Closing the Barn Door...

[Yonivore]

...after the horses are out.

www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/pierce1.pdf (http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/pierce1.pdf)

[ChumpDumper]

Find the originals.

That's the only comment I have on this issue, and the only comment that makes any sense.

[Yonivore]

Uh, they don't exist...that's why Dan had to get them forged.

[ChumpDumper]

:rolleyes

Prove it.

Same challenge I have for Rather.

[Yonivore]

Burden's on Dan.

[ChumpDumper]

And you.

1) Make claim.

2) Back up claim with fact.

[Spurminator]

I believe "Preponderance of Evidence" would hold true in this case.

No, it's probably not enough for a conviction, but it's enough to render them useless as evidence of the attacks they supposedly support.

CBS' credibility has taken a hit, and rightfully so.

[ChumpDumper]

I believe "Preponderance of Evidence" would hold true in this case. Not really.

Real or fake, there's an original out there.

[Spurminator]

Unless it was trashed or deleted. I doubt Burkett would be keeping it in his personal file.

[ChumpDumper]

Then take it for what it is.

Nothing.

[Yonivore]

Without the forgeries, there would have been no claim the documents existed.

If someone photoshopped a picture to make you think unicorns existed and then, you found out the picture was faked...would you demand the person that showed you the picture was fake prove that unicorns don't exist?

No, you'd go back to the previous truth, unicorns don't exist. Unless, of course, you're a stupid ****.

[ChumpDumper]

You ask to see the unicorn.

[Yonivore]

It doesn't exist.

You are a stupid ****.

[ChumpDumper]

Of course it doesn't exist.

Faker can't produce it -- can't prove unicorns exist.

Unicorns don't exist.

So simple even your stupid ass could follow the logic.

If they can't produce the original, they have nothing.

You can't even see when i'm agreeing with you, you blind piece of shit.

[Nbadan]

:lol

[Spurminator]

The documents themselves are nothing.

The way CBS has seemingly bent over backwards to get this sensationalist dig on the air despite having questionable evidence is something worth discussing and learning from.

[Yonivore]

You asked me to prove they don't exist. And, it's impossible to prove something doesn't exist.

[ChumpDumper]

The documents themselves are nothing.They are everything.

That they went ahead without even seeing the originals is poor journalism. If they don't press the source to produce the originals, they have nothing and deserve whatever they get.

[ChumpDumper]

You asked me to prove they don't exist. And, it's impossible to prove something doesn't exist.But you can disprove someone's claim if they can't produce real evidence.

[Spurminator]

Nothing, everything... same difference.


:p

[Tommy Duncan]

It's quite hard for Rather to make the case that he was duped. He knew who his source was and that source has some definitely credibility problems. He knew that there were some questions about the authenticity of the memos. Everything he did in developing the story reeks of a partisan vendetta against Bush.

Also, as long as he tries to argue that the docs could be true he is going to look like an idiot and the rest of the media is going to dump on him. It is kind of hard to say your critics are simply right wing partisans when its the Washington Post, ABC, and the LA Times who are telling you that they are fake.

I do think it is important to find out who created these documents and what Rather and his producer had to do with them. It's a bad precedent to set that something like this can happen without some justice.

[Yonivore]

"But you can disprove someone's claim if they can't produce real evidence."
And, I'm saying you've done that the moment you prove the claim is fraudulent. At that point, you've proven the unicorns or documents don't exist.

Ball back in the fraud's court. I should get to move on without the constant nattering about non-existent documents.

[ChumpDumper]

The document does exist.

It was faxed -- you can't fax that which does not exist..

Whether it is fake is the question.

[Nbadan]

This is just the Swift boat veteran claims turned on its heels. Kerry couldn't prove them wrong because to do so would require that he opened all his military files, something he has chosen not to do probably for medical reasons. W. can't prove Dan Rather or CBS complicit without proving that what the documents say is false. To do so would require W. to come up with records he either has not released, yet, or those that have been deliberately destroyed.

[Yonivore]

I fax documents created in Word all the time...without printing them.

The signature could be stolen from some other digital image of Killian's signature online.

There doesn't have to be a piece of paper.

Yes, even the fax data, showing it was faxed from a machine at the Kinko's in Abilene, can be reproduced and pasted at the top of a Word document.

[ChumpDumper]

I fax documents created in Word all the time...without printing them.And they exist.

[Yonivore]

Not if you wipe them with a DoD-class program.

Look, I'm as anxious as you are to see what Burkett has to say. But, if the original fakes never show up, that doesn't mean they didn't exist.

But, there are no memos typed by Killian or his pool secretary.

[ChumpDumper]

Not if you wipe them with a DoD-class program.Then the proof of the original is gone, which is all I've said regarding this.
Look, I'm as anxious as you are to see what Burkett has to say.Can't say I really am. Anyone who is undecided by now and can be swayed by this or Swift Boat is someone I'd rather not have deciding the fate of the country.

[Yonivore]

So, if he connects the DNC or Kerry to an effort to sway the election through fraud, you don't think there are some undecideds out there that would be affected?

I think different.

[ChumpDumper]

I seriously doubt it goes that far and am sure it wouldn't come out before the election.

Not enough time.

Now, someone could make up a story about a DNC connection. That would probably have legs.

[Yonivore]

It's certainly explain why Dan Rather and CBS are so hot to defend the fakes as being authentic. They know where the investigation will lead.

You're right, they may be able to stall...but, if Burkett talks, and he's not the brightest bulb in the hall, it could prove fatal for the Kerry campaign.

[ChumpDumper]

My point is if you are undecided by now you're pretty much an idiot -- the choices are pretty clear from a straight policy standpoint. I mean "I was going to vote for Kerry until someone in the DNC lied."? "I was going to vote for Bush until I saw some GI corpses a couple of days before the election."?

This is exactly the kind of thing that shouldn't sway people. I don't argue that it doesn't.

Folks is stupid.

[Yonivore]

"I don't argue that it doesn't."
And, political operatives know it is EXACTLY the superficial and/or the sensational scandal that knocks them off the fence.

[ChumpDumper]

Sure -- It's close enough that whoever has the most effective superficial scandal last is going to win.

If I was ever to make a prediction, that is it.

[Yonivore]

And, I think the DNC blew their wad early...they're spent.

Premature emasculation.