Discussion:
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
(too old to reply)
K***@thereich.hal
2008-12-27 16:41:54 UTC
Permalink
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life

By Paul Alexander, The Daily Beast. Posted December 27, 2008.

How a former governor -- and a rising star in the Democratic Party --
ended up mopping floors in prison and how he's fighting to get out.

Last week, Al Gore sent an email message urging supporters to give
money to Don Siegelman's legal defense fund. Gore is the latest in a
string of high profile supporters to suggest Siegelman, the former
Governor of Alabama, was the victim of a Republican plot when he was
found guilty of bribery, conspiracy and fraud in 2006, and sentenced
to seven years in prison.

Now, in the waning days of the Bush administration, Siegelman is
trying to win back his freedom -- not to mention his good name -- in a
courtroom in Atlanta. Earlier this year, an appeals court granted his
release after he had served nine months, saying the Governor's appeal
had raised "substantial questions" about the case against him.
Siegelman's cause was helped by a bipartisan group of 54 former state
attorneys general from across the country who filed a federal appeals
brief supporting his bid to overturn the conviction. Republican
insiders have also come forward to say Siegelman was unfairly targeted
by Rove and his circle.

Making it in prison depends on one's level of tolerance. I'm used to
mopping in my wife's kitchen. It was just a bigger floor.

Siegelman's appeal was heard earlier this month and the verdict will
determine whether he returns to prison to finish out his sentence, or
goes free.

How did a former governor -- and a rising star in the Democratic Party
-- end up in a situation like this?

On June 29, 2006, Siegelman and Richard Scrushy, the CEO of
HealthSouth, a chain of medical rehabilitation services with
facilities both in the United States and abroad, were found guilty by
a jury in Montgomery, Alabama, of federal bribery charges. A year
later, Judge Mark Fuller, who had clear conflicts of interest in the
case -- a company in which he holds a major stake received a $175
million government contract at one point during the legal proceedings
-- sentenced Scrushy to almost seven years in prison. Siegelman got 88
months.

There was one central transaction that sent these men to prison for
all this time. Not long after Siegelman had been elected governor in
1998, he convinced Scrushy to contribute $500,000 to a political
action committee, which was supporting the establishment of a lottery
in Alabama to pay for higher education. At the same time, he talked
Scrushy into serving on a state hospital regulatory board on which he
had already served three times -- appointed by both Democrats and
Republicans -- and from which he had recently resigned. To US attorney
Leura Canary, the wife of William "Bill" Canary, the close friend and
former business associate of Karl Rove, the act constituted bribery,
for which she charged the two men. Among the many other charges,
dismissed by the jury, this was the one that stuck.

QUESTION: First, was the act for which you and Richard Scrushy
convicted actually a crime?

SIEGELMAN: Fifty-four state attorneys general filed a friend of the
court brief stating that it has never been a crime in America for a
politician or a public official to appoint a contributor to anything,
whether it's ambassador or cabinet member or a member of a board or an
agency. The only thing that is a crime is if you swap a position for
money. And there has got to be an express agreement that's provable.
Otherwise, the United States Supreme Court says it's an infringement
on a person's first amendment right to freely associate and make
contributions.

QUESTION: The case with you and Scrushy seems especially weak.

SIEGELMAN: Scrushy had just recently resigned from the board and the
person I had defeated, Job James, had appointed one of Scrushy's vice
presidents to the position. When I got elected I called Scrushy and
said, "I want you to serve in my administration like you did in three
previous administration." And he said, "Oh, Governor, do I have to? I
just resigned from that board. Can't I get you the name of somebody?"
I said, "Nope, it's either you or nobody." So he went onto the board
reluctantly. And this poor guy is still in prison today.

QUESTION: Many observers believe he is because he would not cooperate
with the prosecution to convict you.

SIEGELMAN: In an effort to get me, the prosecution went to Scrushy
before they indicted him and said, "Just tell us Siegelman extorted
the money; just tell us he twisted your arm." He said, "I can't do
that because that's not what happened." They went to him after he was
indicted and said, "Okay, we will give you another chance. Tell us
Siegelman twisted your arm and tried to extort money." He said, "I
can't say that because that's not what happened." During the trial, he
was sitting at the defense table, and they came and got him again and
gave him a third chance to throw me under the bus by lying for the
prosecution and he wouldn't do it. This is not the way the justice
system in this country is supposed to work.

QUESTION: Describe what happened to you after you were sentenced.

SIEGELMAN: Scrushy and I were taken from the courtroom less than
thirty seconds after the gavel came down in handcuffs, shackles, and
chains around our waist and ankles. We were put in the back of a
police car and driven to Atlanta where we were taken to a
maximum-security prison and put in solitary confinement. Then they
moved me around the country from prison to prison until I ended up in
the swamps of Louisiana.

QUESTION: What was prison like?

SIEGELMAN: You can just imagine. But making it in prison depends on
one's level of tolerance. I'm used to mopping and sweeping floors in
my wife's kitchen. It was just a bigger floor and I had to mop it
every day.

Seriously, all my life I've worked to try to correct and perfect our
system of government to make it more fair, and here I was in the
middle of something that wasn't fair. If God had a purpose in this, it
was for me to see how the system is flawed so I can do something about
it. There are some things I'd like to see corrected -- flaws in the
system that can result in innocent people going to prison. When I get
out of this situation for good, I'll be back before the Judiciary
Committee advocating changes.

QUESTION: You have claimed Karl Rove was a driving force behind your
prosecution.

SIEGELMAN: We know from documentary evidence and from testimony that
Rove was involved in the firing of the US attorneys [at the start of
Bush's second term] and he's been identified at the scene of the crime
in my case. We know that others worked with Rove to carry out his
conspiracies to subvert our system of justice and to abuse the power
of his office and to misuse the power of the Department of Justice for
political purposes.

QUESTION: Some people believe Rove wanted your political career
damaged because of your standing in the Democratic Party.

SIEGELMAN: I had endorsed Al Gore in 2000 -- the first governor to do
so -- and it wasn't long after that that they started the
investigation. I had made plans after my 2002 re-election -- which I
ultimately lost because of the bad press generated by these
investigations -- to hit the primary states. I had been secretary of
state for eight years, attorney general for four years, lieutenant
governor for four years, and governor for four years -- I had all
these friends around the country -- so I thought I could gin up a
campaign not for me but against George W. Bush, against his war,
against his economic policies, and against his education policies.

There is no question in my mind that Rove played a key role in what
happened to me. From the beginning, the investigation was started by
Rove's client, the state attorney general Mark Pryor; then the
prosecution was carried out by the wife of Rove's best friend and his
former business partner. [They had previously worked as political
consultants together in Alabama.] We have a live witness who claims
that Bill Canary -- Rove's partner -- said Rove had taken my case to
the Department of Justice. Now it's up to Congress -- and the House
and the Senate judiciary committees -- to bring Rove before the House
Judiciary Committee.

QUESTION: Actually, the House Judiciary Committee has already
subpoenaed Rove to testify and he has refused to appear.

SIEGELMAN: That's why it's so important for the House and the Senate
to hold Rove in contempt of Congress and exercise their inherent
authority to enforce that subpoena by sending the Capital police to go
get him and bring him in or by pursuing the thing through litigation.
But one way or the other, it is critically important that the subpoena
be upheld. Otherwise, it sends the message to all his accomplices that
they are free to carry out their mischief in the future with impunity
because nothing is going to happen to him.

QUESTION: Do you believe your case will be taken up by the Obama
administration?

SIEGELMAN: There are lots of good fights, and I know that Obama is
looking to end the war in Iraq, to provide health care to all
Americans, to fix the economy, and to deal with global warning --
there are so many important issues that are out there -- but restoring
people's faith and trust in the government, assuring people the
Department of Justice will no longer be used as a political weapon in
this country, is vital. We are not going to allow the torture of
prisoners in Guantanamo, nor are we going to permit the torturing of
witnesses until we get the correct testimony to put political enemies
in jail in this country.

A lot of Americans are aware of the injustices that have been going on
in the Bush administration. They need to know that the Obama
administration is not going to tolerate these kinds of injustices. I
am hopeful that the Obama administration will work with an interested
House Judiciary Committee (and hopefully a Senate Judiciary Committee)
in finding the truth.

QUESTION: Do you hold George W. Bush accountable for what happened to
you?

SIEGELMAN: All I know if that for a long time Karl Rove held himself
up as a co-president with George Bush. He bragged about being his
drinking buddy, his kicking-around buddy in the White House. They
shared good times together. He was Bush's "brain." He was the genius
behind Bush. For a long time, I thought they were inseparable. They
were as close as close can be. I don't know what Rove told President
Bush. But we need to find out.

I've already spent nine months in prison and the guy who gave the
money is still in jail for making a contribution so I could persuade
the people of Alabama to vote for an education lottery so their
children could go to college for free. We need to know how far my case
goes up in the Bush administration.

QUESTION: Tell me about the charge of obstruction of justice for which
you were convicted.

SIEGELMAN: The obstruction of justice charge is ludicrous. Honda Motor
Company offered to give me a motorcycle. Now if I had taken it, they
may have had a case -- Siegelman took a motorcycle, an unpaid gift --
but I said no to Honda and bought the motorcycle. The prosecution in
my case ended up convicting me for accepting a campaign contribution
to a lottery and paying for a free motorcycle.

QUESTION: What are your feelings about your appeal?

SIEGELMAN: I am not worried one way or the other. I hope and believe
that the Eleventh Circuit will see through this and reverse and
rescind, which means they'll acquit me of the charges. If not, it's
another fight the Good Lord has put me into and there's a reason for
it. There are enough people in America made aware of Rove's
shenanigans in this case, we'd have a good fight on our hands.

QUESTION: Will you run for public office again?

SIEGELMAN: I don't think so. I'm at a point in my life where I'd like
to help others. Everyone says, "Never say never," but at this point I
do not see it in the cards.
Curt
2008-12-27 18:06:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.

Curt
lein
2008-12-27 19:31:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
Would you expect CBS to present it any other way?
IBM
2008-12-27 21:01:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
Would you expect CBS to present it any other way?
They'd rather not if ya know what I mean....

IBM
Bill Shatzer
2008-12-27 21:06:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
Would you expect CBS to present it any other way?
Yeah - unlike Faux News, they actually attempt to be fair and balanced.

Peace and justice,
Arne Saknussen
2008-12-27 21:13:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Shatzer
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
Would you expect CBS to present it any other way?
Yeah - unlike Faux News, they actually attempt to be fair and balanced.
You're on drugs, right?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/14/AR2006061402394.html

NEW YORK -- CBS executives have decided there is no future role at the
network for Dan Rather, making it certain that the man who sat in the
anchor chair for 24 years will depart by this fall.

These executives recognize Rather's contributions over four decades and
are not trying to boot him because of the controversy surrounding his
botched story on President Bush and the National Guard, say network
sources who declined to be named while discussing a sensitive personnel
matter

http://www.mrc.org/SpecialReports/2006/sum/sum082906.asp

Meet the Real Katie Couric
CBS’s New Star Adores Liberals, Scolds Conservatives — And Thinks
America Should Be More Like France


http://www.mrc.org/Profiles/wallace/welcome.asp

CBS’s Mike Wallace: Too Many Minutes of Liberal Bias

To mark his retirement, the May 21 edition of 60 Minutes devoted a
tribute to Mike Wallace. Below, from the MRC's archive, are some
comments and views from Wallace that were not mentioned on the tribute
show:

