SwiftVets.com

RMalloy · PO3 Joined: 23 Aug 2004 Posts: 280

Burkett says he spoke to Cleland then sent papers or e-mailed them
to him, probably KINKOS in Abilene. IF Cleland isn't close enough
to the Kerry campaign, the trail probably then leads to Rather.

CandiM · LCDR Joined: 20 Aug 2004 Posts: 411

Here's my theory:

Cleland was the "reliable" source that Rather and/or his people relied on--

It goes this way: The DNC doesn't want their fingerprints on this, so they pass it off to Max Cleland--Cleland tells Burkett to run with it--Burkett approaches CBS News, but they want corroboration--Yes, I'm well aware of what a jerk Dcn Rather is and I realize that we're all POed at him royally, but he didn't get where he is by being stupid and Burkett's 'colorful' history is too easy to find, so CBS wants someone to vouch for him, and Burkett refers them to Max Cleland--That way, the DNC and the campaign insiders had deniability--

So Cleland gives his assurance that Burkett is OK, but can't authenticate the documents themselves, of course, because he hasn't seen them and isn't qualified to anyway--That insulates him from anything beyond vouching for a nutjob and he can later say "Gee, I thought he was OK--Mea culpa"--But CBS finds Max credible, so they decide to go with it and Burkett faxes his paperwork from the local Kinkos--

Rather gets authentication from someone with sketchy credentials at best and gets sketchy responses from a couple of qualified experts, but he decides to go with what the first guy said because that's what he wanted to believe and, anyway, Max Cleland vouched for Burkett--So he aired the story--

And that leaves Burkett.......and Dan Rather.......holding the whole bag for all intents and purposes--

.......or something--C
_________________
“I haven’t seen anyone milk this much out of a bad boat ride since Gilligan” -- Dennis Miller

Wit · Seaman Recruit Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 19

I was surfing today and Tony Snow on FOX had a Republican Senator on talking about the documents. The Senator said that he was waiting to see how things fell out. If the documents prove to be false then he will call for a Senate investigation. It seems that CBS got into trouble in the 2000 election for projecting that Gore would the win election, just after the East coast poll closed. It looks to me that the Republicans are going to let this get as much press as they can and then call for a full investigition into election tampering.

MJB · LCDR Joined: 14 Aug 2004 Posts: 425

Wing Wiper · Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 3:25 am Post subject:

I think the way Rather and CBS went about "verifying" the documents puts them a lot deeper into this than your explanation, since they chose to ignore warnings and provided a bad copy for their "experts" to judge. I don't see them trying to get an accurate analysis. I feel they're VERY complicent in all of this. No slack from me.

Dimsdale · Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 5:17 am Post subject:

NavyChief · Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 5:38 am Post subject:

Well ya got motive. Burkett lost a law suit for money. Did money exchange hands?

And the authenticator of the CBS documents that they cited said they were authentic was Marcel Matley -- the one and the same that authenticated Vince Foster's suicide note. Even though a panel of seven other experts said the note was a forgery.

- Chief
_________________
Working with Senator Kerry four years in the POW/MIA Office left me thinking -- when did the man ever do any work?

BC · PO3 Joined: 08 Aug 2004 Posts: 288 Location: Oklahoma City

This is great no matter kerry is screwed. He will come out and say he had nothing to do with it and didn’t know anything. If that happens it just takes one commercial.

Nixon: I am not a crook
Clinton: I didn’t have sex with that woman
Kerry: I had nothing to do with it
_________________
Remember United Flight 93, "Are you guys ready? Let's roll."
Duty Honor Country

DC_Diva · Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 5:51 am Post subject: Too stupid to be believed

I think Candy got a chunk of it right, especially the thin veil of 'deniabilty' plotting. As always (it seems) with this crowd, their sheer arrogance once again trips them up. They really believe that people will not question, check, verify what they say/do...

But the "Texas ******** Yahoo List" is supposed to be a viable smokescreen?!

Like 500+ people could keep anything quiet, for even 5 minutes, let alone something like this?

Especially when their target is the sitting President of the United States of America.

They are to stoopid to be allowed to govern!

Amazing

NavyChief · Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 5:52 am Post subject:

And oh, yeah. Did someone bother to check who Cleland met with when he came to Texas on 26 August to deliver his message to Bush? Didn't Burkett say he sent an email on 21 August? and Cleland said "counter attack". Did Max take a little something something with him back to the Kerry camp?

- Chief
_________________
Working with Senator Kerry four years in the POW/MIA Office left me thinking -- when did the man ever do any work?

ASPB · Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 5:53 am Post subject:

You're all missing one point that ties this even closer to the DNC and the Kerry campaign.

The following is from Tomorrow's WAPO.

DC_Diva · Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 5:54 am Post subject: PERFECT

NavyChief · Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 6:03 am Post subject:

Good link here: http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=%2B%22max+cleland%22+%2B%22bill+burkett%22&ei=UTF-8&fr=sbc-web&fl=0&x=wrt

- Chief
_________________
Working with Senator Kerry four years in the POW/MIA Office left me thinking -- when did the man ever do any work?

factman · Seaman Recruit Joined: 28 Aug 2004 Posts: 13

Two short comments:

#1-So far the only reference to Kinkos is that someone who was asked to verify the documents noticed that they were faxed from a Kinkos in Abilene, Texas. He didn't say they were faxed directly to CBS. They could have been faxed to someone other than CBS, and that other someone gave them to CBS. Needs verification.

#2-Watch the wording coming out of CBS as they are slowly giving hints as to the origin of the documents. Pay particulr attention to the use of the word "SOURCE".

In this scandal there are two potential different uses of the term "source"-they are:

(a) The individual, or individuals, who created the forged documents and initiated their journey into the hands of CBS.

(b)The individual, or individuals, or organization, that gave the forged documents to CBS.

Source (a) can well be different than Source (b). CBS may only want to talk about Source (a) to the exclusion of the possibility that there is a Source (b). Guess why?

ASPB · Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 6:13 am Post subject:

Further to consider:

But given what we now know about the time line (CBS’ Mapes receives the documents on September 2)—and given the DNC’s corresponding “Fortunate Son” anti-Bush campaign, which was timed to launch just as the 60 Minutes II story airs (and was almost certainly in the works weeks before CBS received the forged documents)—serious questions need to be asked about how much the DNC knew about these docs before CBS itself knew about them.

So by September 3rd we have.

1. Documents in the hands of CBS (Mapes) probably from Burkett.

2. Barnes comes forward to Rather to say he helped Bush get into the TANG.

3. DNC starts "Favored Son" campaign which had to be in the works for a couple weeks.

What does this add up to?

Answer. DNC/Kerry coordinated this regardless of who forged the documents.
_________________

On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB