60-Minutes Interviews Knox, Rather Speaks Out

1. The interview followed and pertained to the controversy over forged memos. The purpose of it was to establish CBS' assertion that they did not use inaccurate documents (as opposed to forged documents - a paradigm shift).
2. Rather did not provide any cross-examination whatsoever but instead led Knox down a path that would inevitably allow her to give a (negative) opinion about President Bush. Rather didn't even ask her personal bias (she is a Democrat - noted by ABS News). You might expect that her recollection of any original memos or letters might be influenced by 30 years of time or biased by her political views. She previously was quoted as stating she felt Bush was "unfit for office."
3. Few questions and minimal time were directed to questions and answers regarding the authenticity of the memos.
4. Knox did spend considerable time explaining that she didn't like Bush's attitude, believed (but had no personal knowledge) that he received special treatment getting into the military and that he did not obey his commander and get a physical. Ok, deal with it. What does this have to do with forgery?
5. Rather is the journalist who is alleged to have reported a story based upon forged memos. Why is he the one interviewing potential witnesses? He has a personal interest tied to what Knox's reveals. Rather said he was "relieved and pleased" by Knox's comments that the disputed memos reflected Killian's view of the favorable treatment that Bush received in the military unit. Rather also has a reputation for being biased against conservatives making his role in investigating himself dubious.
6. A further reflection on Rather's bias is the decision by 60 Minutes not to interview any witnesses/experts who contradict Knox or their countinued assertion of accuracy (and there are many). For example, why not bring Killian's son on the program?
7. "Partisan political ideological forces" and "competitors" were blamed for the backlash Rather and CBS have suffered. He suggests directing tough questions at the president rather than asking CBS to prove the authenticity of their source documents.

The spin from CBS is that the authenticity of the records they reported does not matter because they believe their story is true. Having witnessed Rather's profound inability to admit error, I lack confidence in his ability to report accurately the actions of those he is biased against.

In an interview, six days after breaking the story, Rather did admit the memos may not be authentic (see the Washington Post 9/16).

INDC Journal suggests, by his own standard, this makes him a right-wing operative. Unfortuntately, he reinforces the notion that the memos are being questioned because of their content and not because they've been forged.

Poliblogger comments, "And since it is demonstrably obvious that the document is a fake, Rather is making himself the story by acting as if they are real". There are some who this can not be applied to:

Rather has attributed the MSM's reaction to "competition", suggesting that HE is the only one who can credibly report the forged memo story. Very revealing.

Updates:

Killian's son is disputing the secretary's version of events on Hannity & Colmes. He said that she was a pool secretary, not Killian's personal assistant, and she "wouldn't have insight into that situation." [INDC Journal].