Friday, July 20 , 2018, 7:33 pm | A Few Clouds 69º

 
 
 
 

Michelle Malkin: Memo to Dan Rather — Shut Up About Memos

Old liberal media liars never fade away. They just rage, rage against the dying of their dinosaur industry's light.

I'm looking at you, Dan Rather.

After years of trashing alternative media, which exposed the veteran CBS News reporter's monumental Memogate fraud in 2004, Rather has joined the ranks of pajama-clad online broadcasters.

The 86-year-old grandfather of fake news now uses Facebook, YouTube and Twitter to stoke the left's anti-Trump resistance — all while clinging bitterly to the vestiges of his defunct "legendary" newsman persona.

Consider Gunga Dan's comments on the House Intelligence Committee's release of the four-page Nunes memo alleging domestic surveillance abuses by politicized FBI brass working with Democratic operatives.

"Most respectable analysts," Rather asserted, "have determined that the contents of the memo are thin."

Who determined that these unnamed analysts are "respectable"? Dan Rather.

Why are they "respectable"? Because they confirm Dan Rather's opinions. Why are Dan Rather's opinions more valid than others? Because he's Dan Rather, the veteran teleprompter reader America must trust.

"With the release of the memo," Rather railed, "the goal of the White House and its willing enablers is to make what is really the truth into a forgettable sidebar."

He lambasted "cherry-picking" and taking things "out of context." And, Rather fretted, "what will be the endgame if a big segment of the public confuses what they hope to be true with what turns out to be true?"

This "disgraced former journalist" fraudster's got more gall than a bladder bank.

Document Dr. Dan is the man who fronted the notorious "60 Minutes" propaganda hit piece on George W. Bush based on fake documents about his Texas Air National Guard service in the 1970s and nonexistent sources upon whom Rather's team relied to verify these documents.

(If that self-validating circularity of bogusness sounds eerily similar to what the Nunes memo revealed, you've been paying attention.)

Rather and his CBS team perpetuated journalistic fraud of the highest order. Conservative bloggers and alternative media called out Dan Rather and his con artist producer Mary Mapes for their malpractice.

CBS denied this and delayed addressing the hoax. The mainstream media tried to shoot the messenger and discredit critics of CBS/Rather.

The evidence of bias was overwhelming — forcing CBS to appoint an independent review panel that concluded that the network "failed to follow basic journalistic principles in the preparation and reporting of the piece," was "rigid and blind" in its defense, and demonstrated "myopic zeal" in its manufacturing of the Bush/National Guard fraud.

After the report was issued, Mapes and three executives were fired and the editorial practices at CBS were revamped.

The New York Times infamously coined the phrase "fake but accurate" to describe the left's stubborn defense of the four manufactured memos attributed to Texas Army National Guard commander Lt. Col. Jerry Killian. Less remembered are the scathing conclusions of the independent panel who identified these worst defects of Rather's work in 2004:

"1. The failure to obtain clear authentication of any of the Killian documents from any document examiner;

"2. The false statement in the Sept. 8 Segment that an expert had authenticated the Killian documents when all he had done was authenticate one signature from one document used in the segment;

"3. The failure of 60 Minutes Wednesday management to scrutinize the publicly available, and at times controversial, background of the source of the documents, retired Texas Army National Guard Lieutenant Colonel Bill Burkett;

"4. The failure to find and interview the individual who was understood at the outset to be Lieutenant Colonel Burkett's source of the Killian documents, and thus to establish the chain of custody;

"5. The failure to establish a basis for the statement in the segment that the documents "were taken from Colonel Killian's personal files";

"6. The failure to develop adequate corroboration to support the statements in the Killian documents and to carefully compare the Killian documents to official TexANG records, which would have identified, at a minimum, notable inconsistencies in content and format;

"7. The failure to interview a range of former National Guardsmen who served with Lieutenant Colonel Killian and who had different perspectives about the documents;

"8. The misleading impression conveyed in the segment that Lieutenant Strong had authenticated the content of the documents when he did not have the personal knowledge to do so;

"9. The failure to have a vetting process capable of dealing effectively with the production speed, significance and sensitivity of the segment; and

"10. The telephone call prior to the segment's airing by the producer of the segment to a senior campaign official of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry — a clear conflict of interest — that created the appearance of a political bias."

Michelle Malkin is a senior editor at Conservative Review. Contact her at [email protected], follow her on Twitter: @michellemalkin, or click here to read previous columns. The opinions expressed are her own.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made through Stripe below, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Enter your email
Select your membership level
×

Payment Information

You are purchasing:

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >