CBS directly aids Kerry campaign

[trumptman]

CBS tells Kerry advisor to make contact (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/21/cbs.kerry.adviser/index.html)

It's one thing to make a mistake on a story or be lied to by a source. but this whole things goes into the realm of the surreal. CBS wasn't duped. they ignored their own experts. Additionally we have the ace in the hole as it were. CBS directly contacted the Kerry campaign, and put them in contact with their protected "source"

Of course they deny anything bad happened. You get aside confessions where they say "documents" were mentioned but nothing else and no context, etc. and that the source only wanted to, beyond laughable here, offer campaign advice.

Is that believable to anyone here? That CBS, who was running a story about Bush and TANG, and the Kerry campaign, who knew they were getting ready to run that story would have the source for the story talk to the Kerry campaign, and only offer campaign advice?

It smells like 100% bullshit because it that's what it is. The fact that DNC produced an ad that happened to use footage from that exact 60 minutes, well... that is just coincidental...

:no:
Nick

[Scott]

Don't worry! Dan Rather is looking into it.

[Aquatic]

Next at 11-Fox News directly aids Bush campaign. :rolleyes:

[pfflam]

Originally posted by Aquatic
Next at 11-Fox News directly aids Bush campaign. :rolleyes: You forgot to add: 'has aided Bush since FOX's inception

[rageous]

Originally posted by pfflam
You forgot to add: 'has aided Bush since FOX's inception

Yeah, since everyone knows Bush began campainging in '96.

[pfflam]

Originally posted by rageous
Yeah, since everyone knows Bush began campainging in '96. You'll note that I said Bush . . not his campaign

They have painted the backdrop, made a vicious kind of Conservatism be the ambient background in the media-scape

[Scott]

FOX NEWS! FOX NEWS! ... FOX NEWS! FOX NEWS! Pay no attention to that CBS producer behind the curtain.

[trumptman]

Originally posted by ShawnJ
Lots of innuendo here but no clear statements of principle.

Did you look at the title?

Nick

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by ShawnJ
Right-- what principle are you getting at here?

CBS didn't collaborate with the Kerry Campaign-- they merely connected one of their sources to a senior advisor in the campaign. The network obliged that source's request. The question, I suppose, is why that's a breach of conduct-- which is what I'm looking for here. It feels fishy to me-- I'm all for independent media. I'm just looking for a clear reason why that's wrong-- something more than just innuendo.

OMFG. Are you kidding me? A major news organization contacted the Kerry campaign at the highest levels as "payment" of sorts for the documents. You have got to be kidding me. Please, please Shawn...tell me you see the problem here. If this true, CBS is finished as far as news goes. Actually, I think they're finished anyway.

[trumptman]

Originally posted by ShawnJ
Right-- what principle are you getting at here?

CBS didn't collaborate with the Kerry Campaign-- they merely connected one of their sources to a senior advisor in the campaign. The network obliged that source's request. The question, I suppose, is why that's a breach of conduct-- which is what I'm looking for here. It feels fishy to me-- I'm all for independent media. I'm just looking for a clear reason why that's wrong-- something more than just innuendo.

You're better than this.

I'll give you a little help. What does CBS contacting the senior advisor have to do in anyway with reporting the news?

Give me a credible answer for that, and I'll give the CBS actions some credibility.

Nick

[pfflam]

So, who is "Lucy Ramirez"?

Burkett got memos from Lucy (tp://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+CBS+backs+off+Guard+story&expire=&urlID=11705426&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitic selections%2Fnation%2Fpresident%2F2004-09-21-cover-guard_x.htm&partnerID=1660)

Is she a Republican stooge?
Or an idiot Kerry supporter who knew what hacks would jump at?

I think, if she can be found, the plot will get more and more twisted . . . I still hold out this: it is mighty suspicious that the fakes were so obvious and that they were called-out four hours after airing by a big Lawyer with Bush sympathies.
It is just too good to be true . . . . post a picture of a tin-foil hat but maybe you'll need one too.

[Scott]

Little google search for Lucy.

http://hinojosa.house.gov/news/speech.cfm?id=198

[7E7]

Originally posted by pfflam
You forgot to add: 'has aided Bush since FOX's inception

I don't see anybody at Fox News working for the Bush campaign.

Can you say the same for Paul Begala and James Carville? They now work for the Kerry campaign and still draw checks from CNN. Doesn't that seem a tad unethical to you?

And can you imagine if Fox News were to do a smear story on Kerry the way CBS News did on Bush and it turned out the whole thing was a pack of lies and was based on forged documents and sources that had already been discredited on prior occasions?. Can you imagine the outrage from the liberals if that happened?

[tonton]

Originally posted by 7E7
And can you imagine if Fox News were to do a smear story on Kerry the way CBS News did on Bush and it turned out the whole thing was a pack of lies and was based on forged documents and sources that had already been discredited on prior occasions?. Can you imagine the outrage from the liberals if that happened?

LOL! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yeah, Fox never ran the Swift Boat ad! Sure it wasn't a "news story" but Fox nevertheless has a responsibility to not air blatantly false information, just as CBS does.

[zaphod_beeblebrox]

Originally posted by tonton
LOL! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yeah, Fox never ran the Swift Boat ad! So? Running their ads is no different than running ads from Moveon.org. There's no smear on Fox's part. This is nothing more than the First Amendment at work. You don't like it? Too bad.Sure it wasn't a "news story" but Fox nevertheless has a responsibility to not air blatantly false information, just as CBS does. Uh let's see. You seriously didn't think the Swift Vets wasn't a news story? What freaking planet are you living on? As for false information, it was the Kerry campaign that had to back down from his "Christmas in Cambodia" story. Also, where was the false information in the ad about Kerry's anti-war testimony before the Senate?

[tonton]

Originally posted by zaphod_beeblebrox
So? Running their ads is no different than running ads from Moveon.org.

That's not true. The ads from Moveon.org are biased and partisan, sure, but they are not lies.

[zaphod_beeblebrox]

Originally posted by tonton
That's not true. The ads from Moveon.org are biased and partisan, sure, but they are not lies. Or so you say. But I just gave you two claims made by the Swift Vets that are clearly not lies. You like the Moveon ads and hate the Swift Vets ads so in your little cartoon world that means the Swifties are LYING while your guys are telling the truth. If only life was so simple.

[zaphod_beeblebrox]

CBS Reveals Copies of Kerry Senate Documents (http://www.scrappleface.com/MT/archives/001839.html)(2009-09-16) -- CBS reporter Dan Rather plans to reveal copies of documents on tonight's Evening News that demonstrate that John Forbes Kerry may have sought to evade service in the U.S. Senate due to his privileged position as a presidential candidate...

[pfflam]

Originally posted by 7E7
I don't see anybody at Fox News working for the Bush campaign.

Bush has direct relatives that work in production for FOX

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by pfflam
Bush has direct relatives that work in production for FOX

Such as? And why is that a problem?

CBS contacted a political campaign to bring fruition to their story that effectively slammed the other candidate. No, nothing to see here.

[Northgate]

McAuliffe: Will GOP Answer If They Know Whether Stone, Others Had Involvement With CBS Documents?

Washington, D.C. - In response to false Republican accusations regarding the CBS documents, Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe issued this statement:

“In today’s New York Post, Roger Stone, who became associated with political ‘dirty tricks’ while working for Nixon, refused to deny that he was the source the CBS documents.

“Will Ed Gillespie or the White House admit today what they know about Mr. Stone’s relationship with these forged documents? Will they unequivocally rule out Mr. Stone’s involvement? Or for that matter, others with a known history of dirty tricks, such as Karl Rove or Ralph Reed?”

DNC (http://www.democrats.org/news/200409210001.html)

[Northgate]

Why is Our Dear Danny hiding?

Washington, DC— Facing questions about President Bush’s Guard Service and its own possible involvement with the disputed National Guard documents, the Republican National Committee has postponed a call scheduled to discuss the issue this afternoon.

And, in the last several hours, the Bush campaign has also cancelled scheduled appearances by Dan Bartlett on cable networks this evening. These cancellations came as the Bush operatives refused to appear live alongside Kerry campaign official Joe Lockhart.

“It’s clear that even the Bush campaign is having a problem defending the President’s National Guard service,” said Democratic National Committee Spokesman Howard Wolfson. “The Bush campaign has decided to once again duck the tough questions and avoid real debate. Given the President’s National Guard service, I don’t blame them for being camera shy.”

