Steven Clemons: Moore was offered same Killian forgeries that bitch-slapped CBS and Dan Rather

Steven Clemons: “Speaking Sunday evening at the University of Central Arkansas, Moore was asked during Q&A about the ‘Dan Rather story.’ After expressing some reluctance about saying anything, he told the audience that while making Farenheit he had been offered the same fraudulent documents by the same source…

“… 60 Minutes’ source apparently shopped the forged documents around to others before the story ran.”

This would seem to lend some credence to the possibility that the forgeries were a plant by some pro-Bush operative.


  1. MIchael said:

    I can’t resist. How does the shopping of a forged document suggest or �lend some credence� to the idea that pro-Bush people are behind it? Here’s the conversation you imagine – correct me if I’m wrong (and I guess you’ll attempt to). Pro-Bush operatives speaking: “We’re so smart, let�s forge a document with just enough technical glitches so that someone with expertise who looks at it honestly will realize it is a forgery. Let’s then shop it to smart reporters, movie producers and wealthy networks who have tremendous fact checking resources – but we�re sure won’t use them, to see if they bite. When they do, obviously it will run & then �bloggers�, who until very recently have had little effect on American politics, will catch the error and bring it to the attention of the American public & force the media to re-examine it. This will then obviously embarrass all liberals and paint the media as biased.� What other conspiracy theories do you have?

    This comes after you �Ratherized� my last comment with �I stand corrected,,, sort of�� essentially you said �my facts are totally false but my subjective belief is correct�.

    Your�s is the first blog I have ever responded too. I enjoyed it. Maybe I should start one. I look forward to your future comments.



    October 6, 2004
  2. Jake Savin said:


    You’re a thoughtful writer. You should definitely start your own blog.

    Of course I have no proof that the documents were a plant by anyone involved with Bush directly. I think either they were a very inept plant by a Kerry supporter (or Bush enemy), or they were a plant by a Bush supporter.

    I’d love to see some investigation into the matter. That’s the main reason I’m drawing attention to it — I want the facts. If it takes thousands of bloggers to make that happen, so be it. As I learn more, I’ll post it. If you can point to additional information, facts or leads, please do let me know, either in comments, or privately.

    I make no claims to impartiality, and my post was conjecture, and therefore by nature doesn’t require the same kind of fact-checking that the general public assumes (incorrectly) that an organization like CBS News would conduct.

    I have no backing, no financing, no advertising, and no direct assotiation with either campaign. I also make no claim to having any inside info, special connections with sources, etc.

    What I do have is a vested interest in America, our civil liberties, safety, security and freedom.

    Saying that I “Ratherized” your last comment doesn’t hold much water, since I’m neither as influential, statedly impartial, nor as well supported as Dan Rather.

    What I did do is concede the point that you made, and stand by my position relative to Kerry’s attitude that America can’t act in such a brazen fashion as we have in Iraq, without expecting an international backlash, and consternation among our allies and enemies alike.

    Ask the next citizen of any NATO country that you talk to, what they think of Bush, and what they think about our war in Iraq. (And it is our war.)

    I don’t think they’ll speak too higly of either.

    Also respectfully,


    October 7, 2004

Post a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.