Wallace proclaimed that if he were traveling with enemy soldiers he
would not warn U.S. soldiers of an impending ambush
Wallace was "astonished" wounded vets back the Iraq war.
Wallace declared only a "[expletive] up" America could elect Bush.
He insisted the liberal bias charge is "damn foolishness."
He lent his name to a fundraiser for a pro-gun control group.
He doubted Bush's "validity," and said Iraq was not a "good war."
He mocked President's Bush's smarts and belief in freeing people from
oppression as he demanded, "Who gave George Bush the duty to free people
around the world?"
lein
2008-12-28 00:39:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Shatzer
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
Would you expect CBS to present it any other way?
Yeah - unlike Faux News, they actually attempt to be fair and balanced.
Yeah, I hear they are good at uncovering long lost memos, but not as
good as CNN when it comes to falsely accusing military members.
Curt
2008-12-28 15:36:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
Would you expect CBS to present it any other way?
Well, there's a good story there, and there's evidence for a frame-
up.

Curt
lein
2008-12-28 20:51:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
Would you expect CBS to present it any other way?
Well, there's a good story there, and there's evidence for a frame-
up.
So CBS's presentation must be 100% accurate then.
Curt
2008-12-30 14:52:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
Would you expect CBS to present it any other way?
Well, there's a good story there, and there's evidence for a frame-
up.
So CBS's presentation must be 100% accurate then.
I know, I know, Rathergate blah blah.. but still, CBS has a fine
record.

Curt
Arne Saknussen
2008-12-30 18:05:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
Would you expect CBS to present it any other way?
Well, there's a good story there, and there's evidence for a frame-
up.
So CBS's presentation must be 100% accurate then.
I know, I know, Rathergate blah blah.. but still, CBS has a fine
record.
You must be insane to say that.

http://www.mediaresearch.org/Profiles/welcome.asp

Walter Cronkite: Liberal Media Icon
Since his retirement, Walter Cronkite, anchor of the CBS Evening News
from 1962 to 1981, has made clear his liberal views on a range of
issues, including how being a liberal is essential to being a good
journalist. The MRC has compiled a representative collection of
Cronkite's liberal pronouncements, and denunciations of conservatives,
since the late 1980s.


CBS’s Mike Wallace: Too Many Minutes of Liberal Bias
To mark his retirement, the May 21 edition of 60 Minutes devoted a
tribute to Mike Wallace. Below, from the MRC's archive, are some
comments and views from Wallace that were not mentioned on the tribute show.


Katie Couric’s Years of Liberal Tilt
Read and watch quotes from Katie Couric, former co-anchor of NBC’s Today
and, starting in September 2006, the anchor of the CBS Evening News.
Katie Couric has a long history of liberally biased reporting: a soft
spot for Jimmy Carter, Hillary Clinton, and the U.N., knee-jerk posture
on global warming, war on terrorism, higher taxes, more regulations,
national health insurance, and blatant hostility towards conservatives.
Curt
2008-12-30 22:12:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
Would you expect CBS to present it any other way?
Well, there's a good story there, and there's evidence for a frame-
up.
So CBS's presentation must be 100% accurate then.
I know, I know, Rathergate blah blah.. but still, CBS has a fine
record.
You must be insane to say that.
http://www.mediaresearch.org/Profiles/welcome.asp
Walter Cronkite: Liberal Media Icon
Since his retirement, Walter Cronkite, anchor of the CBS Evening News
from 1962 to 1981, has made clear his liberal views on a range of
issues, including how being a liberal is essential to being a good
journalist. The MRC has compiled a representative collection of
Cronkite's liberal pronouncements, and denunciations of conservatives,
since the late 1980s.
CBS’s Mike Wallace: Too Many Minutes of Liberal Bias
To mark his retirement, the May 21 edition of 60 Minutes devoted a
tribute to Mike Wallace. Below, from the MRC's archive, are some
comments and views from Wallace that were not mentioned on the tribute show.
Katie Couric’s Years of Liberal Tilt
Read and watch quotes from Katie Couric, former co-anchor of NBC’s Today
and, starting in September 2006, the anchor of the CBS Evening News.
Katie Couric has a long history of liberally biased reporting: a soft
spot for Jimmy Carter, Hillary Clinton, and the U.N., knee-jerk posture
on global warming, war on terrorism, higher taxes, more regulations,
national health insurance, and blatant hostility towards conservatives.-
Sure, there'll always be a Rightweenie website that says CBS is too
"liberal", whatever that means. But the fact remains -- they have a
fine record of accurate reporting. And correcting themselves if they
turn out to be wrong. FOX, for example, or WND, can't say either about
themselves.

