Danny Boy's Statement

So that is what Rather considers the "key question": how their source got the documents. Not "who fabricated these documents," not "who neglected warnings of the fabrication", nothing like that. Dan's "key question" is the chain of custody for the memos. The implication is that Rather still believes the content of the documents, but can no longer vouch for their authenticity because he doesn't know how the source got them.

Shouldn't that read, "Based on what we now know, CBS News admits that the documents are forgeries, and will diligently investigate to find out just who duped us. Or, more likely, since out credibility on this subject is in the toilet, we eagerly await the results from the investigations by ABC, the Washington Post, and the Pajamahadeen."

A question for any legal minds out there: since Burkett has admitted to being their source, and has admitted that he "misled" CBS as to what his source was, is he in any potential legal trouble for passing on forgeries?

I realize that his defense would be that he didn't know they were forgeries and passed them on to CBS in good faith, but for that defense to work, won't he have to reveal who gave him the memos? He doesn't have a journalist-shield law to hide behind.

© Mamatestataqueria.com