DNC (http://www.democrats.org/news/200409210003.html)

[Northgate]

DOH! (http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/4616/enq0213.html)

Big time political strategist Roger Stone (and involved party to the CBS documents) and his wife Nikki: The former Bob Dole adviser and his wife were swingers and The Vault was a favorite haunt.
"Roger and Nikki were our customers for a long time," Marini says. "They were heavy duty swingers and ran ads on the Internet and in many sex publications. They were heavy players."

Roger was one of the top advisers who urged Dole and other Republican politicians to emphasize family values and integrity.

"Regardless of his status in politics, Roger never came to the club in disguise," Marini recalls. "He looked like a Ken doll. He was tall, blond, handsome and muscular and his wife was curvaceous and very sexy. She would wear leather bras and tantalizing outfits and he would wear collars, chaps and a leather vest with no shirt underneath."

Then in 1996, an ENQUIRER investigation revealed that Roger and his wife frequented group sex clubs and engaged in group sex orgies. In two blockbuster articles, we published evidence, including a shocking ad the couple had placed in a swingers' magazine soliciting lovers for group sex, a handwritten note arranging a sexual encounter, and revealing photos from sex magazines of Roger and Nikki barechested.

Hours after The ENQUIRER story hit the stands, it was picked up by dailies around the country — and Dole's campaign ended its association with Roger Stone.

[Northgate]

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/atrios/stone1s.jpg

Bigger Image (http://mywebpages.comcast.net/atrios/stone1.jpg)

[7E7]

Originally posted by tonton
LOL! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yeah, Fox never ran the Swift Boat ad! Sure it wasn't a "news story" but Fox nevertheless has a responsibility to not air blatantly false information, just as CBS does.

Kerry has never effectively countered the Swift Boat veterans - that is why it has cost him heavily in the polls. Your "blatantly false" charge is not borne out by the facts. Kerry made knowingly false war crime accusations when he returned from Vietnam - that fact is not disputed. And Fox did not create the Swift Boat story - unlike CBS which knowingly did create the attempt to smear President Bush's National Guard record.

You are not making a valid comparison here.

[Not Unlike Myself]

People still watch that Fox stuff? Why? Oh, I forgot, the same reason people engage in 'solo sexual activity'. Tube feed exactly what you want to hear, 24-7. Excellent for the soul, terrible for the mind.

[pfflam]

Originally posted by Northgate
Why is Our Dear Danny hiding?

Washington, DC— Facing questions about President Bush’s Guard Service and its own possible involvement with the disputed National Guard documents, the Republican National Committee has postponed a call scheduled to discuss the issue this afternoon.

And, in the last several hours, the Bush campaign has also cancelled scheduled appearances by Dan Bartlett on cable networks this evening. These cancellations came as the Bush operatives refused to appear live alongside Kerry campaign official Joe Lockhart.

“It’s clear that even the Bush campaign is having a problem defending the President’s National Guard service,” said Democratic National Committee Spokesman Howard Wolfson. “The Bush campaign has decided to once again duck the tough questions and avoid real debate. Given the President’s National Guard service, I don’t blame them for being camera shy.”

DNC (http://www.democrats.org/news/200409210003.html) :wow:

Is that just tit-for-tat, or are there really possible links between the two?
as I suspected while in tin-hat mode . . .

[Northgate]

Originally posted by pfflam
:wow:

Is that just tit-for-tat, or are there really possible links between the two?
as I suspected while in tin-hat mode . . .

I hear ya'. I'm not prone to conspiracy theories. And I usually won't stick my neck out for them.

But I couldn't help but think this was a possible master stroke of Rove's. I didn't put it past him to manufacture the so-called fake CBS memos, use a Dem double-agent to pass them on, then coach the "their a fake" crowd on how to make a scandal out of it.

Kinda like Denny Hastert..."I'm not saying Rove deliberately pulled a fast one, I'm saying we just don't know he didn't."

[Hassan i Sabbah]

Originally posted by SDW2001
Such as? And why is that a problem?

CBS contacted a political campaign to bring fruition to their story that effectively slammed the other candidate. No, nothing to see here.
The guy who called the election for Bush last time on Fox is George Bush's first cousin.

Yes, that is a problem.

[Aquatic]

:lol:

(nods to MarcUK)

[tonton]

Originally posted by 7E7
Kerry made knowingly false war crime accusations when he returned from Vietnam - that fact is not disputed.

