Typical liberal response--claim he's a victim. Hopefully John Edwards will drop out of the presidential race and be his Italian-loafer-wearing trial lawyer.

p.s. Whatever new popup widget you're using on this post is pretty annoying.

Good for him. The story should never have been discredited as the story was solid. One piece of evidence used in the story was problematic.

At he time, it seemed to me he was being set up. My guess was it may have been CBS execs. My first thought was, what can he possibly hope to gain or prove. Yet if I was right way back then, how else could it be proved?

Wow. It took almost two hours for someone to come in and defend Rather's story. I'm a little surprised; I figured it wouldn't be more than 45 minutes.

But that argument was hashed out well beyond its sell-by date 3 years ago. No-one's going to let go of whatever they want to believe now. So let's just acknowledge that each side thinks it knows The Truth and not go through it again, please. Thanks for your consideration.

So let's just acknowledge that each side thinks it knows The Truth and not go through it again, please.

As usual the difference is one side has evidence and the other relies upon faith based arguments.

Yes, you're absolutely right. Since I've asked that we not rehash the issue, I'll leave it at that.

Dodd, one side has facts, but the other has TRUTH!

Don't Hsut the messenger.

If Rather is going to try and spread some of that blame around, more power to him. The timing of this, would seem to culminate just about the time of the election in November ‘08. More stories under public discussion about how the media tried to.... well, you know.

But that argument was hashed out well beyond its sell-by date 3 years ago. No-one's going to let go of whatever they want to believe now. So let's just acknowledge that each side thinks it knows The Truth and not go through it again, please. Thanks for your consideration.

If that was your desire why did you write

his “discredited story about President Bush’s National Guard service.”

If that was your desire why did you write

his “discredited story about President Bush’s National Guard service.”

. . . maybe because it was the lead in the AP press release? Just a guess.

Does this mean that the network execs will have to defend themselves by attacking Dans story and Dans approach? That would be weird! As another writer said , "I can't wait to see what internal memos surface now!" If that happens I expect someones facts (no names {tlaloc} hehehehe) to suddenly switch into the opinion category.

Hey, Dodd. Long time no see!