I was just pleasantly surprised to see a column on CBS's web site speculating that KKKarl had to have known and approved the White House access that was given to Jeff Gannon. The last paragraph of the column reads:
"This week Democrats, who have serious case of Rove envy, went a little nuts and started sending around information and graphic pictures of Gannon and his porn Web sites. But it is the more routine part of Gannon's life that deserves serious scrutiny. Planting or even just sanctioning a political operative in the WH press room is a dangerous precedent and Karl Rove's hope to become a respected policymaker will be hampered if the dirty tricks from his political past are more apparent than his desire to spread liberty around the globe."
Here's the link:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/18/opinion/lynch/main675050.shtmlHere is part of my reply to CBS:
The only reason why Karl Rove’s dirty tricks are not more apparent is that the press has been intimidated into looking the other way. Since most of the MSM, even those outlets with a supposedly liberal leaning, is financed by conservatives, this is no surprise.
In case you’re not aware, Mr. Rove has a history of anonymously planting “information”. Sometimes the “reports” are unflattering to his cohorts, but presented in a manner that is guaranteed to be discredited. Then the truth slips out the back door.
I suspect that something similar may have been done to Dan Rather. Why did no one look into the source of the forged documents? How were the conservative bloggers able to discern the forgery from the blurry image in a television screen and discuss the details of the font changes within a few hours of the show? Doesn’t it seem strange that so many people suddenly knew so much about fonts that were used in the 1970’s?
I hope you both pursue this story and keep your job.