Curt
Arne Saknussen
2008-12-30 23:29:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by lein
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
Would you expect CBS to present it any other way?
Well, there's a good story there, and there's evidence for a frame-
up.
So CBS's presentation must be 100% accurate then.
I know, I know, Rathergate blah blah.. but still, CBS has a fine
record.
You must be insane to say that.
http://www.mediaresearch.org/Profiles/welcome.asp
Walter Cronkite: Liberal Media Icon
Since his retirement, Walter Cronkite, anchor of the CBS Evening News
from 1962 to 1981, has made clear his liberal views on a range of
issues, including how being a liberal is essential to being a good
journalist. The MRC has compiled a representative collection of
Cronkite's liberal pronouncements, and denunciations of conservatives,
since the late 1980s.
CBS’s Mike Wallace: Too Many Minutes of Liberal Bias
To mark his retirement, the May 21 edition of 60 Minutes devoted a
tribute to Mike Wallace. Below, from the MRC's archive, are some
comments and views from Wallace that were not mentioned on the tribute show.
Katie Couric’s Years of Liberal Tilt
Read and watch quotes from Katie Couric, former co-anchor of NBC’s Today
and, starting in September 2006, the anchor of the CBS Evening News.
Katie Couric has a long history of liberally biased reporting: a soft
spot for Jimmy Carter, Hillary Clinton, and the U.N., knee-jerk posture
on global warming, war on terrorism, higher taxes, more regulations,
national health insurance, and blatant hostility towards conservatives.-
Sure, there'll always be a Rightweenie website that says
facts are facts.
Curt
2008-12-31 15:24:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Sure, there'll always be a Rightweenie website that says
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.

Unlike, say, FOX.

Curt
Arne Saknussen
2008-12-31 18:08:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Curt
Sure, there'll always be a Rightweenie website that says
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
Curt
2008-12-31 23:41:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Curt
Sure, there'll always be a Rightweenie website that says
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
I don't have to -- they have a well deserved and worldwide reputation
for accuracy and attention to detail.

Unlike, say, FOX.

Curt
Arne Saknussen
2008-12-31 23:45:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Curt
Sure, there'll always be a Rightweenie website that says
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
I don't have to -- they have a well deserved and worldwide reputation
for accuracy and attention to detail.
Unlike, say, FOX.
PROVE it.
Curt
2009-01-01 18:43:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Curt
Sure, there'll always be a Rightweenie website that says
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
I don't have to -- they have a well deserved and worldwide reputation
for accuracy and attention to detail.
Unlike, say, FOX.
PROVE it.
That'd be like proving the sky is blue, dude. They have that
reputation. Regardless of what Freep or WND say about them.

Curt
Arne Saknussen
2009-01-01 21:49:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Curt
Sure, there'll always be a Rightweenie website that says
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
I don't have to -- they have a well deserved and worldwide reputation
for accuracy and attention to detail.
Unlike, say, FOX.
PROVE it.
That'd be like proving the sky is blue,
No proof provided.
Curt
2009-01-02 03:26:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Curt
Sure, there'll always be a Rightweenie website that says
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
I don't have to -- they have a well deserved and worldwide reputation
for accuracy and attention to detail.
Unlike, say, FOX.
PROVE it.
That'd be like proving the sky is blue,
No proof provided.
None needed.

Curt
Arne Saknussen
2009-01-02 05:40:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Curt
Sure, there'll always be a Rightweenie website that says
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
I don't have to -- they have a well deserved and worldwide reputation
for accuracy and attention to detail.
Unlike, say, FOX.
PROVE it.
That'd be like proving the sky is blue,
No proof provided.
None needed.
Curt
Curt that is total bullshit, you melted down on this one.
Curt
2009-01-02 20:39:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
I don't have to -- they have a well deserved and worldwide reputation
for accuracy and attention to detail.
Unlike, say, FOX.
PROVE it.
That'd be like proving the sky is blue,
No proof provided.
None needed.
Curt
Curt that is total bullshit, you melted down on this one.
Nonsense -- CBS is far more accurate and respected than FOX.

Curt
Arne Saknussen
2009-01-02 22:41:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
I don't have to -- they have a well deserved and worldwide reputation
for accuracy and attention to detail.
Unlike, say, FOX.
PROVE it.
That'd be like proving the sky is blue,
No proof provided.
None needed.
Curt
Curt that is total bullshit, you melted down on this one.
Nonsense -- CBS is far more accurate
You'll have to PROVE that with actual statistics.
Post by Curt
and respected than FOX.
After Rather-gate?

Not so.
Curt
2009-01-03 01:09:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
I don't have to -- they have a well deserved and worldwide reputation
for accuracy and attention to detail.
Unlike, say, FOX.
PROVE it.
That'd be like proving the sky is blue,
No proof provided.
None needed.
Curt
Curt that is total bullshit, you melted down on this one.
Nonsense -- CBS is far more accurate
You'll have to PROVE that with actual statistics.
Post by Curt
and respected than FOX.
After Rather-gate?
Not so.
What was Rathergate? Let's see.. dialing up the Wayback machine.

It was a story about how the dumbya managed to dodge military service
by jumping past more qualified people to join a danger-free champagne
unit of the TANG -- known to actual military people IIRC as the FANG
-- so he wouldn't have to go and fight. Not that he opposed fighting,
you understand -- he just preferred to have other people do it.

That much is undisputed -- there was a war on, the dumbya prevailed on
his father's influential friends to keep him out of it and sent a
better man to fight in his place.

The CBS special about the dumbya's failure to Stand Up For His Country
was supposed to be about an hour long. About six seconds of it
consisted of a typewritten order from I don't remember who, keeping
the dumbya out of harm's way. No one could find the person who typed
the order (after forty years or so).

The rightweenie blogosphere went into hyperfurious mode attacking this
Tiny Little Itty Bitty Piece of what was an undeniably true story
about the dumbya's shirking his duty back when duty called.

Rather, and CBS, being legitimate news people, looked back and
realized that in the middle of this Hour Long Great Story that was
Completely Documented and Beyond Question Correct, they had included,
what, six seconds of something that, while certainly not ever proven
to be false, they couldn't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt to be
documented -- forty years later.

Rather and CBS were mortified that they had made a Tiny Little Error.
So mortified that Rather wound up leaving the network. The remainder
of the documentary on the dumbya's cowardice was never aired, mostly
because of CBS's humiliation.

That's how Legitimate News Organizations act. They dump a whole story
if one footnote turns out to be out of place. Now compare to FOX --
whose viewers, as late as 2007, thought Saddam was behind 9/11.

Curt
Justin Case
2009-01-03 01:58:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Rather and CBS were mortified that they had made a Tiny Little
Error. So mortified that Rather wound up leaving the network. The
remainder of the documentary on the dumbya's cowardice was never
aired, mostly because of CBS's humiliation.
Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha That's one of the best one I've heard in quite
a while. CBS was so mortified that they kicked Rather's ass off the
air.

The report was based on a false document.

.. Can I assume you've never served your country?

--
Curt
2009-01-03 15:17:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Rather and CBS were mortified that they had made a Tiny Little
Error. So mortified that Rather wound up leaving the network. The
remainder of the documentary on the dumbya's cowardice was never
aired, mostly because of CBS's humiliation.
Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha  That's one of the best one I've heard in quite
a while.  CBS was so mortified that they kicked Rather's ass off the
air.
I think that's what I said.
The report was based on a false document.
No. A questionable document was included as a Very Small Part of an
undeniably true story.

For which the network and the anchor paid dearly.
.. Can I assume you've never served your country?
I serve every day, child.

Curt
Justin Case
2009-01-03 19:53:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
I serve every day, child.
I thought not.

--
Curt
2009-01-04 15:17:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Justin Case
Post by Curt
I serve every day, child.
I thought not.
--
That's true.

Curt

Arne Saknussen
2009-01-03 03:05:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
I don't have to -- they have a well deserved and worldwide reputation
for accuracy and attention to detail.
Unlike, say, FOX.
PROVE it.
That'd be like proving the sky is blue,
No proof provided.
None needed.
Curt
Curt that is total bullshit, you melted down on this one.
Nonsense -- CBS is far more accurate
You'll have to PROVE that with actual statistics.
Post by Curt
and respected than FOX.
After Rather-gate?
Not so.
What was Rathergate? Let's see.. dialing up the Wayback machine.
It was a story about how the dumbya managed to dodge military service
by jumping past more qualified people to join a danger-free champagne
unit of the TANG -- known to actual military people IIRC as the FANG
-- so he wouldn't have to go and fight. Not that he opposed fighting,
you understand -- he just preferred to have other people do it.
That much is undisputed -- there was a war on, the dumbya prevailed on
his father's influential friends to keep him out of it and sent a
better man to fight in his place.
The CBS special about the dumbya's failure to Stand Up For His Country
was supposed to be about an hour long. About six seconds of it
consisted of a typewritten order from I don't remember who, keeping
the dumbya out of harm's way. No one could find the person who typed
the order (after forty years or so).
The rightweenie blogosphere went into hyperfurious mode attacking this
Tiny Little Itty Bitty Piece of what was an undeniably true story
about the dumbya's shirking his duty back when duty called.
Rather, and CBS, being legitimate news people, looked back and
realized that in the middle of this Hour Long Great Story that was
Completely Documented and Beyond Question Correct, they had included,
what, six seconds of something that, while certainly not ever proven
to be false, they couldn't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt to be
documented -- forty years later.
Rather and CBS were mortified that they had made a Tiny Little Error.
So mortified that Rather wound up leaving the network. The remainder
of the documentary on the dumbya's cowardice was never aired, mostly
because of CBS's humiliation.
That's how Legitimate News Organizations act. They dump a whole story
if one footnote turns out to be out of place. Now compare to FOX --
whose viewers, as late as 2007, thought Saddam was behind 9/11.
Curt
Who cares what their viewers thought?

Can you find critical errors in their news coverage?

Do their anchors espouse obvious bias?
Curt
2009-01-03 15:18:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
I don't have to -- they have a well deserved and worldwide reputation
for accuracy and attention to detail.
Unlike, say, FOX.
PROVE it.
That'd be like proving the sky is blue,
No proof provided.
None needed.
Curt
Curt that is total bullshit, you melted down on this one.
Nonsense -- CBS is far more accurate
You'll have to PROVE that with actual statistics.
Post by Curt
and respected than FOX.
After Rather-gate?
Not so.
What was Rathergate? Let's see.. dialing up the Wayback machine.
It was a story about how the dumbya managed to dodge military service
by jumping past more qualified people to join a danger-free champagne
unit of the TANG -- known to actual military people IIRC as the FANG
-- so he wouldn't have to go and fight. Not that he opposed fighting,
you understand -- he just preferred to have other people do it.
That much is undisputed -- there was a war on, the dumbya prevailed on
his father's influential friends to keep him out of it and sent a
better man to fight in his place.
The CBS special about the dumbya's failure to Stand Up For His Country
was supposed to be about an hour long. About six seconds of it
consisted of a typewritten order from I don't remember who, keeping
the dumbya out of harm's way. No one could find the person who typed
the order (after forty years or so).
The rightweenie blogosphere went into hyperfurious mode attacking this
Tiny Little Itty Bitty Piece of what was an undeniably true story
about the dumbya's shirking his duty back when duty called.
Rather, and CBS, being legitimate news people, looked back and
realized that in the middle of this Hour Long Great Story that was
Completely Documented and Beyond Question Correct, they had included,
what, six seconds of something that, while certainly not ever proven
to be false, they couldn't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt to be
documented -- forty years later.
Rather and CBS were mortified that they had made a Tiny Little Error.
So mortified that Rather wound up leaving the network. The remainder
of the documentary on the dumbya's cowardice was never aired, mostly
because of CBS's humiliation.
That's how Legitimate News Organizations act. They dump a whole story
if one footnote turns out to be out of place. Now compare to FOX --
whose viewers, as late as 2007, thought Saddam was behind 9/11.
Curt
Who cares what their viewers thought?
Well they're clearly getting bad information somehow.
Post by Arne Saknussen
Can you find critical errors in their news coverage?
Do their anchors espouse obvious bias?-
Of course.

