CBS to admit memo's are fake...

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

I was gonna say the Watergate tempest in a teapot fiasco personally.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Straybow
Hmmmm, sounds like someone too young to remember the Bork and Thomas confirmation hearings…

Hardly. Bork wasn't qualified.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
I was gonna say the Watergate tempest in a teapot fiasco personally.

The cover-up wasn't a tempest in a teapot.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Partisanness is as old as the government, but it has become especially bitter in the U.S. since the Repubs '94 campaign. They really went over the top under Gingrich, and haven't tamed any since he was tossed out. It's only been the last year and a half, really, that the Democrats discovered they had some testes. Pickled and kept in a jar on the shelf, but they had them none the less.

Oh, please. It has become "especially bitter" since the people who are obstensibly closer to your political beliefs started losing in a serious way. But you can't convincingly claim that today's politics are more "bitter" than the politics of the 19th century (Civil War, duelling politico's, etc) or even of the 1950's and 1960's.

[chequita guevara]

After Watergate, things really calmed down for a while.

[JohnT]

Otoh, the 200 years before Watergate, things were pretty high-strung.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


The cover-up wasn't a tempest in a teapot.

If you say so...

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by The diplomat
But Fox did not use forged documents, did they?

Just because the documents couldn't be shown to be genuine doesn't automatically make them forged.

Interesting leap of faith.

[chequita guevara]

UR, I don't think anyone thinks they're legit, even if they are duplicates of original documents, which they very well likely may be.

But you know what? We already know the President is a liar. We dopn't need this to confirm it.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ned
I suspect that the investigation will lead to a search for a new CBS anchor. In fact, I suspect the search has already been ordered.

Don't anchors just read what they're told to?

[Urban Ranger]

Still, there is a big difference between documents not admissable for certain legal purposes and outright forgeries. Suppose these are uncertified duplicates. That means you probably can't use them in a court of law, but they can still be used to, say, study the behaviour of a certain person.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Still, there is a big difference between documents not admissable for certain legal purposes and outright forgeries. Suppose these are uncertified duplicates. That means you probably can't use them in a court of law, but they can still be used to, say, study the behaviour of a certain person.

Considering the font used in the documents wasn't even in use back then...Considering that NO document expert that has looked at them has even said they "might" be real...considering CBS's own document people had "serious questions" about their authenticity...Your probably right.

Of course you are taking a typical liberal line...the 'ole "we want it to be true...so it must be!"

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
That means you probably can't use them in a court of law, but they can still be used to, say, study the behaviour of a certain person.

Not without the originals you can't. As long as there is a strong possiblity these are made up from whole cloth, you cannot use them as a basis for anything, other than that CBS screwed up.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by PLATO
Of course you are taking a typical liberal line...the 'ole "we want it to be true...so it must be!"

That is a defect on both sides of the politifal fence. I might remind you of all the anti-Clinton lies you people so happily paraded around.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Asher

Don't anchors just read what they're told to?

Maybe in your country where the ruling party tells the anchors what to say.