Comments on: Dan Rather Gets Discovery http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/ Tue, 24 Nov 2009 03:36:08 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: bmaz http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/comment-page-1/#comment-44188 bmaz Sun, 13 Jan 2008 04:29:39 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/#comment-44188 <p>Agreed for the most part I think. But, really, anybody with a lick of sense knows Bush was given preference to get into TANG and then chumped out on his duty and commitment. There is really no question there; I want it established how completely fraudulent they were in hiding that, how they kowtowed the media, and the same they did in covering up and killing the abuGharaib story, which is, again, conspiracy, collusion and and extortion of the public’s fourth estate.</p> Agreed for the most part I think. But, really, anybody with a lick of sense knows Bush was given preference to get into TANG and then chumped out on his duty and commitment. There is really no question there; I want it established how completely fraudulent they were in hiding that, how they kowtowed the media, and the same they did in covering up and killing the abuGharaib story, which is, again, conspiracy, collusion and and extortion of the public’s fourth estate.

]]> By: JohnLopresti http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/comment-page-1/#comment-44163 JohnLopresti Sun, 13 Jan 2008 03:49:44 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/#comment-44163 <p>There is a lot of charged sensibility in the interchanges. Also there was a kultcha clash in the years of young Bush nationalGuard service. The parallel most immediate that came to mind was Quayle’s time doing something similar. Conscriptive recruitment ended years afterward. Kerry fresh out of the ‘theater’ obtained fame for straight talk in a congressional hearing, with a rhetorical flourish that branded him next generation, though his own and WA-DC processes ameliorated some of the wildness of youth as his elections repeated. One of the interesting outcomes of the Rather payback to his mediaEmployer could be baring more of the newsmaking process in television, in these times when there is increasing substance online and less in the old media. My bent is to look for character and character building situations, an issue addressed in some of the posts, above; but the scandal riff gets worn, and, though maybe real, it is the other folks, the ones to whom excellence, and fairness, matter that make it into my politicalPantheon. Which is to say I am less concerned about Bush pecadillos in a chaotic time than I would be letting generations heal, and looking for a kind of leadership now that understands how far we have come and how immensely farther and more quickly we need to proceed.</p> There is a lot of charged sensibility in the interchanges. Also there was a kultcha clash in the years of young Bush nationalGuard service. The parallel most immediate that came to mind was Quayle’s time doing something similar. Conscriptive recruitment ended years afterward. Kerry fresh out of the ‘theater’ obtained fame for straight talk in a congressional hearing, with a rhetorical flourish that branded him next generation, though his own and WA-DC processes ameliorated some of the wildness of youth as his elections repeated. One of the interesting outcomes of the Rather payback to his mediaEmployer could be baring more of the newsmaking process in television, in these times when there is increasing substance online and less in the old media. My bent is to look for character and character building situations, an issue addressed in some of the posts, above; but the scandal riff gets worn, and, though maybe real, it is the other folks, the ones to whom excellence, and fairness, matter that make it into my politicalPantheon. Which is to say I am less concerned about Bush pecadillos in a chaotic time than I would be letting generations heal, and looking for a kind of leadership now that understands how far we have come and how immensely farther and more quickly we need to proceed.

]]> By: looseheadprop http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/comment-page-1/#comment-43602 looseheadprop Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:06:13 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/#comment-43602 <p>I agree with you</p> I agree with you

]]> By: bmaz http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/comment-page-1/#comment-43597 bmaz Fri, 11 Jan 2008 06:14:48 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/#comment-43597 <p>Sara - I’ll be honest, that is not something that can or will come out of this. I have an inkling that Rather has been liberated from a lot of things personally and professionally as a result of his forced ejection from CBS. I think it might be worth writing him a letter laying out your story, background and question. Heh, you can copy most of it off the comment you left for me. I have no personal knowledge, but I bet there is a decent chance he will engage you and maybe answer your questions. I would hazard a guess that the answer involves many of the same actors and principles we are afflicted with currently. Please not that I am not sure the email address is good, but I think so. If not, drop a regular letter off to him. It is worth a try and it may well be something he would like to get out now.</p> <p>Dan Rather<br /> HDNet Dallas Office<br /> 320 S. Walton Street<br /> Dallas, TX 75226<br /> (214) 672-1740<br /> <a href="mailto:drather@hd.net" rel="nofollow">drather@hd.net</a></p> Sara – I’ll be honest, that is not something that can or will come out of this. I have an inkling that Rather has been liberated from a lot of things personally and professionally as a result of his forced ejection from CBS. I think it might be worth writing him a letter laying out your story, background and question. Heh, you can copy most of it off the comment you left for me. I have no personal knowledge, but I bet there is a decent chance he will engage you and maybe answer your questions. I would hazard a guess that the answer involves many of the same actors and principles we are afflicted with currently. Please not that I am not sure the email address is good, but I think so. If not, drop a regular letter off to him. It is worth a try and it may well be something he would like to get out now.

Dan Rather
HDNet Dallas Office
320 S. Walton Street
Dallas, TX 75226
(214) 672-1740
drather@hd.net

]]> By: Sara http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/comment-page-1/#comment-43596 Sara Fri, 11 Jan 2008 05:54:26 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/#comment-43596 <p>Bmaz, what I want to see Rather demand in the Suit (not exactly on topic mind you) is the hour long piece he had in the can, late 1984, on the system of financing the Afghani dispora in Pakistan via the process of bringing raw opium out of Afghanistan on CIA financed Mules, and selling it at the border to Pakistani Military Officers. </p> <p>I know about this because a few days after Rather left Peshwar and Dean’s Hotel, I was there, and with others hired his translator so as to visit some of the refugee camps. Translator told me what was researched and what was shot. Translator normally worked with an NGO sponsered by the World Council of Churches that dealt with treating women and children in the refugee maze who had TB, and needed DOT treatment plus nutrition. </p> <p>At the time, Dean’s Hotel hosted the chemists from Marsailles made famous by the French Connection. They were working with Pakastani Military to create the superior Heroin Labs necessary for world class trade. It was all most open, but the Church Ladies from the World Council of Churches made it all most clear to me. </p> <p>I assume that Rather was not able to broadcast this material because of the necessity of depicting the Pakistani Military and the “Afghani Freedom Fighters” as the next best thing to our Founding Fathers — and they were hardly that. I suspect that most of the Afghani part of the drug biz went into supporting their extended families — but the Pakistani Military take did not go to such causes. </p> <p>When I returned from Pakistan in that period (84-85) I contacted three Senators then on the Foreign Relations Committee about this issue. Senator Durenberger, Senator Boschwitz, and Senator Cranston. (I had co-chaired Alan Cranston’s Presidential Campaign Committee in Minnesota in 1984.) I could not get them to look into the matter, and it could be that my writing and calling just might have flagged what Rather had in the can. Anyhow, one way or another, I want the question asked and answered. Who decided that Americans should not know how our aid to the Afghani resistance was part and parcel of supporting the Heroin Trade? Who wanted to obscure the fact that we were fighting a war on the cheap — supporting the Refugee Families on the Heroin Trade in a country very ill prepared to control a drug problem, let alone support refugees? Apparently about 1/8th of the profit went to support of Afghani Families, the Pak Military took the rest of the revenue. Doesn’t this help us understand aspects of the current situation? </p> <p>Milt Bearden says in his book, “Main Enemy” that while CIA Station Chief in Pakistan he never saw a drug connection. It took me less than a day. The case has to, in my opinion, make it possible for Rather to open up on all the censorship — and this story is probably only one piece of it all.</p> Bmaz, what I want to see Rather demand in the Suit (not exactly on topic mind you) is the hour long piece he had in the can, late 1984, on the system of financing the Afghani dispora in Pakistan via the process of bringing raw opium out of Afghanistan on CIA financed Mules, and selling it at the border to Pakistani Military Officers.

I know about this because a few days after Rather left Peshwar and Dean’s Hotel, I was there, and with others hired his translator so as to visit some of the refugee camps. Translator told me what was researched and what was shot. Translator normally worked with an NGO sponsered by the World Council of Churches that dealt with treating women and children in the refugee maze who had TB, and needed DOT treatment plus nutrition.

At the time, Dean’s Hotel hosted the chemists from Marsailles made famous by the French Connection. They were working with Pakastani Military to create the superior Heroin Labs necessary for world class trade. It was all most open, but the Church Ladies from the World Council of Churches made it all most clear to me.

I assume that Rather was not able to broadcast this material because of the necessity of depicting the Pakistani Military and the “Afghani Freedom Fighters” as the next best thing to our Founding Fathers — and they were hardly that. I suspect that most of the Afghani part of the drug biz went into supporting their extended families — but the Pakistani Military take did not go to such causes.

When I returned from Pakistan in that period (84-85) I contacted three Senators then on the Foreign Relations Committee about this issue. Senator Durenberger, Senator Boschwitz, and Senator Cranston. (I had co-chaired Alan Cranston’s Presidential Campaign Committee in Minnesota in 1984.) I could not get them to look into the matter, and it could be that my writing and calling just might have flagged what Rather had in the can. Anyhow, one way or another, I want the question asked and answered. Who decided that Americans should not know how our aid to the Afghani resistance was part and parcel of supporting the Heroin Trade? Who wanted to obscure the fact that we were fighting a war on the cheap — supporting the Refugee Families on the Heroin Trade in a country very ill prepared to control a drug problem, let alone support refugees? Apparently about 1/8th of the profit went to support of Afghani Families, the Pak Military took the rest of the revenue. Doesn’t this help us understand aspects of the current situation?

Milt Bearden says in his book, “Main Enemy” that while CIA Station Chief in Pakistan he never saw a drug connection. It took me less than a day. The case has to, in my opinion, make it possible for Rather to open up on all the censorship — and this story is probably only one piece of it all.

]]> By: bmaz http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/comment-page-1/#comment-43593 bmaz Fri, 11 Jan 2008 03:26:24 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/#comment-43593 <p>I guess my beef with the whole “change” bit is that it is simply unrealistic. It is insane to believe that you can just put on a big chesire grin and tell everybody how groovy everything is and the world turns on it’s head. There are to many negative forces out there and, more importantly, the simple inertia inherent in government and bureaucracy makes it impossible. It is a lot easier to demolish something than it is to build it. I will settle for somebody just turning the tide in the other direction and starting the painful reconstruction. I am not that fond of her or many of her policies, but i think Clinton is an apparatchik and may have a lot of skills and attention to details on many different fronts at once that could lend itself well for this task. My preference was Gore; short of that, probably Edwards. But I think any of the main three will be fine. And I, as so many are, am enamored with the eloquence and ability instill passion and motivation of Obama. He would be fine no matter what; however, in the back of my mind I keep running the end of the movie The Candidate where Robert Redford, after actually pulling off a similar esoterical victory out of nowhere, yanks Peter Boyle into a bathroom and in kind of a panic says “what the fuck do I do now”? By the same token, I have concerns that Clinton as the nominee can bring as many down ticket Congressional wins on her coattails. I don’t know, but I think we’ll be alright with any of the three. I do know this, our work will not be close to done simply with victory at the polls; whoever takes office will need a lot from activists to actually start the reconstruction.</p> I guess my beef with the whole “change” bit is that it is simply unrealistic. It is insane to believe that you can just put on a big chesire grin and tell everybody how groovy everything is and the world turns on it’s head. There are to many negative forces out there and, more importantly, the simple inertia inherent in government and bureaucracy makes it impossible. It is a lot easier to demolish something than it is to build it. I will settle for somebody just turning the tide in the other direction and starting the painful reconstruction. I am not that fond of her or many of her policies, but i think Clinton is an apparatchik and may have a lot of skills and attention to details on many different fronts at once that could lend itself well for this task. My preference was Gore; short of that, probably Edwards. But I think any of the main three will be fine. And I, as so many are, am enamored with the eloquence and ability instill passion and motivation of Obama. He would be fine no matter what; however, in the back of my mind I keep running the end of the movie The Candidate where Robert Redford, after actually pulling off a similar esoterical victory out of nowhere, yanks Peter Boyle into a bathroom and in kind of a panic says “what the fuck do I do now”? By the same token, I have concerns that Clinton as the nominee can bring as many down ticket Congressional wins on her coattails. I don’t know, but I think we’ll be alright with any of the three. I do know this, our work will not be close to done simply with victory at the polls; whoever takes office will need a lot from activists to actually start the reconstruction.

]]> By: PetePierce http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/comment-page-1/#comment-43592 PetePierce Fri, 11 Jan 2008 03:08:29 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/#comment-43592 <blockquote><p>PSS - I think a lot of people have had trouble seeing what Edwards did on Saturday night in the “change exchange”. IMO he wasn’t picking sides or playing a game: he was telling Senator H to her face in about as natural a way a human being could possibly do in the circumstances and the setting that he’s convinced that certain things have got to change - & whether he’s right or wrong he’d accepted that Obama already figured that out & Senator H needed a wake up call to that effect.</p></blockquote> <p>That’s why LD I think Obama will get Edwards’ delegates if and when he bows out.</p>

PSS – I think a lot of people have had trouble seeing what Edwards did on Saturday night in the “change exchange”. IMO he wasn’t picking sides or playing a game: he was telling Senator H to her face in about as natural a way a human being could possibly do in the circumstances and the setting that he’s convinced that certain things have got to change – & whether he’s right or wrong he’d accepted that Obama already figured that out & Senator H needed a wake up call to that effect.

That’s why LD I think Obama will get Edwards’ delegates if and when he bows out.

]]> By: PetePierce http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/comment-page-1/#comment-43591 PetePierce Fri, 11 Jan 2008 03:07:34 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/#comment-43591 <blockquote><p>PSS - I think a lot of people have had trouble seeing what Edwards did on Saturday night in the “change exchange”. IMO he wasn’t picking sides or playing a game: he was telling Senator H to her face in about as natural a way a human being could possibly do in the circumstances and the setting that he’s convinced that certain things have got to change - & whether he’s right or wrong he’d accepted that Obama already figured that out & Senator H needed a wake up call to that effect.</p></blockquote> <p>That’s why I think Obama gets Edwards’ delegates soon.</p>

PSS – I think a lot of people have had trouble seeing what Edwards did on Saturday night in the “change exchange”. IMO he wasn’t picking sides or playing a game: he was telling Senator H to her face in about as natural a way a human being could possibly do in the circumstances and the setting that he’s convinced that certain things have got to change – & whether he’s right or wrong he’d accepted that Obama already figured that out & Senator H needed a wake up call to that effect.

That’s why I think Obama gets Edwards’ delegates soon.

]]> By: LabDancer http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/comment-page-1/#comment-43590 LabDancer Fri, 11 Jan 2008 03:02:50 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/#comment-43590 <p>No argument. I’ve got some old friends still there who’ve stayed embedded & sat quietly thru all the KoolAid bashes, but my thinking & that of most I worked with “when” is that doing that erodes the soul. I’m essentially Edwardian but I’d be content just to see whoever survives the Clinton Obama pillow fight & goes on to win in November [please] nominate Edwards as AG [please]. I know EW has drawn very many Fitz fanatics & Sheldon believers but neither of them holds a candle to his ability to cut thru noise & b.s. & hold to meaningful reform - let alone the guts to tell several thousand embedded graduates of substandard Schools of Law As it Oughtta be “I’m sorry & I understand your disappointment but it’s time for you to go” & call on his supporters in the “other” ABA - oh, they still call it that do they? Ok the ABA then - to restock the shelves with some competence & integrity.</p> <p>I want to end with a PS on Kerry’s endorsement of Obama & the implications for Edwards: Edwards - as usual & it’s never a surprise with this guy - showed his class. Kerry - tho I don’t dispute his version of the Swiftboat story nor do I doubt his personal courage - has proved over time he was the wrong one at the top of the 2004 ticket - & as usual & it’s again no surprise with that guy - must think we care who among these 3 he believes would make the best chief executive & that we who know him well will simply accept that was behind his decision. Not me tho - between three extremely able talented qualified people he chose against the two who would make him seem less statesmanlike. Self consciousness has always been his biggest flaw. We know the other two are girding up for the long haul - I know John wants to be there too & I really would like him to make it that far.</p> <p>PSS - I think a lot of people have had trouble seeing what Edwards did on Saturday night in the “change exchange”. IMO he wasn’t picking sides or playing a game: he was telling Senator H to her face in about as natural a way a human being could possibly do in the circumstances and the setting that he’s convinced that certain things have got to change - & whether he’s right or wrong he’d accepted that Obama already figured that out & Senator H needed a wake up call to that effect.</p> No argument. I’ve got some old friends still there who’ve stayed embedded & sat quietly thru all the KoolAid bashes, but my thinking & that of most I worked with “when” is that doing that erodes the soul. I’m essentially Edwardian but I’d be content just to see whoever survives the Clinton Obama pillow fight & goes on to win in November [please] nominate Edwards as AG [please]. I know EW has drawn very many Fitz fanatics & Sheldon believers but neither of them holds a candle to his ability to cut thru noise & b.s. & hold to meaningful reform – let alone the guts to tell several thousand embedded graduates of substandard Schools of Law As it Oughtta be “I’m sorry & I understand your disappointment but it’s time for you to go” & call on his supporters in the “other” ABA – oh, they still call it that do they? Ok the ABA then – to restock the shelves with some competence & integrity.

I want to end with a PS on Kerry’s endorsement of Obama & the implications for Edwards: Edwards – as usual & it’s never a surprise with this guy – showed his class. Kerry – tho I don’t dispute his version of the Swiftboat story nor do I doubt his personal courage – has proved over time he was the wrong one at the top of the 2004 ticket – & as usual & it’s again no surprise with that guy – must think we care who among these 3 he believes would make the best chief executive & that we who know him well will simply accept that was behind his decision. Not me tho – between three extremely able talented qualified people he chose against the two who would make him seem less statesmanlike. Self consciousness has always been his biggest flaw. We know the other two are girding up for the long haul – I know John wants to be there too & I really would like him to make it that far.

PSS – I think a lot of people have had trouble seeing what Edwards did on Saturday night in the “change exchange”. IMO he wasn’t picking sides or playing a game: he was telling Senator H to her face in about as natural a way a human being could possibly do in the circumstances and the setting that he’s convinced that certain things have got to change – & whether he’s right or wrong he’d accepted that Obama already figured that out & Senator H needed a wake up call to that effect.

]]> By: bmaz http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/comment-page-1/#comment-43552 bmaz Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:14:54 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/01/09/dan-rather-gets-discovery/#comment-43552 <p>Yeah, I have to agree with you on the major case front for the DOJ; as to the normal criminal caseload, it has degraded in quality of prosecution somewhat progressively over time since the Bushies took over, but the core of mid office attys in the various USA offices, at least the ones I am familiar with, has still been fine. The problem that I have seen, generally, is the more senior Dem leaning people tried to integrate but many were frustrated and left. The younger ones stayed for the most part, but have not been groomed properly and fundie/Regent/federalist pukes have almost exclusively been the picks to fill the higher positions and the bottom rung new hire positions. The net result is that by next year there are going to be really bad structural problems to deal with and due to there being no mid senior and senior leadership worth a fuck to help climb out of the morass; it is really bad. I honestly think it will take a decade of hard work, and a little good fortune in getting the right leadership in place fast, to get the DOJ and USA offices back to just the level of overall quality and consistency they were at when Bush took office. Others may differ, but that is my take.</p> Yeah, I have to agree with you on the major case front for the DOJ; as to the normal criminal caseload, it has degraded in quality of prosecution somewhat progressively over time since the Bushies took over, but the core of mid office attys in the various USA offices, at least the ones I am familiar with, has still been fine. The problem that I have seen, generally, is the more senior Dem leaning people tried to integrate but many were frustrated and left. The younger ones stayed for the most part, but have not been groomed properly and fundie/Regent/federalist pukes have almost exclusively been the picks to fill the higher positions and the bottom rung new hire positions. The net result is that by next year there are going to be really bad structural problems to deal with and due to there being no mid senior and senior leadership worth a fuck to help climb out of the morass; it is really bad. I honestly think it will take a decade of hard work, and a little good fortune in getting the right leadership in place fast, to get the DOJ and USA offices back to just the level of overall quality and consistency they were at when Bush took office. Others may differ, but that is my take.

]]>