« 60-Minutes Interviews Knox, Rather Speaks Out | Main | AP Story Reports Boos Rather than Bush's Act of Kindness »

A Likely Source for the CBS Memos Part II

Update: CBS has issued a statement and Rather has apologized. There is no admission of inaccuracy but the network does say it was misled by Burkett regarding the source of the memos [more]. Burkett will be interviewed on the CBS evening news 9/20.

Previously I documented the possible role that Bill Burkett played in the ongoing CBS Memo scandal [click here]. Since then the MSM has identified Burkett as a possible source and even reported that the memos bore fax markings from a Kinko's near his home in Abilene, Texas [more]. Apparently, Richard Strong said he was shown copies of the documents by CBS anchor Dan Rather and producer Mary Mapes on Sept. 5, three days before the broadcast. He said at least one of the documents bore the faxed header "Kinko's Abilene."

While Burkett and everyone who knows him in Texas suddenly have "no comment" about his potential involvement, the New York Times published a few interestings comments from his lawyer, David Van Os.

Mr. Burkett declined to return telephone calls to his home near Abilene, Tex. His lawyer, David Van Os, on Tuesday repeatedly refused to say in a telephone interview whether the officer had played a part in supplying the disputed documents to CBS. Mr. Van Os said "the real story is and should be, where was George Bush?" and that Mr. Burkett "is not the proper object of attention."

Mr. Van Os called Mr. Burkett "a man of impeccable honesty who would not permit himself to be a party to anything fake, fraudulent or phony." He also said, in response to questions, and stressing that he was speaking only hypothetically, "If Bill Burkett were to later discover that something he was a party to were fake or phony, as a man of honor who lives by a code of honor of the military, he would not permit the falsity to continue." But, the lawyer hastened to add, "This is not intended to be any kind of specific statement."

Asked what role Mr. Burkett had in raising questions about Mr. Bush's military service, Mr. Van Os said: "If, hypothetically, Bill Burkett or anyone else, any other individual, had prepared or had typed on a word processor as some of the journalists are presuming, without much evidence, if someone in the year 2004 had prepared on a word processor replicas of documents that they believed had existed in 1972 or 1973 - which Bill Burkett has absolutely not done'' - then, he continued, "what difference would it make?"

I catch a familiar tune, "similar to that expressed by Dan Rather." What's more, Burkett published a scathing editorial about Bush which appeared in the Online Journal, Aug. 25, 2004 [hat tip Rathergate]

I know from your files that we have now reassembled, the fact that you did not fulfill your oath, taken when you were commissioned to "obey the orders of the officers appointed over you".

Taken with his attorney's statement about "replicas", it is hard not to read a lot into Burkett's "reassembly" of the files.

After writing to this point, I found an excellent Washington Dispatch posting by CK Rairden that goes a step further by noting an additional similarity. Well done.

Update:

In the interest of fair reporting, I note a disagreement with the interpretation of Mr. Van Os' statements. "I continue to maintain that CBS News' use of forged documents is itself an issue of genuine public concern. But while Mr. Van Os was obviously trying to change the subject, it does not appear that he was impliedly endorsing or dismissing outright the actions of the documents forger, whoever that may turn out to be." - Beldar Blog

The main reason for the disagreement appears to be a truncation of Mr. Van Os' quote that has now been corrected by the Times: Mr. Van Os then asked "what difference would even that make'' to the "factual reality of where was George W. Bush at the times in question and what was he doing?''

Update:

In a surprising story by the Houston Chronicle Burkett is revealed to have compared the President to Hitler, previously exaggerated to the media (by his own admission), and stated one month ago that he was unable to find memos or documentation consistent with his speculation concerning Killian [hat tip Captain Ed - see also BlogsforBush and INDC Journal]. Here are a few bytes:

WASHINGTON - Bill Burkett, who has emerged as a possible CBS source for disputed memos about President Bush's Guard service, has a long history of making charges against Bush and the Texas National Guard.

Even Burkett has admitted some of his allegations are false.

[snip]

One month ago, in an essay posted on a progressive Web site, Burkett theorized that Killian would have been a likely person to know more about Bush's service. But, he conceded, "I have found no documentation from LTC Killian's hand or staff that indicate that this unit was involved in any complicit way to ... cover for the failures of 1Lt. Bush ... " Burkett went on to say, "On the contrary, LTC Killian's remarks are rare."

Burkett wrote a long indictment against Bush for a Web site in 2003 in which he said he personally was ordered to "alter personnel records of George W. Bush." In that article, Burkett said that when he refused he was sent to Panama as punishment, where he contracted a disabling disease.

But when asked about that charge by the Houston Chronicle in February, Burkett said, "That statement was not accurate, that is overstated."

[snip]

In an article Burkett wrote for the Internet last year he compared Bush to Hitler and Napoleon as one of "the three small men" who sought to rule through tyranny. "Three small men who wanted to conquer and vanquish," Burkett wrote. Burkett confirmed authorship of that article in the February Chronicle interview.

Captain Ed suggests, "For someone who has had no trouble making things up before, going to Kinko's and attempting to create Killian "documentation" is hardly a leap -- it fits directly into the man's character. Further, he had the motive and the track record of conducting smears against George Bush."

Update:

New York Times (9/19): One person at the network, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that Mr. Burkett had been at the very least a go-between for the documents, but that very few people at the network know from whom he might have obtained them, if anyone.

One of the better sources for more information on Burkett is Ace of Spaces.

Update (9/20):

I give you CBS' statement about Bill Burkett:

The following statement was issued by CBS News:

"Bill Burkett, in a weekend interview with CBS News Anchor and Correspondent Dan Rather, has acknowledged that he provided the now-disputed documents used in the Sept. 8 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY report on President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard. Burkett, a retired National Guard lieutenant colonel, also admits that he deliberately misled the CBS News producer working on the report, giving her a false account of the documents' origins to protect a promise of confidentiality to the actual source. Burkett originally said he obtained the documents from another former Guardsman. Now he says he got them from a different source whose connection to the documents and identity CBS News has been unable to verify to this point. Burkett's interview will be featured in a full report on tonight's CBS EVENING NEWS WITH DAN RATHER (6:30-7:00 PM, ET/PT).

In light of this and other developments reported by CBS News and other news organizations, CBS News President Andrew Heyward issued the following statement: "60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY had full confidence in the original report or it would not have aired. However, in the wake of serious and disturbing questions that came up after the broadcast, CBS News has done extensive additional reporting in an effort to confirm the documents' authenticity. That included an interview featured on last week's edition of 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY (15) with Marian Carr Knox, secretary to the late Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, the officer named as the author of the documents; the interview with Bill Burkett to be seen tonight (20); and a further review of the forensic evidence on both sides of the debate. Based on what we now know, CBS News cannot prove that the documents are authentic, which is the only acceptable journalistic standard to justify using them in the report. We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret. Nothing is more important to us than our credibility and keeping faith with the millions of people who count on us for fair, accurate, reliable, and independent reporting. We will continue to work tirelessly to be worthy of that trust."

"CBS News and CBS management are commissioning an independent review of the process by which the report was prepared and broadcast to help determine what actions need to be taken. The names of the people conducting the review will be announced shortly, and their findings will be made public."

Posted by tim at September 16, 2004 7:05 PM

Articles Related to CBS Memos, Politics: