ampnetmedia.com -- Rather: 'Nobody Has Proved Documents Were Fakes' --

home ... what? ...Rather: 'Nobody Has Proved Documents Were Fakes'

Rather: 'Nobody Has Proved Documents Were Fakes'

Mark Finkelstein
Posted on 09/21/2007 6:41:18 AM PDT
by governsleastgovernsbest
Partners in deception, partners in denial . . .

newsBusters

Earlier today I noted that in her HuffPo column, ex-CBS producer Mary Mapes continues to cling to the delusion that the Memogate documents were authentic. In an inteview on "Morning Joe," Dan Rather has now made a similar reality-denying claim.

Mika Brzezinski, who, as was repeatedly pointed out, used to work at CBS and has friends on both sides of the issue, conducted the interview. Bubbles didn't have the gumption to confront Rather with the crux of the issue: the forged documents at the heart of the story. Interestingly, Rather chose to raise the issue himself, and in doing so demonstrated his departure from reality and a twisted sense of journalistic standards.

DAN RATHER: We haven't noted here, Mika, that nobody has disputed that the story of President Bush's service in the National Guard, how he got in, and what he did and didn't do when he went in there, nobody's disputed the story was untrue [sic]. We were, uh, made vulnerable on the documents which, by the way, let me point out also, that nobody has ever proven the documents are, quote, fraudulent or, uh, that they were, uh, fakes, as some people have written.

As I noted regarding the Mapes' column, fake-but-accurate rides again.

In any case, Mika didn't confront Rather with any of the mountains of evidence demonstrating that the documents were blatant forgeries. This "Little Green Footballs" overlay is my favorite. Brzezinski instead chose to ask a hanging curveball of a question.

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Then why read the apology, Dan?

Host Joe Scarborough remains out on sick leave, but had called in and listened to the exchange. When it was over, he wasn't as accepting of Rather's claim as Mika.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: He said that these documents have yet to be proven false. I guess I need to go back and take a closer look at it, and I'm not being facetious here, either. I thought most everybody, from the New York Times to the LA Times had determined these documents were fake.

Rather: 'Nobody Has Proved Documents Were Fakes'

What did they Say?