Click on the photo to catch their post, numerous links, and a devastating exerpt from Mark Steyn’s Chicago Sun Times piece.
This Instapundit post on more media reaction, too.

Mere minutes after Dan Rather’s sketchy rebuttal to the growing evidence that the 60 Minutes II memos were forgeries, Wizbang has been tracking down the background of the ” handwriting expert” who CBS states authenticated the signatures on the documents (as though this is the primary issue under dispute).
His name is Marcel Matley – and it appears that he was the same handwriting expert who authenticated the Vince Foster suicide note.
Small world.

Behold: The Power Of The Blogosphere
Drudge

CBS NEWS executives have launched an internal investigation into whether its premiere news program 60 MINUTES aired fabricated documents relating to Bush’s National Guard service, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
“The reputation and integrity of the entire news division is at stake, if we are in error, it will be corrected,” a top CBS source explained late Thursday.
The source, who asked not to be named, described CBSNEWS anchor and 60 MINUTES correspondent Dan Rather as being privately “shell-shocked” by the increasingly likelihood that the documents in question were fraudulent.

ABC News reports the family is disputing the memos legitimacy, as uncharacteristic of the alleged author.
A Drudge link to the Prowler shut down their server, so a cached version is here alleging they were passed to CBS by the Kerry campaign;

More than six weeks ago, an opposition research staffer for the Democratic National Committee received documents purportedly written by President George W. Bush’s Texas Air National Guard squadron commander, the late Col. Jerry Killian.
The oppo researcher claimed the source was “a retired military officer.” According to a DNC staffer, the documents were seen by both senior staff members at the DNC, as well as the Kerry campaign.
“More than a couple people heard about the papers,” says the DNC staffer. “I’ve heard that they ended up with the Kerry campaign, for them to decide to how to proceed, and presumably they were handed over to 60 Minutes, which used them the other night. But I know this much. When there was discussion here, there were doubts raised about their authenticity.”
The concerns arose from the sourcing. “It wasn’t clear that our source for the documents would have had access to them. Our person couldn’t confirm from what file, from what original source they came from.”
The documents that CBS News used were not documents from any of Bush’s personnel files from his time in the National Guard. Rather, CBS News stated that they were documents uncovered in the personnel files of Killian. That would explain why the White House or the Pentagon had never before released or even seen them.

The Chicago Sun-Times is giving credit where credit is due – to Powerline, Bill, at INDC, (though Little Green Footballs was overlooked. )
The New York Post credits everyone, including the Free Republic commentor who first mentioned the discrepencies.
Instapundit is probably the best central source for continuing updates on this. Glenn is reporting that the Washington Post is going page A1 with this story tomorrow.
Donald Sensing notices that the Air Force Manual cited in one memo seems not to have ever existed. Ouch.
I repeat – is anyone from the Canadian Conservative Party paying attention yet?

A radio talk host sent me a comment by private email today, mentioning “Cheney’s low, low blow”.
Ahem.
As I said in my reply – check the transcripts, guys. Forming on-air opinions based on AP “reporting” or CNN “quotes” is risky business.

CBS “news” magazine 60 MInutes heeded Terry McAuliffe’s call for help last night.
This morning, Powerline is taking a close look at the memos cited in the show (and by others) that purportedly prove that Bush was AWOL from national guard service. (PDF’s of the memos are available on the CBS site). A Powerline reader:

I was a clerk/typist for the US Navy at the Naval Underwater Systems Center (NUSC) in Newport RI for my summer job in 1971 when I was in college. I note the following with regard to the Killian memos:
1) Tom Mortensen is absolutely correct. Variable type was used only for special printing jobs, like official pamphlets. These documents are forgeries, and not even good ones. Someone could have at least found an old pre-Selectric IBM (introduced around 1962). Actually, I believe we were using IBM Model C’s at the time, which was the precursor to the Selectric.
2) I also used a Variype machine in 1971. I fooled around with it in my spare time. It was incredibly difficult to set up and use. It was also extremely hard to correct mistakes on the machine. Most small letters used two spaces. Capital letters generally used three spaces. I think letters like “i” may have used one space. Anyway, you can see that this type of machine was piloted by an expert, and it would NEVER be used for a routine memo. A Lt. Colonel would not be able to identify a Varitype machine, let alone use it.
3) US Navy paper at the time was not 8 1/2 x 11. It was 8 x 10 1/2. I believe this was the same throughout the military, but someone will have to check on that. This should show up in the Xeroxing, which should have lines running along the sides of the Xerox copy.
4) I am amused by the way “147 th Ftr.Intrcp Gp.” appears in the August 1, 1972 document. It may have been written that way in non-forged documents, but as somone who worked for ComCruDesLant, I know the military liked to bunch things together. I find “147 th” suspicious looking. 147th looks better to me, but the problem with Microsoft Word is that it keeps turning the “th” tiny if it is connected to a number like 147. And finally……
5) MORE DEFINITIVE PROOF OF FORGERY: I had neglected even to look at the August 18, 1973 memo to file. This forger was a fool. This fake document actually does have the tiny “th” in “187th” and there is simply no way this could have occurred in 1973. There are no keys on any typewriter in common use in 1973 which could produce a tiny “th.” The forger got careless after creating the August 1, 1972 document and slipped up big-time.

Now, there’s a story for an enterprising young reporter to pick up – exposing dupes at 60 Minutes. It’s not like Dan Rather is likely to beat you to it.
update – Documents reconstructed at LGF:

I opened Microsoft Word, set the font to Microsoft’s Times New Roman, tabbed over to the default tab stop to enter the date “18 August 1973”, then typed the rest of the document purportedly from the personal records of the late Lieutenant Colonel Jerry B. Killian.
And my Microsoft Word version, typed in 2004, is an exact match for the documents trumpeted by CBS News as “authentic.”

A screenshot of the “original” document as found at CBS:

The memo produced on Microsoft Word;

The two images, superimposed.

Drudge is now reporting the story, citing “internet sources”.

John Hinderaker (Powerline Blog), Roger L. Simon , and Tom Beavans – Realclearpolitics.
(Photo: Ed Morrisey)
Ed Morrisey of Captain’s Quarters;

Former New York Mayor and “lifelong Democrat” Ed Koch paid a visit to Blogger’s Corner and spoke about his support of George Bush.The mayor started off informally by asking us whether we would consider his weekly e-mail columns to be the equivalent of blogging, which we unanimously rejected. We think he’ll be blogging in the next couple of months.
[…]
I’ve met Tony Snow from Fox, who immediately recognized my name — which floored me. I’ll report later on the breakfast with Matthew Dowd and the interesting speech and Q & A we had this morning.

Kevin Aylward has notified his Wizbang readers that text of his interview with Ari Fleisher is being prepared and will be up shortly.
Powerline also has a quick video of Radio Row and Bloggers’ Corner. Some of the personalities present: Roger Simon, Ed Morrissey, Sean Hannity, Michael Medved and Gereralissimo Duane. Video here.
Blogs for Bush has lots of audio links and more.
RNC Bloggers (group blog).
Now, if there are any Canadian Conservative party members lurking about, would you please sit up and pay attention;
These bloggers are, in no small way, responsible for the recent downturn in the polls for John Kerry, through their relentless pursuit of the Swift Boat contraversy, keeping it alive, digging up documentation and expert military analysis when the mainstream media was avoiding it like the plague. They pushed past the major networks, the New York Times, WaPo and kept this story alive. Both the Democrats and Republicans have recognized the phenomenon of citizen journalism and news analysis and are finding ways to use it to their advantage – but for the Republicans, with the handicap of a predominantly Democrat leaning media – the importance of the internet cannot be “misunderestimated”.
With a minority government, and the potential of another election over the horizon, the gatekeepers at the CBC, Globe, Toronto Star to contend with – I hope that someone in party headquarters is looking at finding ways to incorporate the Canadian blogosphere into the machinery of the Conservative Party.
Now.
Crossposted to the Shotgun

Dear John;
For some months now we have been covering your ass. We’ve spun good economic news into bad. We spilled gallons of ink to promote every accusation leveled against Bush/Cheney/Rice/Rumsfeld/Rove. We pushed every critic we could find front and center in our news lineup, iinterviewed every moonbat activist. We edited 9/11 Commission testimony to discredit them.
We pimped the books. We latched onto Democratic talking points and allegations like happy ticks. And Abu Graihb… wrung every last drop of blood out of that miserable stone, headlined every accusation, published every photo.
We even published the fake ones.
We promoted that stupid movie from MIchael Moore and pretended he had something to say. Quoted any Hollywood High drop-out who could form sound into words. Quoted the rock stars, wept for Linda D’Arc and the Salem Chicks.
We avoided quoting your goofy wife and that deranged Al Gore. We buried the lunacy dribbling from Teddy’s yapping maw.
Even when we knew we looked stupid for doing it, we did it for you, John, for us – for our common cause.
And when they started to hurt you, we timed our first news stories to boost your campaign’s rebuttals of the Swift Vets. We shouted them down.
But John, when the chips were down, when the moment came to hold up to your end of the bargain, after we let you hide out, unmolested, for days … when you finally came up for air, who did you turn to? Who did you grant that exclusive first interview to?

Jon Stewart.
A fucking comedian. With a fake news show. A cheap little media whore.
Well, John, that hurt. You betrayed us, made us look like fools.
So, remember, we’re doing this because we loved you. And still do. This hurt us even more than it hurts you.
Signed,
LA Times, Washington Post, et al

Occam’s Carbuncle;

Anyone who watched only the CBC’s coverage of the Russian gymnast Nemov’s high bar routine would have seen a crowd protest of a score perceived to be far too low for the effort put forward by Nemov. In CBC’s version of events, the score started out at 9.762 and the crowd’s unruliness lasted perhaps five minutes. Not much else happened. Nemov came out to quiet the crowd, then competition resumed.

The unedited US coverage told the rest of the story.

you don’t succeed, pull, poll again…

After pulling the poll the first time, ZDF reset it to zero votes and placed it back online. But that still did not get them the results they wanted and the results they expected: John Kerry did not have an overwhelming lead. So instead of just letting the poll run, ZDF silently removed it…AGAIN.

hat tip – Flea

Via Kathy Shaidle at the Shotgun;

The Canadian Association of Broadcasters has told the CRTC that Fox News should not be granted a spot on the eligible satellite list for digital distribution in Canada…

(Original article)
I smell fear.

Dean Esmay on the perplexing media refusal to cover any of the growing and glaring discrepencies in the Kerry self-promoted Vietnam record;

The media blackout on Kerry’s Vietnam record is really quite stunning. I’ve never seen anything quite like this. We know for a fact that 80-90% of working reporters and editors vote Democratic in every election, but this is simply unreal. As John Rosenberg notes, even so respectably mainstream-left a paper as the Washington Post, on its front page no less, is continuing to gush about Kerry’s fantastic Vietnam record and the support of his fellow veterans, while saying not one word about any of the Swifties’ allegations or the recently uncovered evidence of Kerry’s possibly false claims about Cambodia. Or about a man who served on his boat saying he’s a liar and a sleaze.
The Post didn’t put the gushy praise-sans-criticism in an editorial either. It was there as front page news.
I would have to ask why a single 20 year old drunk driving charge made screaming national headlines four years ago, but none of this is making it into the mainstream press, except on the editorial pages of a few small newspapers.

Dean’s post is rich with links to the various contraversies. Go check it out. Right now, the blogosphere is the only real source for this story – which seems to be growing despite the best efforts of the mainstream media to ignore it, and the Democrats to sue the Swift Boat Vets into silence.
update – talk radio host and blogger Hugh Hewitt spots the first crack in the dam.

For fans of Bill O’Reilly and Paul Krugman.

Mr. O’REILLY: …I’m appointing Russert as president of the United States right now, OK? I talked to Tommy Franks the other night, and I said, ‘You know, what’s this weapons of mass destruction deal?’ And he was the general that commanded the war. He said, ‘Before we went to war, Egypt and Jordan told me,’ Tommy Franks, all right, ‘that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. I passed that along to President Bush.’ So you’re sitting there in the White House, Russert, OK–frightening thought, but you are–and you’re getting your top general going, ‘I just heard from Egypt and Jordan weapons of mass destruction are there.’ Blair’s telling you, ‘MI6–weapons of mass destruction.’ Putin’s telling you, ‘Russian intelligence–weapons of mass destruction.’ Your own CIA chief is telling you, ‘Slam dunk weapons of mass destruction,’ according to Woodward. Now the 9-11 Commission harshly criticized Clinton and Bush for not doing enough to get bin Laden. That was one of their main thesis, and I believe that and I think everybody does. So you’re told by Jordan, Egypt, Russia, Britain, your own guy, ‘Weapons of mass destruction.’ You know Zarqawi, a top al-Qaida lieutenant’s, sitting in Baghdad because he just had a leg operation, all right? You know that. You know, as the 9-11 Commission pointed out, there’s been repeated contacts between al-Qaida and Saddam. You know all this. And you don’t move against Saddam? So they did have the WMDs. Say there was an anthrax attack on Krugman’s apartment block, OK? You’re sitting there, you had all this information, you didn’t act. Impeachable offense. He had to act. That’s the truth.
Prof. KRUGMAN: No, the truth–look, you’re talking all about commissions and governments that were under political pressure, and we have some independent stuff, right? The best reporting was actually by Knight Ridder, which was talking to the analysts off the record and not to the top officials. And this is the fall of 2002. And all the analysts said, ‘You know, they’re exaggerating this threat. We’re under enormous pressure to go and find reasons to attack Iraq.’ And you’ve actually got people who are close to the administration, like, you know, editorialists at The Washington Post, Jim Hoagland saying– boasting about how we’re managing to put the screws on these CIA analysts who don’t want to believe that Saddam is such a threat. So, come on, this is rewriting history. And the fact of the matter, as…
Mr. O’REILLY: Like I’m going to believe a Washington Post editorial writer over all the people I’ve cited.
[…]
Mr. O’REILLY: Why doesn’t your newspaper, The New York Times, do some investigating? You did 48 Abu Ghraib front-page stories…
Prof. KRUGMAN: Oh…
Mr. O’REILLY: …but you haven’t been able to do any oil for food investigations. I wonder why.
Prof. KRUGMAN: Because nobody has any information, right?
Mr. O’REILLY: Nobody has any?
Prof. KRUGMAN: Nobody has anything except these claims of all this come from Ahmad Chalabi, who The New York Times has learned a little bit to be wary of.
Mr. O’REILLY: Well, maybe you assign a couple of reporters to do that, you know. I mean, Abu Ghraib, I think we got the story there.
Prof. KRUGMAN: No, we didn’t.
Mr. O’REILLY: Oh, we didn’t? Forty-eight front-page stories, we still don’t have it?
Prof. KRUGMAN: We didn’t. No. Read the appendices. Read the appendices to the Taguba report. There’s much, much worse than anything that most of the public has heard about yet.
Mr. O’REILLY: All right. Well, maybe it’s right. And if there is, I want to read about it.
Prof. KRUGMAN: Yeah. Well…
Mr. O’REILLY: And I know I will in your paper. But I ain’t gonna read oil for food investigation there.
Prof. KRUGMAN: But let me just come back. The…
RUSSERT: Bill, why are you suggesting The New York Times won’t be aggressive in pursuing oil for food?
Mr. O’REILLY: Because they use stories to bludgeon the Bush administration. They use their front page–here’s the deal.
Prof. KRUGMAN: Oh God.
Mr. O’REILLY: Abu Ghraib, horrible story, awful, OK. Off-the-chart bad. Twenty-eight front-page stories in the Chicago Trib, no bastion of conservatism. Forty-eight front-page stories, all of the last 20 just repetitive, what we already knew, in The New York Times.
Prof. KRUGMAN: So you…
Mr. O’REILLY: They use that story to drive public opinion against the present administration, which the paper despises, and that’s the fact.

Heh.
The National Debate has more.

There’s been considerable coverage of a so-called “Bushism” being reported today. Why, I do not know, other than the fact that the media sits in wait for them.

” Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we. “

It is a clumsy sentence, to be sure. But does it say what the scoffers pretend to think it does?
Just a month ago, the Bush administration was criticized for having a “lack of imagination” prior to the 9/11 attacks. “Thinking about new ways” that harm could be inflicted is not the same as planning to inflict the harm to yourself.
So, what’s the fuss about?

Ed Morrisey charts the media coverage of the Joe Wilson before (Bush lied about Iraq seeking uranium in the SOTU address) and the Joe Wilson after (Joe Wilson lied about what he found in Niger and who recommended him for the job) media coverage;

Outlet………Wilson Before….Wilson After
CBS………………..30……………0
NBC………………..40……………1
ABC………………..18……………1
Washington Post…..96………….2
New York Times……70………….3
Los Angeles Times…48………….2

Using “uranium niger” and “Joe Wilson” as search terms:
CBC.ca…………………..7……………0
CTV.ca……………………1……………0
(It appears that CTV preserves stories for a shorter period of time)

Former New York Times Executive Editor, Howell Raines, February 20, 2003:

“Our greatest accomplishment as a profession is the development since World War II of a news reporting craft that is truly non-partisan, and non-ideological, and that strives to be independent of undue commercial or governmental influence….But we don’t wear the political collar of our owners or the government or any political party. It is that legacy we must protect with our diligent stewardship. To do so means we must be aware of the energetic effort that is now underway to convince our readers that we are ideologues. It is an exercise of, in disinformation, of alarming proportions, this attempt to convince the audience of the world’s most ideology-free newspapers that they’re being subjected to agenda-driven news reflecting a liberal bias.”

New York Times Public Editor Daniel Okrent, July 25, 2004:

Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper?
Of course it is.

Ed Driscoll asks, “What does that do to the folks who claim that because Fox sometimes tilts to the right (don’t tell Geraldo and Greta, though) that they shouldn’t be using “fair and balanced”? Read the rest of his post.
I agree with the critics, though. Until there are about a dozen more networks and media outlets like Fox, media fairness and balance is still just a idealistic fantasy. But the success of Fox vs the declining share values and circulation figures for organizations like the Times, does bring some hope that the marketplace may eventually force change where basic journalistic integrity has failed.
via Instapundit

Republican commissioner John Lehman on the circus that overtook the 9/11 commission hearings when Richard Clarke was testifying;

“I think we were mugged by Viacom,” Lehman told NRO in a phone interview on Thursday afternoon. “Because they changed the release date of the book and geared up 60 Minutes to launch his book to time them with his testimony and they edited his book to take out all of the criticisms of Clinton from his [original private] testimony. Because they wanted to make it a jihad against Bush.”
Lehman says that Clarke’s original testimony included “a searing indictment of some Clinton officials and Clinton policies.” That was the Clarke, evenhanded in his criticisms of both the Bush and Clinton administrations, who Lehman and other Republican commissioners expected to show up at the public hearings. It was a surprise “that he would come out against Bush that way.” Republicans were taken aback: “It caught us flat-footed, but not the Democrats.”
Clarke’s performance poisoned the public hearings, leading to weeks of a partisan slugfest. Lehman says Republican commissioners felt they had to fight back, adding to the partisan atmosphere. “What triggered it was Dick Clarke,” says Lehman. “We couldn’t sit back and let him get away with what he wanted to get away with.” He adds, “We were hijacked by a combination of Viacom and the Kerry campaign in the handling of Clarke’s testimony.”

The Associated Press has already pulled this item, but not before it was saved for posterity…

Police are asking for help to solve the mystery of Powell’s death.
“The public is very important, especially if they know her from a different name or may have seen her sometime before Saturday,” Ryan McFarland of the Adams County sheriff’s office said.
Investigators are not sure if Powell died where her body was found or if she was killed elsewhere, WLWT Eyewitness News 5’s most- overrated, obnoxious, annoying, stick-like, ho-bag, sperm- receptacle staff member Raegan Butler reported.

Via Outside The Beltway and Wizbang.

I sent an email to CTV news today. I asked them where their coverage is on Joe Wilson’s exposure as a liar and fraud. Considering the breathless reporting they gave to the infamous “16 words” in the State Of The Union address, and the “Iraq trying to buy uranium from Africa” contraversy, one would think they’d be over this complete vindication of the Bush administration like white on rice.
A search for the words “Joe Wilson” produced only this year old item on the initial contraversy.

The 16 words in the State of The Union Address last year in which Bush stated that British Intelligence had reported that Iraq had attempted to buy uranium in Africa have been upheld by the Senate Intelligence Report.
Did you know that?
The same report quite clearly exposes Joe Wilson, husband of the infamous “outed” cia agent Valerie Plame, as an out and out liar.
Now, Mr. Fryer et al – why have you not revisited this information to correct it for Canadian viewers? The SOTU address recieved tremendous coverage at the time.
Or, does anyone at CTV actually READ the reports you “report” on?

Over at Instapundit, Glenn Reynolds is gloating.

LIKE MILLI VANILLI’S GRAMMY AWARD, this “Restore Honesty” website by the now-discredited Joe Wilson is mostly of comedic value now. But wait, there’s more — scroll to the bottom and you’ll see that it’s “Paid for by John Kerry for President, Inc.” Quite an embarrassment.

Indeed.
Now, I think it’s time for an experment, fellow Canabloggers – Join me in emailing CTV. (I don’t watch CBC tv at all, so email them too if it’s appropriate). Ask them where the “Joe Wilson lied and Iraq did try to buy uranium from Niger” story is.
Let’s see if we can get a reply.

Coming to a cable channel near you – the Official News Service Of The Islamic Jihad;
Globe & Mail;

The federal broadcast regulator is expected to announce today that it will permit Canadians to subscribe to the Arabic Al-Jazeera network but is turning down an application to offer Italy’s RAI International as a digital specialty service through cable or satellite. The decision, more than a year in the making, will be announced by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission in Ottawa.

Brought to you by the federal licencing body that protects Canadians from the propogandist FoxNews.

For those who are making a career of being outraged over the FCC fines directed at Howard Stern’s behavior – The CRTC has pulled the broadcast license for Quebec City’s most popular radio station, because of offensive comments by a couple of radio personalities. They recieved 47 complaints.
We should all complain more about the CBC, methinks.
This is the same CRTC that will not allow Fox News on Canadian cable, but has no problem with CBC’s “it’s not porn if there are subtitles” or with CTV scheduling the Sopranos uncut and Nip/*uck-fests on prime time.