Yep, the Kerry campaign was contacted by CBS prior to the story being run(contrary to what the Kerry campaign said earlier) according to both Dan Rather's producer and a senior Kerry aide.

In addition, the guy who forged the documents has had multiple meetings with people close to Kerry over the past months(such as Cleland).

I can't wait to hear the screams of denial from you Kerry supporters...

I'm a Bush supporter, I despise Kerry with all my heart... but can you show some proof? :p

This is a far cry from proof, but it does raise some serious questions.

http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+CBS+arranged+for+meeting+with+Lockhart&expire=&urlID=11703685&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitic selections%2Fnation%2Fpresident%2F2004-09-20-cbs-documents_x.htm&partnerID=1660

More interesting reading:

http://www.nysun.com/article/1993

Good enough for me, I just wanted some sort of backup, since there are accusations being thrown around all over the place.

What's this one going to be titled.

OutOfDateFontGate??

By hook or by crook eh Mr Kerry?

Fandros

how about ImpossibleSuperscriptGate?

In addition, the guy who forged the documents has had multiple meetings with people close to Kerry over the past months(such as Cleland).The article simply says, "Burkett said, adding that he also talked to former Georgia senator Max Cleland and Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean during the past 45 days." Perhaps the "multiple meetings" are mentioned elsewhere? Or by multiple did you just mean "two?"

Anyway, unless a firm connection between the forgeries and the Kerry campaign surfaces, this is more problematic for CBS than for Kerry. The network's credibility is thoroughly hosed. I haven't watched Rather much over the years, but I may have to tune in just to see the look on his face (and to see how much CBS is talking about the issue).

What about Joe Lockhart?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132996,00.html

The dems twisted every angle possible to try and establish a connection between the SBVT and the Bush campaign. So much so that the mere fact that an attorney represented both was cause for the attorney's resignation.

Lockhart and Cleland aren't low level people in the Kerry camp.

Although it raises questions about the Kerry campaign, the Kerry campaign is supposed to be partisan and this kind of dirty trick is par for the course (e.g. Cleland showing up at Bush's ranch with a "letter").

What's alarming to me is CBS's cooperation in the action. CBS will have a very hard time convincing anyone that they are non partisan.

I also like this answer from Dan Rather in an interview on August 30, 2004.

Is the media doing a good job covering the 2004 election? Or is there too much attention on the Swift Boat flap?

I would like us to concentrate more on issues and less on campaign process. But there is always a tendency to go with what's sensational. Also, we're human, and humans keep making the same mistakes. In the end, what difference does it make what one candidate or the other did or didn't do during the Vietnam War? In some ways, that war is as distant as the Napoleonic campaigns. What's far more import is this: Do they have an exit strategy for Iraq? If so, what is it? How will they address the national deficit? And what are the chances their plans will work?

So when it comes to discussions of John Kerry and the Swift Boat ads it shouldn't make a difference (despite the fact that Kerry's campaign has been run primarily on his service in Vietnam). Yet 9 days later CBS spends 60 minutes highlighting forged documents focused on Bush's national guard service provided by an obviously bitterly partisan person . Does anyone really think CBS is non partisan anymore?

that is such a political answer to a rather easy question, he took it 10 ways different then from what the person was requesting

I was listening to Fox News as I left to get my daughter from school. They said the vast majority of the Viacom(owner of CBS)board of directors are high end Kerry supporters and donators. Heh.

Having read some of these stories, some are now claiming CBS did not actually receive the documents for study until September 3, yet didn't CBS claim they had been "vetting" them for 6 weeks prior to using them on the air? Am I missing something or has CBS been lying through their teeth?

If I were in charge, Mapes and Rather would be getting their pink slips about now.

The morning after the 60 Minutes flap ran, the DNC had their "Fortunate Son" video with Dan Rather / Burkett distributed and on the air, and Kerry/Edwards were already out in front of crowds of people with their new attack theme. Imagine that, an entirely new direction for the Kerry campaign planned, produced, and distributed all from this bogus interview- overnight. I bet someone at the Kerry campaign was mighty pleased when they just happened to catch that 60 Minutes episode as it was airing huh?

Riiight.

I don't need a smoking gun or a bloody candlestick to be convinced. But it doesn't matter at this point anyway, because you people sticking with Kerry have already had to overlook so many other train wrecks, it's quite pathetic actually.

How many people that have perjured themselves (Joe Wilson) or committed felonies (Sandy Berger) has Kerry allowed to be central advisors or key components in his campaign? Wake the fuck up people, if you elect this man it will only get worse.

Having read some of these stories, some are now claiming CBS did not actually receive the documents for study until September 3, yet didn't CBS claim they had been "vetting" them for 6 weeks prior to using them on the air? Am I missing something or has CBS been lying through their teeth?

If I were in charge, Mapes and Rather would be getting their pink slips about now.
They are lying through their teeth :p

'Wake the fuck up people, if you elect this man it will only get worse.'

- 'Cause The Only Way Is Up, for Bush.

Heh.