ConservaGear

Anti-Terrorist, Liberal Bashing t-shirts, bumper stickers and more.

ConservaGear

Get the Right Stuff at ConservaGear

Sqotty's Blogroll

Minnesota Organization
of Bloggers

Blogs For Bush

GOP Bloggers

Newsfeeds

Reciprocal Links

Acknowledgments

All trademarks and related service marks are the sole property of their respective owners.

« Happy Birthday Anna Marie! | Main | Gingrich May Enter 2008 Race »

Return of Rathergate

Dan Rather, the man who, like the Eveready bunny, seems to keep going and going and going. Or, to coin another phrase: "He's back!"

Yep, Dan Rather, who, during the 2004 election campaign, put forth a story on "60 Minutes II" that used forged documents to further the leftist agenda that President Bush was AWOL during his time in the Air National Guard. The allegations have repeatedly been proven to be completely false, and in the case of the forged documents, it was Little Green Footballs that proved they were written on computer technology that did not exist during Bush's time in the ANG.

Rather is now claiming that CBS made him a scapegoat and that his employers "botched" the aftermath of the story and forced him to be the fall guy. Never mind the fact that he was directly responsible for vetting the legitimacy of the documents he was using to prove his hit piece story, which also failed to bear any resemblance to facts.

Now he is suing CBS and Viacom for $70 million.

From Breitbart:

Rather narrated a September 2004 report saying that Bush had disobeyed orders and shirked some of his duties during his National Guard service and that a commander felt pressured to sugarcoat Bush's record.

In his lawsuit, Rather maintains that the story was true, but that if any aspect of the broadcast wasn't accurate, he was not responsible for the errors.

Dan Rather fails the test of manhood: taking responsibility for your actions rather than blaming others for your failures. And Rather still claims that his story is true despite the overwhelming body of facts that proves it was all a lie?

What ticks me off about the whole thing is that despite the fact that the documents were proven to be forgeries written on a computer using Microsoft Word, the article uses the following: "Critics questioned the documents' authenticity and suggested they were forged." The documents were, in fact, forgeries.

The article points out that Rather, at the time he pushed his agenda driven hit piece on America weeks before an election, was making $6 million a year. Must be nice to make that kind of change.

I agree with the CBS spokesman that said the suit is old news and without merit.

Tags:

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Powered by
Movable Type 3.33