Power Line: There Will Be A Report, But Was There an Investigation?

January 06, 2005

There Will Be A Report, But Was There an Investigation?

More than three months after they were appointed to investigate the peddling of fake documents on President Bush's National Guard service by 60 Minutes, Dick Thornburgh and Louis Boccardi are expected to release their report tomorrow. I have no doubt there will be a report; I have no idea whether there was actually an investigation.

There is a story to be told here: a story about how CBS coordinated its attack on President Bush with the Democratic National Committee; a story about how fake documents were put into the hands of a mentally ill, obsessively anti-Bush crank named Bill Burkett; a story about how Burkett (if he can be believed) not only got the documents into the hands of 60 Minutes, but also into the hands of the Kerry campaign, via Max Cleland; a story about how left-wing CBS producer Mary Mapes pursued the Bush National Guard "story" for five years, beginning when he was Governor of Texas, without finding anything worth reporting until the fake documents came along; a story about how 60 Minutes was warned that the documents appeared to be fakes, but published them anyway; a story about how CBS relied on interviews with people who had neither met President Bush nor seen the documents, like Robert Strong, but carefully avoided talking to the key witnesses who actually had knowledge of relevant events, like Gen. "Buck" Staudt. Whom, by the way, they carelessly slandered in their broadcast.

But I doubt whether Thornburgh and Boccardi will tell that story. To conduct this investigation, you needed an investigator. An old-fashioned investigator who would go to Texas, track down Bill Burkett, and persuade him to talk. Who would immerse himself in the corrupt politics of Travis County, Texas, and pursue leads on who created the forgeries. Who would demand to see Mary Mapes' telephone records for the last two years, and track down every number she called. Who would make witnesses like Max Cleland either answer questions, or go on record as refusing to talk. Who would, in short, investigate.

CBS didn't employ an investigator. They employed a couple of distinguished 70-year-old gentlemen: exactly the wrong sort of people. Maybe Thornburgh and Boccardi had the sense to hire investigators, but I doubt it. My guess is that their "investigation" consisted essentially of interviewing CBS employees. At one point, I saw a news item where they proudly announced that they had talked to 36 CBS employees. Wow. What they needed to do was forget about CBS for a while, and go to Texas. If they only talked to CBS people, they would inevitably come away with the impression that 60 Minutes was well-intentioned but regrettably failed to be sufficiently critical of the documents' authenticity, and therefore fell for a possible hoax.

I say "possible" because I doubt that the Thornburgh/Boccardi report will draw any conclusion about the documents' falsity. I suspect that they will be agnostic about the documents, much as Mr. Pein was in his recent Columbia Journalism Review article. If I'm right, the report will be useless.

The fundamental question here is whether CBS was the victim of a hoax, or the perpetrator of a hoax. It has been our view for a long time that Rather and his colleagues were perpetrators, not victims, in part because the documents were such obvious fakes that it strains credulity to suppose that they were actually fooled. When you read the Thornburgy/Boccardi report, keep that question constantly in mind: victim, or perpetrator?

There are lots of problems with CBS's effort to portray itself as the victim of a hoax, but perhaps the most intractable is Dan Rather's personal vouching for the documents. Trust me, he said to America. I know they're authentic. They came from an unimpeachable source. That takes CBS out of the category of victim, and into the category of perpetrator.

As a trial lawyer, there are lots of witnesses I'd love to cross-examine and lots of questions I'd love to ask. On Hugh Hewitt's show tonight, I said that the first one would be of Dan Rather: On what basis did you personally guarantee that the documents were authentic? What source did you describe as "unimpeachable"? Why? If the source was Bill Burkett, it is hard to imagine anyone more impeachable. Maybe Rather was just lying, trying to brazen it out until after the election, so that his last "contribution" would be the election of John Kerry. Or maybe--this is my own idea, just a wild hunch--the source that Rather thought was "unimpeachable" was Max Cleland. But, of course, he couldn't admit this afterward, as the story unravelled, because his paramount concern was not to admit the coordination between CBS and the Kerry campaign.

If Thornburgh and Boccardi didn't ask these questions, and if the answers aren't clearly laid out in their report, what they did wasn't an investigation. It was a cover-up.

Enough speculation. Tomorrow, the report--and we'll let you know what we think of it.

Posted by John at 09:28 PM |

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/mt/mt-diespammers.cgi/9191

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference There Will Be A Report, But Was There an Investigation?:

» On the trail of the lonesome Pein from This isn’t writing, it’s typing.
Corey Pein offers a defense of his recent article in The Columbia Journalism Review, revealingly entitled [Read More]

Tracked on January 6, 2005 10:37 PM

» The Rathergate investigation from Commonwealth Conservative
So the report from the Rathergate investigation is to be released on Friday, finally. Powerline agrees that there will be a report, but wonders if there was actually an investigation. I'm interested in that, myself. We'll find out soon enough,... [Read More]

Tracked on January 6, 2005 11:49 PM

» CBS Report on Fake Memos Set for Release from bLogicus
According to Drudge: THU JAN 06 2005 10:46:50 ET // SOURCES: CBS REPORT ON '60 MINUTES' AIRING OF FAKE BUSH DOCS SET FOR RELEASE...Is it too much to hope for an impartial analysis of the facts? [more on the panel]... [Read More]

Tracked on January 6, 2005 11:55 PM

» CBS to release report without investigating from Of The Mind
CBS has been stonewalling its efforts to investigate Rathergate and the problems surounding forged documents and President Bush's National Guard service. [Read More]

Tracked on January 7, 2005 06:56 AM

» Rathergate Report To Be Released Today from La Shawn Barber's Corner
According to Power Line, the two-person panel reviewing the Rathergate debacle will release its report today. A few days into the blogosphere buzz about Dan Rather's forged memos , which were purported to show that George Bush received preferential... [Read More]

Tracked on January 7, 2005 08:03 AM

» Obligatory Post from INDC Journal
It's Friday. It's currently overcast here in DC. The temperature is 43F, though it really feels more like 30F. UPDATE: Powerline has the foreshadowing of the impending Rathergate report covered. I'm tabling comment until I actually read it, but Hindroc... [Read More]

Tracked on January 7, 2005 08:33 AM

» http://whatattitudeproblem.blogs.com/home/2005/01/today_the_alleg.html from What Attitude Problem?
Today the alleged report on MemoGate is supposed to be released by cBS. But Hindrocket has bigger doubts: More than three months after they were appointed to investigate the peddling of fake documents on President Bush's National Guard service by [Read More]

Tracked on January 7, 2005 09:36 AM

» Rathergate Report Warm Up from Common Sense Runs Wild
As part of the blogosphere's preparations for the release of the Rathergate report, Michelle Malkin has produced a Rathergate Refresher Course. It's a handy link guide to the history of the story and will be useful to many of us [Read More]

Tracked on January 7, 2005 11:52 AM

» On the Rathergate Investigation from Reagan Republican
Apparently there's a report thats about to be released on the whole forged documents scandal at CBS. But Power Line isn't convinced that it will be worth anything. Neither are Commonwealth Conservative or Of the Mind. For me, I think that conserva... [Read More]

Tracked on January 7, 2005 12:30 PM

» Outtakes
01.05.07 from the evangelical outpost
Thursday: The New Friday CBS News still believes they are operating in the pre-blog era. Why else would they release the Rathergate report on a Friday afternoon? In the old days (circa 2003), if you wanted to bury a story... [Read More]

Tracked on January 7, 2005 01:42 PM

» Outtakes
01.07.05 from the evangelical outpost
Thursday: The New Friday CBS News still believes they are operating in the pre-blog era. Why else would they release the Rathergate report on a Friday afternoon? In the old days (circa 2003), if you wanted to bury a story... [Read More]

Tracked on January 7, 2005 02:16 PM

» Outtakes
01.07.05 from the evangelical outpost
There Can Be Only One For this new year I have but one goal, a single objective that I will be pursuing with a fierce and steely-eyed dedication: To overtake the Lutherans. ***** Thursday: The New Friday CBS News still... [Read More]

Tracked on January 7, 2005 04:35 PM

Tracked on January 8, 2005 05:36 AM

» Saturday morning reading ... from Darleen's Place
Some great things are afoot today! Let's start with LGF's first round voting for The Fiskie. It's a long list of idiotarians to choose from, but you get to vote for five. Right now the top three are His Corpulentness... [Read More]

Tracked on January 8, 2005 09:51 AM

» Anyone seen the report? from The Universal Church of Cosmic Uncertainty
Power Line: There Will Be A Report, But Was There an Investigation? There is a story to be told here: a story about how CBS coordinated its attack on President Bush with the Democratic National Committee; a story about how fake documents were put into ... [Read More]

Tracked on January 8, 2005 10:46 AM

Tracked on January 8, 2005 11:56 AM