Like fuck it's not. Why lie? No, really, why do it? WHy do you lie? It's like you're still trying to convince yourself it's all true.

And the lies of the Swifties have been proven to be lies.

[Scott]

Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
The guy who called the election for Bush last time on Fox is George Bush's first cousin.

Yes, that is a problem.

Why because he was correct?

[Scott]

Originally posted by tonton
That's not true. The ads from Moveon.org are biased and partisan, sure, but they are not lies.

Actually MoveOn is lying (http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_09_19_archive.html#1095814980416359 54).

[trumptman]

Originally posted by tonton
Like fuck it's not. Why lie? No, really, why do it? WHy do you lie? It's like you're still trying to convince yourself it's all true.

And the lies of the Swifties have been proven to be lies.

Are you claiming that Kerry didn't meet with North Vietnamese leaders in Paris?

Are you claiming Kerry WAS in Cambodia at Christmas?

What the hell are you claiming was a lie on the SwiftVets part? What has been refuted with regard to these two matters?

Meanwhile they have indeed caught Kerry playing up his own actions in a multitude of ways and forced him to set his own record straight. Things like his boat had hit the mine during the incident that was the basis for his Silver Star. He was not shot during that time. (It was self-infliced from blowing up some rice) and he did not drag up the special service soldier he was carrying with his bloody arm, because his arm was only bruised.

You have repeated the spin on SwiftVets until you care to believe it, but you cannot cite what they have been disproven on.

Nick

[tonton]

Originally posted by Scott
Actually MoveOn is lying (http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_09_19_archive.html#1095814980416359 54).

You need to get your lies straight.

Contrary to what the ad clearly implies, any weapon that can fire 300 rounds per minute remains illegal for civilians to own without specific clearance by the US Department of Justice.

In fact, machine guns have been tightly regulated since the passage of the National Firearms Act in 1934, in the wake of the gangster era. Legal ownership of a machine gun requires an extensive federal background check, fingerprinting, signed clearance from the chief of local law enforcement (such as a county sheriff), a $200 excise tax , and weeks of paperwork. That was true before the assault-weapon ban was enacted in 1994, and it remains true with the expiration of the ban at midnight Sept. 13, 2004.

So before the expiration you could not get a 300 round per minute AK-47 AT ALL unless you were the military. Even law enforcement agencies weren't eligible to apply.

After the expiration YOU CAN get an AK-47 that can fire off 300 hundred rounds per minute. Sure you need to apply for special approval. But You can get it now, and you couldn't before.

I know what the ad implies. The implication can be considered misleading. But it's not a BLATANT LIE like "I served with John Kerry".

An just for the record, the fact that AK47s that fire of one round at a time can be bought without any checks at all is unacceptable. Sure Congress didn't send a bill to Bush. But Bush could have easily done something (like ask them for a bill), and he clearly didn't care enough to do it. Meanwhile, he has plenty of time to push Congress for a constitutional amendment against gay marriage. So yes, he is fully, 100% responsible for the expiration of the assault weapons ban.

[FormerLurker]

Originally posted by Scott
Actually MoveOn is lying (http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_09_19_archive.html#1095814980416359 54). From yer link:
This is the sort of technically true slur by implication that has become the gold standard for political spin. Hmm.. I wonder who set that "gold standard for political spin" that Kerry is finally willing to meet, distasteful though it might be?

[Scott]

Originally posted by FormerLurker
From yer link:
Hmm.. I wonder who set that "gold standard for political spin" that Kerry is finally willing to meet, distasteful though it might be?


Why so myopic? That's a five paragraph article talking about several different things. READING COMPREHENTION! You must have skipped it in school.

Here's another quote.

A new MoveOn ad falsely implies that the expiration of the assault weapons ban would legalize machine guns.

[tonton]

Originally posted by Scott
Why so myopic? That's a five paragraph article talking about several different things. READING COMPREHENTION! You must have skipped it in school.

Here's another quote.

Speling comprehenTion, Mr. PhD.?

[tonton]

Originally posted by Scott
Why so myopic? That's a five paragraph article talking about several different things. READING COMPREHENTION! You must have skipped it in school.

Here's another quote.

Why is that a false implication? The expiry DOES legalize machine guns. It DOES.