Curt
Arne Saknussen
2009-01-03 17:43:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Post by Curt
facts are facts.-
Indeed. And CBS has an exceptional record of reporting on them.
You mean INVENTING them..
Post by Curt
Unlike, say, FOX.
Cite?
I don't have to -- they have a well deserved and worldwide reputation
for accuracy and attention to detail.
Unlike, say, FOX.
PROVE it.
That'd be like proving the sky is blue,
No proof provided.
None needed.
Curt
Curt that is total bullshit, you melted down on this one.
Nonsense -- CBS is far more accurate
You'll have to PROVE that with actual statistics.
Post by Curt
and respected than FOX.
After Rather-gate?
Not so.
What was Rathergate? Let's see.. dialing up the Wayback machine.
It was a story about how the dumbya managed to dodge military service
by jumping past more qualified people to join a danger-free champagne
unit of the TANG -- known to actual military people IIRC as the FANG
-- so he wouldn't have to go and fight. Not that he opposed fighting,
you understand -- he just preferred to have other people do it.
That much is undisputed -- there was a war on, the dumbya prevailed on
his father's influential friends to keep him out of it and sent a
better man to fight in his place.
The CBS special about the dumbya's failure to Stand Up For His Country
was supposed to be about an hour long. About six seconds of it
consisted of a typewritten order from I don't remember who, keeping
the dumbya out of harm's way. No one could find the person who typed
the order (after forty years or so).
The rightweenie blogosphere went into hyperfurious mode attacking this
Tiny Little Itty Bitty Piece of what was an undeniably true story
about the dumbya's shirking his duty back when duty called.
Rather, and CBS, being legitimate news people, looked back and
realized that in the middle of this Hour Long Great Story that was
Completely Documented and Beyond Question Correct, they had included,
what, six seconds of something that, while certainly not ever proven
to be false, they couldn't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt to be
documented -- forty years later.
Rather and CBS were mortified that they had made a Tiny Little Error.
So mortified that Rather wound up leaving the network. The remainder
of the documentary on the dumbya's cowardice was never aired, mostly
because of CBS's humiliation.
That's how Legitimate News Organizations act. They dump a whole story
if one footnote turns out to be out of place. Now compare to FOX --
whose viewers, as late as 2007, thought Saddam was behind 9/11.
Curt
Who cares what their viewers thought?
Well they're clearly getting bad information somehow.
Do tell, proof?
Post by Curt
Post by Arne Saknussen
Can you find critical errors in their news coverage?
Do their anchors espouse obvious bias?-
Of course.
And the proof is????
IBM
2008-12-27 20:58:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
'railroaded'? I think you mean 'rathered' although strictly
speaking a 'rathering' is an attempt to frame that backfires.

IBM
Curt
2008-12-28 15:35:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
CBS I think it was, did a pretty good program on this guy maybe 6mo
ago. It really did look like he was railroaded.
        'railroaded'? I think you mean 'rathered' although strictly
        speaking a 'rathering' is an attempt to frame that backfires.
        IBM
Fair enough -- so why'd you use the wrong word for the wrong meaning?

Curt
IBM
2008-12-27 20:53:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by K***@thereich.hal
Karl Rove Destroyed My Life
Well you should feel hono(u)red.
I can't say I know anyone who got Mister Rove's
undivided attention to the extent of having their
life destroyed.
You should be doing an extended "I'm Not Worthy"
riff.

IBM
Loading...