RICHARD NIXON'S REVENGE

No, he's not gone. He still has his very cushy spot with "60 Minutes Wednesday". Heads rolled at CBS, but Rather himself emerges virtually unscathed. You get the feeling 'memogate' may have been a catalyst to hurry the process to replace Rather as CBS news anchor, but that was going to happen anyway. He wasn't 'punished' at all.

However, this story is circulating (quietly) this week. I wonder if it signifies a trend?:

'60 Minutes' Staffer on Bush National Guard Report Sues CBS

By Samuel Maull Associated Press Writer
Published: Mar 9, 2005

NEW YORK (AP) - A veteran "60 Minutes" staffer sued CBS on Wednesday for alleged age discrimination and defamation, charging that the network used the flawed report on President Bush's National Guard service as an excuse to try to ease her out.
Esther Kartiganer, 67, filed the lawsuit on the last day that Dan Rather, the newsman who presented the Bush report, appeared as anchor of the CBS evening news after 24 years. Rather, 73, will continue as a full-time "60 Minutes" reporter.

Kartiganer said in court papers that her defamation claim is based on a statement by Leslie Moonves, CBS chairman and chief executive officer, on the network's Web site Jan. 10.

In that statement, Moonves said Kartiganer had "abnegated her assigned function" and "CBS News is the worse for it." Moonves made his statement on the same day that an independent panel issued its report on the Bush report.

Kartiganer says in court papers that her role in the story's airing was minimal. She says she was directed on Sept. 7 to read transcripts to make sure excerpts of interviews were not used out of context.

Kartiganer says she had already been demoted when she was removed as senior producer of "60 Minutes" in May 2004 and made senior producer of "60 Minutes Wednesday."

She says she was replaced at "60 Minutes" by a woman 20 years younger, which is part of the basis for her age discrimination claim. She says she was stripped of her senior producer title and her pay was reduced by 20 percent.

It was on "60 Minutes Wednesday" that the Bush military service report appeared on Sept. 8.

Dana McClintock, spokesman for CBS' parent company, Viacom, issued a statement saying Kartiganer was not terminated by CBS but was transferred to a new position because of the findings of the panel that investigated the Bush report.

Kartiganer's lawsuit asks for back pay, bonuses, benefits and unspecified compensatory damages for "emotional distress, humiliation, pain and suffering." It also seeks punitive damages for the "willful and/or reckless disregard" of her rights.

AP-ES-03-09-05 2059EST
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGB6LPBB46E.html

The recent story on Rather in The New Yorker makes me think that "unscathed" is hardly a fair estimation of what's happened to Rather.

Wonder what's going on with the Plane issue? Imagine Kerry getting a pass on that. Treason and all.

What plane issue?

Valerie Plane issue.

Palme

But don't expect any real response from the we-love-anything-GOP crowd here regarding this matter. Rather (no pun intended) you will read varying degrees of "Oh, shucks." It's perfectly alright with them if a government they favor uses it's power to suppress it's opposition, truth not being a factor taken in consideration.

By the way, I think Dan Rather did what any good boss would do and what any good reporter would do. He looked at the story his producers brought him, he asked about the vettings that went on, he asked about the sources. He asked the editor's question: Do you stand by this story? Once they said yes, he did what I hope any boss would do, he stood behind his producer's and their work.

And he held on. That's my kind of boss, one who would give me a chance to defend my work and what's more, once I showed I couldn't really vet those letters didn't cut me off at the knees, but took responsibility on himself for the errors. CBS News and Dan Rather let themselves get taken for a ride. It happens to all reporters though not usually at the end of their career, someone comes up with a story that's both too good to be true and full of those invisible holes that only editors can see, and everybody misses the mark.

So I say "Shucks." too. Because the rest of the story still stands, even without the letters. While Dan Rather was reporting from Tay Son, and friends of mine were dying, George W. Bush and his family used their power and influence to secure him a slot in the National Guard. He flew a little bit then got himself re-assigned to some political hack's campaign so he thought he didn't have to even show up in Alabama or anywhere else for duty, got himself an early out so he could show up at New Haven's Yale campus wearing his flight jacket while friends of mine were still out there busy dying in the green, green fields of Viet Nam. He was, and is, a spoiled brat of a man

Joe(Take a gander at Texas to see what I mean.)Nation

And it's the kind of 'reporting' you just did that gives reporters a bad name I think Joe. Geroge W. Bush signed his Form 180. It's all there for anybody to see. And if you would have gone on the air with forged documents after having been informed there was a serious problem with their authenticity--and Dan Rather was informed according to the witnesses--I would put you in the club with other political hacks who hide behind freedom of the press to spew their bile.

Dan Rather might have salvaged something out of this if his apology had been extended to the one that was intentionally and deliberately smeared with false 'evidence'. But he didn't. And hasn't. And that is reprehensible.

I go back to a time when libel and slander meant something and was considered a bad thing.