Yes, you have to apply for special approval. But now it is legal for those with special approval to own a machine gun. Previously it was not.

Reading Comprehention.

[Hassan i Sabbah]

Post of the year from Scott.

I love you.

[crazychester]

What is known about Bush's service record.

Reserves (http://themodulator.org/archives/reserves.gif)

(Creative Commons: Copyright 2004 S Woodside/sbwoodside@yahoo.com/http://simonwoodside.com/v1.1 2004/09/07)

[Scott]

Originally posted by tonton
Why is that a false implication? The expiry DOES legalize machine guns. It DOES.

Yes, you have to apply for special approval. But now it is legal for those with special approval to own a machine gun. Previously it was not.

Reading Comprehention.

No it doesn't. They were under special permit BEFORE it and then are under special permit AFTER it. It's a different law.

[pfflam]

Jon Stewert gets down to business:


JON STEWART: Well Stephen, what do you think is going to happen now at CBS News?


STEPHEN COLBERT, Daily Show Senior Media Correspondent: Jon, there's got to be some accountability. Dan Rather is the head, the commander in chief if you will of his organization. He's someone in the ultimate position of power who made a harmful decision based upon questionable evidence. Then, to make things worse, he stubbornly refused to admit his mistake, choosing instead to stay the course and essentially occupy this story for too long. This man has got to go!


STEWART: Uh ... we're talking about Dan Rather...?


COLBERT: Yes Jon, Dan Rather. CBS is in chaos, it's unsafe, riven by internal rivalries. If you ask me, respected, reputable outsiders need to be brought in to help the rebuilding effort.


STEWART: ... at CBS News?


COLBERT: Yeah, at CBS news! What possible other unrelated situation could my words be equally applicable to?! Now people need to be held accountable. The commander in chief, the vice president, the secretary of defense, the national security adviser -- everyone at CBS News needs to go![/B] Jon, I can tell you, Walter Cronkite is rolling over in his grave.


STEWART: Walter Cronkite is still alive.


COLBERT: Not according to my sources ... at CBS News.

Click on MEDIA CULPA (http://www.comedycentral.com/tv_shows/thedailyshowwithjonstewart/videos_headlines.jhtml)

[Scott]

Let's hope there's a criminal investigation into this. Right? Someone broke the law so we should find out who and put them on trial.

Naw forget that!

FOX NEWS! FOX NEWS! ... FOX NEWS! FOX NEWS!

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
The guy who called the election for Bush last time on Fox is George Bush's first cousin.

Yes, that is a problem.

That's actually not true. You're wrong. He told Jeb Bush on election night that he feared Bush was going to lose. As far as I know, Brokaw was first with the call.

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by tonton
Like fuck it's not. Why lie? No, really, why do it? WHy do you lie? It's like you're still trying to convince yourself it's all true.

And the lies of the Swifties have been proven to be lies.

Bullshit. Actually, it seems to me that pretty every thing they've said has turned out to be true, or at least not proven false.

[giant]

Originally posted by SDW2001
That's actually not true. You're wrong. He told Jeb Bush on election night that he feared Bush was going to lose. As far as I know, Brokaw was first with the call.
From everything I've seen, John Ellis, Bush's cousin, was the first to call it @ 2:16.

[Scott]

So let's see. In the face of the ever so bias CBS holding up documents that were forged to throw off an election we ... have to worry everything else but that. Dan Rather got duped into being part of a criminal conspiracy and ... we have to worry about something that was 4 years ago and correct.

[giant]

Hey, I was just correcting one of sdw's many, many errors.

[tonton]

Originally posted by SDW2001
Bullshit. Actually, it seems to me that pretty every thing they've said has turned out to be true, or at least not proven false.

Simple. Let's start with an easy one:

"I served with John Kerry"

True or not true?

TRUE OR NOT TRUE?

[7E7]

Originally posted by Northgate
I hear ya'. I'm not prone to conspiracy theories. And I usually won't stick my neck out for them.

But I couldn't help but think this was a possible master stroke of Rove's. I didn't put it past him to manufacture the so-called fake CBS memos, use a Dem double-agent to pass them on, then coach the "their a fake" crowd on how to make a scandal out of it.

Kinda like Denny Hastert..."I'm not saying Rove deliberately pulled a fast one, I'm saying we just don't know he didn't."

Oh my god... You people are actually serious!