionable that if he said the sun was rising in the east I’d look out the window just to be sure.
Not that I am holding a brief for Lockhart.
RWS: I think the answer to your question is that by Burkett having the credibility of the DNC behind him (Lockhart et al), CBS would take him seriously.
If a random stranger showed up at your door with ‘secret’ documents, you’d question their veracity. If the random stranger said he’d talked with your friends and they sent him to you, you’d probably take him more seriously.
You know, I have one simple request…and that is to have nipples with frickin’ laser beams…Now evidently, my cycloptic colleague informs me that that can’t be done. Ah, can you please remind me what I pay you people for? Honestly, throw me a bone here…what do we have?
Well done, scotch.
RWS – it matters because it looks like the campaign and CBS were colluding to get these memos on the air.
Not that anyone probably cares at this point, but I pretty well show that Burkett forged at least the 8/18/73 memo sometime between August 14-25, 2004. I only mention it because I think it was the start of this thread.
http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2004/09/22/oer-oetr-bill-burkett-and-tightening-the-time-frame-of-the-rathergate-phony-memos/
Thanks, Jack
God made you like chocolate for a reason.
Sarah, that’s wicked funny.
Do the monkey’s nipples like the spanky?
STAND BY YOUR MAN—UNLESS SHE’s A WOMAN
Jeff, Thursday you wrote:
Based on some identical content found in both the CBS docs and a few postings on Kerry’s website dating back to April (among them, a potentially misused AFM number), I suspect that someone in the DNC either 1) got hold of 2) took a peek at, or 3) themselves created the documents that eventually made their way to Bill Burkett and CBS News. I’m no longer convinced Burkett was the forger. He (like Mary Mapes) is simply an overzealous ideologue and patsy.
In 1995, I met Mary Mapes when she did a story on a not dis-similar media rush to judgement–this time, I was the target and the document was real, but did not mean what the media so delightedly decided it meant, to wit, that I was a Nazi and Newt was therefore guilty of appointing a card-carrying Nazi to the Office of House Historian. Oh bliss, oh happiness, if only it were true–Peter Jennings bought it along with the NYT and other worthies. Connie Chung, already upset with Newt over Mom-gate, decided to take a contrary position and did an interview with me –Mary Mapes was the producer. I later met her again in Marietta, Ga. covering the Buchanan campaign.
I’m thinking your first guess, above, is right.Mapes is certainly a liberal feminist, but would she have gone off calling the DNC without Rather or someone higher than herself telling her to do it? It sounds to me like it’s the usual political thing, to wit, “Stand by your man, unless she’s a woman.
But I have a sister who has spent 20 years as an anchor woman for a Fox affiliate in Houston–when she gets back to me about Mary’s local reputation in Texas, I’ll get back to you–but my instincts are similar to yours–she is likely being set up. Burkett isn’t important enough to take the fall for Rather, it has to be Mapes.
Dr. Christina Jeffrey
Visiting Assoc. Prof. of Politics–Coastal Carolina U