A key source who was named to back up CBS News' claims about the authenticity of documents used in a report on President Bush's (search) Air National Guard service has recanted his support, saying the network got the information wrong.
Retired Major Gen. Bobby Hodges (search), a key source behind a "60 Minutes" story that claims Bush shirked his guard duty, said that now that he has seen the memos, he does not believe they are authentic. Hodges told FOX News that CBS did not call him until two days before the piece aired on the network last Wednesday night, and never offered to show him the memos. He said the network only wanted to discuss their content, not their authenticity.
CBS, however, is standing behind its report that Bush refused a direct order to take a required medical examination and discussed with the late Lt. Col. Jerry Killian (search) how he could skip drills in order to go work on a political campaign. The memos, which carry the signature of Killian, who was commander of Bush's Texas Air National Guard fighter squadron, are disputed by Killian's son and wife, who said Killian did not keep records like the ones of which CBS had copies. Killian died in 1984. Bush served in the Texas Air National Guard from 1968 to 1973.
Dan's Documents: Truth or Need More Proof?
Yes, the documents are real. They add up to Bush's cover-up and should be taken seriously. Bush has lied about why he declared war and other events, and Bush is claiming to be our president and continues to lie and have other's cover up for him as he has done all of his life.
Truth? I think not. Dan Rather is a blatantly partisan idiot and he is one of the reasons that CBS will never catch Fox News in the ratings. He wouldn't know fair and balanced if it bit him in the butt.
Dan Rather with fake documents and reporting a fake story? What's the frequency, Kenneth?
I think the media and Americans in general need to get over this issue and concentrate on the issues that we can actually do something about in the upcoming election. I can't help but think this whole document thing is a distraction. What I want to know is what are the candidates going to do? Since you can't change the past, who really cares what either man did 15 years ago?
The question I have is where is the original document? All CBS has to do is produce it to clear all this up. CBS says they can't produce the original because they don't where it came from. Two CBS people say they think it was given to them by the Kerry campaign.
If CBS does not allow the Bush Air-National-Guard documents to be independently checked for authenticity than CBS News has as much credibility as Al-Jazeera News.
The longer Rather defends his yellow journalism, the more he proves his overwhelming bias. He is fast becoming the least trusted newsman on television and for good reason
El Dorado, AR
I will need a lot more proof. I worked for the Forest Service in 1973 as a Clerk Typist. I was responsible for typing the location cards (longitude and latitude) of markers on an IBM Selectric II. No way. When I saw the documents on TV, I said there is no way those were done on a typewriter in some government office in 1972. Dan needs to come clean.
I've served as a computer document forensic expert in US District Court. These documents are fraudulent; that was obvious very quickly. To date, CBS has not been able to get a qualified document forensics expert to authenticate them. In my opinion, they never will.
CBS's decision to stonewall instead of investigate tells me all I need to know.
It’s time for CBS to tie Dan to a post on the gulf coast and let him do what he does best. That is to report on the strength of a hurricane while ducking sheets of roofing tin.
Fox wouldn’t know the truth if it hit you in the face. At least try to be objective, seeing as how you haven’t seen the actual docs, only reproductions. They may not be real, but there is another side to this story, which you are unfairly not putting forth, my fair and balanced friends.
San Francisco, CA
- Note: The views and opinions expressed on this page do not necessarily reflect those of FOX News or its subsidiaries