Well, it hardly stops at Palme.

It's amazing how people are screaming about the liberal press when the GOP is getting a free ride on so many issues.

Talking about the form after Kerry's loss seems, well, like just another huge red herring. I mean, who the hell cares now?

*ahem*

Plame. Valerie Plame.

Wkipedia entry on Valerie Plame

No, it is not a huge red herring when they continue to hound others on for or with far less evidence. It is not what they do, but what they do dishonestly, unfairly, and unevenly based on political ideology. But in this case, a major U.S. network attempted to affect the outcome of a presidential election with forged documents. I think any thinking person should have a problem with that no matter who the target was.

Bayinghound - I haven't seen any of the GOP asking to see Kerry's records since before the election (when he was saluting everything in sight and making a complete fool of himself).

It's the MEDIA that's asking, for your information. Tim Russert on 1/31 and Don Imus last month.

Perhaps because they remember that Kerry PROMISED repeatedly to sign Form 180 and then didn't. He's a politician. The media wants to see just how much of a politician, I guess.

Yup. That's me alright, a political hack. Though one who's able to tell both sides, sometimes even three or more sides, to every story rather than just regurgitate the company line.

I'm still waiting for you to reply to my challenge on Nixon's faults. Remember? I said three good things about him and his administration and you were supposed to come up with three negatives, which you won't because you're incapable of seeing anything ignoble about those you worship. Prove me wrong.

(Though I did love, love, love your poem on lies. Very clever. You made me laugh out loud with that verse on Columbus...)

Maybe Dan should have said that his comments were inoperative. That seemed to work for the Nixon White House for awhile. Or maybe Rather should apologize to the President and then ask him to set the record straight: where was he those missing months? Alabama? Texas? Both? Neither? Where?

Oh, wait! You can tell me. It's in the open record now right?

Joe(sips his coffee)Nation

I didn't see your challenge on Nixon's faults, Joe. But if you will rephrase your question(s) without the neolib patronization/condescention/personal insults, I would be glad to comply. You're one of the few here who probably can hold his own in an intelligent argument without disintegrating into childish one-upmanship and name calling and I would enjoy sparring with you.

JustWonders -- exactly ... the media is pursuing a dead story instead of working on who in the White House is responsible for the crime of releasing Valerie Plame's (heh, do we have it right now?) status as CIA operative ... a treasonable act.

The media further doesn't seem to be much interested in hammering home that our current Attorney General is linked to an effort at the top endorsing torture by our Armed Forces ... an endorsement that ended with teenagers doing the deeds to top it all off.

The media doesn't seem to be interested in any follow up stories on Tom Delay's flagrant misdemeanors.

The media doesn't seem to be interested in how the pro-military GOP-controlled government that has reduced the budget on Veteran's hospitals.

But, the media is interested in hounding a man who lost the Presidential election over an issue that seems rather small given that he was actually in Vietnam and our current President, well, he was in Texas.

And you say they're liberal? C'mon!

Bayinghound - more likely scenario is Tim and Don remember the ad nauseum saluting Kerry did while campaigning (seared into their minds, I say) and are just plain curious on why he keeps stalling.

So, tell me. Why do YOU think he keeps stalling?

There is speculation that there may have been al less-than-honorable discharge that got cleaned up during the Carter administration which would explain the discharge being dated during the Carter administration. (A lot of fuzzy records got cleaned up during the Carter administration.) Now if this wasn't the case, you would think Kerry would jump at the chance to sign the Form 180 to prove it. If it is true, you would think the Democrats would be wanting to know the truth of the matter before he runs for President again and screws up another election. He won't be able to dodge the issue again. His promise to sign the Form 180 is out there on national television with the clips available to run again and again.

Fair question, Just Wonders; riddle me this though, who in the White House do you think is responsible for the treason of releasing the information on Valerie Plame? Karl Rove? The Big W himself?

Why ain't I hearing it and the story on Jeff Gannon each hour, every single friggin day, like, say, Monicagate? Do you think we're going to get the story of the refrigerated briefs?

And won't it be embarrassing if it turns out the culprit wasn't anyone in the White House but was leaked by somebody wishing to implicate the administration? Some never want to see any possibility but GOP guilt though.

Because that's all this could possibly be. Especially when Bush performs lip service to the media, stating that he wished to get to the bottom of it, and then burying it.

You know, kinda like Usama bin Laden.

Claiming that the mainstream media is "liberal" is like claiming that the Pope is an Islamic Fundamentalist.

Were they liberal when they went after Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal?

Were they liberal when the came out highly critical of Janet Reno's handling of Waco?

Were they liberal when they were critical of the Clinton's attempt to overhaul the healthcare industry?

But, Foxfyre, we already know it was someone in the White House! That much Novack et. al. have already said.

The fact that you could be so blase about treason is really odd coming from someone concerned about a friggin 180 form.