Hugh Hewitt - What we have here is a failure not to communicate, con't:
hughhewitt.com
Mickey wonders what's the big deal about collusion between Team Kerry and Team CBS? To quote Sylvester, where's there's cheeses there must be mouses. Who else was in on the con? What did Mapes tell Lockhart, and Lockhart tell McAuliffe and Kerry and Carville and Begala. Did Mapes tell Joe that all that stood between a blockbuster, knock-Bus-to-the-ground story was a phone call? Did she have to describe the story? Did Cleland confirm that Burkett had the docs? Did John Kerry give a green light on the effort to spring the forgeries from Burkett's grip?
Put it another way: Would it be a big deal if FoxNews Carl Cameron had called Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign manager Ken Mehlman to urge Mehlman give Swift Boats Vet leader John O'Neill a call so that O'Neill would provide some after-action reports on a Kerry mission that, once provided, turned out to be forgeries? What would Josh, Matt and Kevin be saying this morning if that were the story line? Remember the outrage that Ben Ginsburg had lawyered for the Swifties --a perfectly acceptable practice under the law? But CBS gets to conspire with Kerry flaks to manufacture fraudulent stories and not a word from the left in criticism? Howard Kurtz rounds up some of critics of the collusion, but most of the press is standing there acting like it is no big deal that CBS and the Kerry campaign hold a joint patent on the forgeries. With the Cameron-Mehlman-O'Neill hypo in mind, ask if the coverage of that Tinkers-to-Evers-to-Chance would have been as gentle as these takes on Mapes-to-Lockhart-to-Burkett:
From the Los Angeles Times this morning:
"Joe Lockhart, a Kerry senior advisor, maintained that he and the campaign had nothing to do with the '60 Minutes' story.
But on Saturday, Sept. 4, Lockhart said he got a call from Mapes, a CBS producer who told him she was working on a piece about Bush's National Guard service that would air the following Wednesday.
She said she had documents but would not tell Lockhart what was in them, Lockhart added.
He said he thought she was calling to get the campaign's response to the story, but instead Mapes gave him Burkett's name and cellphone number.
' She said there was someone helpful on the story who had been trying to reach the campaign and really wanted to talk to me,' Lockhart recalled. Mapes did not tell him that Burkett had been in the National Guard.
Lockhart said he put the number aside and forgot about it until the following Sunday night or Monday morning, when he called Burkett. He said they had 'a short and inconsequential conversation' that lasted about three or four minutes.
' He basically wanted to talk to me because he said the Kerry campaign and the Democrats had not been tough enough in responding to the Swift boat attacks,' Lockhart said, referring to the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which had been challenging Kerry's military record and antiwar activities.
Burkett suggested that Kerry give a speech about his Vietnam service. 'I listened, told him I appreciated his advice, and said goodbye,' Lockhart recalled.
Lockhart said he didn't realize until recently that Burkett might be the source of the Guard memos."
He didn't realize until recently that that Burkett might be the source of the memos?
From USA Today:
"Burkett told USA TODAY that he had agreed to turn over the documents to CBS if the network would arrange a conversation with the Kerry campaign.
The network's effort to place Burkett in contact with a top Democratic official raises ethical questions about CBS' handling of material potentially damaging to the Republican president in the midst of an election. This 'poses a real danger to the potential credibility ... of a news organization,' said Aly Colón, a news ethicist at The Poynter Institute for Media Studies.
'At Burkett's request, we gave his (telephone) number to the campaign,' said Betsy West, senior CBS News vice president.
CBS would not discuss the propriety of the network serving as a conduit between Burkett and the Kerry campaign. 'It was not part of any deal' to obtain the documents, West said, declining to elaborate.
But Burkett said Monday that his contact with Lockhart was indeed part of an 'understanding' with CBS. Burkett said his interest in contacting the campaign was to offer advice in responding to Republican criticisms about Kerry's Vietnam service. It had nothing to do with the documents, he said.
'My interest was to get the attention of the national (campaign) to defend against the ... attacks,' Burkett said, adding that he also talked to former Georgia senator Max Cleland and Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean during the past 45 days. 'Neither the Democratic Party or the Kerry campaign had anything to do with the documents,' he said. "
So Burkett was in contact with Cleland and Dean as well as Lockhart. When did any of these three inform John Kerry of the documents? When did Terry McAluliffe gin up the "Operation Fortunate Son" buffoonery? Why does CBS News "senior vice president" attempt to minimize the Mapes-Lockart deal as the mere giving of a phone number "to the campaign?"
From the Wall Street Journal (subscription required):
"CBS had said last week that it knew where the documents came from but wouldn't talk about it because it couldn't reveal its sources. But yesterday, it said that Mr. Burkett had lied to CBS about how he came into possession of the documents, saying initially that they came from another guardsman.
Now, CBS says it doesn't know were the memos came from.
Mr. Bush's communications director, Dan Bartlett, said the White House requested copies of the disputed documents from CBS the night before Mr. Bartlett was to be interviewed about them, but was told no. Officials said a CBS representative did read the documents to the White House that night. But the actual documents were delivered the morning of the interview, and Bush aides were given three hours to review them.
'The presumption was they were real,' Mr. Bartlett said yesterday, adding it was "not the obligation" of the White House to verify the material. 'How in the heck could you expect a person in three hours to question the validity of a dead man's documents? I've got to presume they were real, and respond.'
Pointing to media reports of contacts between Mr. Burkett and the Kerry campaign, Mr. Bartlett said the circulation of the documents -- which came out a few days after some polls showed Mr. Bush with a widening lead over Mr. Kerry -- 'appears to be a politically motivated attack' on the president.
'We still don't know the source of the documents,' he said. 'It's important we find out who was behind it, and why.'
Mr. Bush's press secretary, Scott McClellan, said, 'Bill Burkett is a source who has been discredited in the past,' and urged examination of any Kerry campaign involvement.
'There are a number of serious questions that remain unanswered and they need to be answered, Mr. McClellan said."
From the New York Times:
"Joe Lockhart, a senior adviser to Mr. Kerry, acknowledged today that he had talked to Mr. Burkett. He said he had done so at the behest of a CBS producer, who had promised to help Mr. Burkett, an ardent Bush opponent, relay some campaign advice. Mr. Lockhart said there was no connection between the campaign and the memos.
Terry McAuliffe, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee said attention should still be paid to questions about whether Mr. Bush fulfilled his service obligations three decades ago."
Spare me the golf game disguised as a solemn committee of investigation. Let me guess: Geogre Mitchell? Bob Kerry? But Brent Bozell on it and I'll pay attention. It is a burial committee, that's all. Why would anyone believe anything from CBS or Team Kerry, including denials and committee reports?
Memorandum has a good round up of the commentary on Mary Lockhart's forgery, with links to Orrin Judd, Betsy's Page, VodkaPundit, PrestoPundit and many others. The bloggers have figured out the significance of the collusion, even as old media stumbles around like Lear bemoaning Dan's fate. Spare us all. Like Rather's hunt for Bush is a discovery. Like television producers don't routinely bend rules and Terry McAuliffe can't be trusted. At the j-schools there will be a brisk business in seminars for years to come: "How Did It Happen!" Save a lot of time: It happened because the fever swamp lives in the newsroom. Drain the swamp and people will begin to believe the big 3 again. In the meantime, they are watching Fox. You can believe Hume. |
