Ace of Spades HQ

« Dan Rather Is the Only Important One on that Stage | Main | BREAKING HUGE: Burkett "Reassembled" Bush Files! »

September 16, 2004

But Was It a Crime?

I don't know how to read the statute posted by Bill From INDC except to conclude that this was a crime committed by whoever actually created the forgeries.

I don't know if Bill Burkett did anything more than pass the forgeries along, but it would seem to be a good idea for his lawyer, the Howard Dean endorsed friend of Bill Clinton David Van Os, to lay off the "what difference would it make?" defense.

I don't see anything in the statute that says it's okay to create forgeries if you believe "in your heart" that the contents of the forgery are true.

But a "Political Partisan Internet Critic" Attacks My Reportage!" The Volokh Conspiracy, whom we can dismiss out of hand as politically-motivated, pajama-wearing cranks, says I'm all wet, and that most forgery statutes require not just a forgery but the intent of defrauding someone out of money or defrauding an official investigation-- neither which we would seem to have here. (Skip down to Sept. 14th posts for Volokh's opinion.)

There have been convictions for similar forgeries, but the circumstances aren't quite similar enough.

Nevertheless, I expressed my opinion after dilligently fact-checking my story and consulting with four anonymous experts, at least two of whom said that I was maybe, sort of, possibly right, although they're not really quote-unquote-lawyers per se.

Given the fact that I investigated this story for at least five minutes, and the producer of this story (me) has a virtually unblemished reputation in fake journalism, I stand by the original story, as the "preponderance of evidence" supports me.

When I discover DEFINITIVE evidence that I am wrong, offered by a non-political-partisan source, I will consider issuing a statement that I am "redoubling my efforts" to get the story right after the fact.

In other words:

My facts may be entirely wrong, but the "heart of this post" remains unchallenged.

posted by Ace at 03:55 PM

Comments

This seems more like a case for a civil lawsuit than a criminal one. The problem in this case, however, that it would be Killian who sues, since he is the victim of the forgery. This also might be a defamation case, or perhaps lible? Perhaps his kids could sue.

Posted by: RS on September 16, 2004 04:50 PM

Memo:
RE: Forgery
To: Ace
From: Unimpeachable source.

1. Questions arising about whether forgery statutes apply. Suppression of this meme needed.

2. Divert Question: Did CBS pay for the documents? Forgery then relevant.

3. My insides knowledge says DR gave BB a "west texas sixed old-school hummer", and a DVD of "Classic Price of Right!" in exch. for memos 1-4. Memo's 5-6 were a tougher sell. Apparently DR had to agree to wear a strap on and sing "Yellow Rose of Texas". 5-6 were eventually handed over.

5. Blackrock running interference now. Must go.

Senator Phil A. Buster

I mean,

Unimpeachable Source! Ignore the other stuff.

(This memo typed on an IBM Selectric).

Posted by: Unimpeachable Source on September 16, 2004 04:57 PM

This technicaly is NOT a crime as it is not forgery of "federal records" or "military records" as they are proported "memos" to file....oh how wish it would be different...nothing would please me more than having dano and his crew dragged into criminal court.

Posted by: dustyroadguy on September 16, 2004 05:02 PM

two things...
1.
just so i understand...i can forge any document i want and not go to jail as long as i dont do it to
recieve money and all i want to do is defame
someone. so if i forged a document saying that
for example, my boss, who just passed away, did something really really bad and i did it because i did not want his son to take over the business.
i really wanted a friend of mine to be ceo, so i forged this fake info to help someone else..this
is legal?

2. in the interview with the secretary..
rather asks "do you think bush got in to the guard because of special treatment" her response..
"there were a lot of other boys in there the same way" she is talking in first person knowledge.
and "boys" meaning other pilots. then she goes on
to say that these other pilots "resented" bush.

ok..here's my question

If most of these boys (pilots) got in the same way as bush..and were privilaged with rich families....WHY WOULD THEY RESENT HIM?

OK...THREE QUESTIONS..

is it a crime....
what about forging documents to affect the outcome of a presidental election during WAR?

toni

Posted by: toni on September 16, 2004 05:17 PM

So masquerading as a dead ANG officer isn't against the law? How about trying to manipulate an election with false information? Throw enough DOJ lawyers at the problem and they'll come up with something.

As for myself, I've seen enough evidence, gather a posse and get a rope.

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt on September 16, 2004 05:21 PM

How about CBS' advertising customers. Aren't they paying for time during 60 Minutes based on the show's reputation? Considering the dip in ratings and possible repercussions I'd be mighty pissed if I'd spent millions of dollars for ad slots during 60 Minutes.

Posted by: Eric Pobirs on September 16, 2004 05:21 PM

The libel approach might be valid. Killian's family would have cause to be angered. Bush's service has been impugned and he could complain but the White House strategy of letting CBS dig its own grave has been working pretty well.

Posted by: Eric Pobirs on September 16, 2004 05:23 PM

ACE - Some observations:

1. Everyone assumes no money is involved. Hence no crime. This may not be true. It is a dirty fact that Networks and tabloids pay for news. Not saying Burkett is definitely nailed, but he is someone who hasn't worked for 5 years, has plenty of bills, and if he peddled the documents, chances are he might want more than a handshake from the CBS producer. If so, it becomes criminal because he defrauded CBS.

The other venue of fraud is showing the CBS network acted recklessly and with malice - given it's own experts raised strong doubts that the documents were real - in an effort to achieve financial gain (higher revenue from higher ratings). Courts have been exceptionally reluctant to go after a news organization on this, though, on 1st Amendment grounds.

2. Everybody seems to be assuming if there is no crime, no action can be taken to get to the bottom of this. Not true. You have torts and Federal Regulatory action.

First torts. Are there harmed parties? Sure. CBS -loss of brand value. Affiliate stations - loss of revenue from lowered ratings, viewership. Loss of reputation to "forensic experts" misused by CBS without knowing all CBS knew, statements by CBS about those experts that further damage their reputation. Tort claims open up discovery. Others have sued CBS and found through discovery how messed up CBS was. Gen Westmoreland, for example, got a pile of money and an apology out of his CBS lawsuit.

Second, regulations. Congress can start an inquiry on misuse of public airwaves by CBS which harm the public interest. Same with the FCC. Full subpeona power to investigators, with criminal charges on those that fail to release records or cooperate. But even if 1st Amendment shields Rather, it doesn't shield other suspects. And the FCC can go after CBS if CBS betrayed it's public trust and a pile of FCC regulations. And, the FEC has authority to investigate election tampering, and could launch it's own investigation with full Federal powers.

***Of course the downside of torts and regulatory action is that it would take years to play out, and attention will go away. Face it, in 3 months, assuming Bush is reelected, the Bushies won't care. It will take some Congressional action pushing the tort suits or regulators - or a criminal case to keep the WHODUNIT trail hot.***

No - I'm not a lawyer, but I stayed at a Holiday...no seriously, I do know a bit of law from my "staffer in DC working on legislation" days alongside lawyers inc. a case of brokers using the media to commit securities fraud....but that all is just my opinion, not that of a true shyster who troubleshoots these sort of media-gov't flaps.

Posted by: Cedarford on September 16, 2004 05:49 PM

So, Is cbs just going to get away with it?
What can we do?

toni

Posted by: toni on September 16, 2004 07:05 PM

What can we do?

Crack open a big barrel of street justice.

Posted by: on September 16, 2004 07:13 PM

and that most forgery statutes require not just a forgery but the intent of defrauding someone out of money

I agree w/ Eric above... It seems to me that the advertisers have an arguable case.

Posted by: scott on September 16, 2004 08:29 PM

Regarding your "um" story. I would like to coroborate it. I once looked inside an IBM selectric, while in the U.S. Army. I have also tried to pick up chicks using the hand writing "trick". According to CBS standards I am an expert. Possibly even a jenious of the caliber of the frauds that cooked up this document.

The only possible caveat I see is that I disagree with the CBS position.

Posted by: Daave on September 16, 2004 10:17 PM

If CBS paid for this story, then there's the money angle.

Posted by: blaster on September 16, 2004 10:41 PM

poker me up

Posted by: poker me up on December 29, 2004 02:26 PM

Amazon.com Widgets

Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]

Top Headlines

Mayor Karen is so stung by fan-made AI ads that she's resorting to the shitlibs' go-to demand for an end to criticism -- these ads are "violent" and "hateful" and making me feel unsafe because one video showed AI cartoons throwing tomatoes at me and the tomatoes looked like blood when they squished
This was her actual complaint. The mushed-up tomato looked like blood so it's a death threat and these violent attacks on me must stop. What is dis bitch, CNN?

Podcast: Sefton and CBD are joined by Jeff Carter, candidate for NV treasurer, and seasoned finance professional, for a discussion of the issues facing Nevadans, and the larger financial challenges in America.

TJM explores the movies of David Lean, director of Lawrence of Arabia

Few people remember that Norm MacDonald began his career as a ventriloquist
MacDonald's old partner Adam Egot revealed that MacDonald repurposed a bit with one of his ventriloquist dolls -- that he was a "bad guy" who "didn't believe the Holocaust happened" -- for the Norm MacDonald show, in which he claimed Egot didn't believe in the Holocaust.

Funniest thing I've read about the Virginia mess. Back when they were hustling the referendum through the assembly both Senators, Warner and Kaine, advised them to go slow and play by the rules. Louise Lucas said she respected them but didn't need advice from the "cuck chair" in the corner. The gerrymandering was overturned and Louise is heading for the big house. Edward G. Robinson voice "where's your cuck now?"
Posted by: Smell the Glove

I posted his post on twitter and it's gotten 25K views so far. Thanks, Smell the Glove

Chris
@chriswithans

"Ahhhhh ahh I put my career on the line for Louise Lucas and Jay Jones thinking they'd vault me into presidential contention and we ended up costing Democrats 20 House seats and unleashing a Reverse Dobbs ahhhhh ahhh"

Forgotten 80s Mystery Click That Sums Up the Democrat Communist Party Today
Something is wrong as I hold you near
Somebody else holds your heart, yeah
You turn to me with your icy tears
And then it's raining, feels like it's raining

TJM wonders about world building in stories, mostly The Hunger Games

"It's f**king f**ked."
-- reportedly a genuine comment offered by a "senior Labour source"
Correction: I wrote that Labour is losing 88% (now 87%) of the seats it is "defending." I think that's wrong. The right way to say it is the seats they are contesting -- that is, they don't necessarily already hold these seats, but they have put up a candidate to run for the seat. It's still very bad but not as bad as losing 87% of the seats they already held.

Basil the Great
@BasilTheGreat

🚨ED MILIBAND [a Minister in Starmer's government] SAYS KEIR STARMER WILL RESIGN AS PRIME MINISTER

He has reportedly reassured Labour MP's that Starmer will be resigning following the disastrous results tonight

It's over

"The end of the two party system in the UK" as first the Fake Conservatives and now Labour chooses political suicide rather than simply STOPPING THE INVASION
Incidentally, the only reason this didn't already happen in the US is because of the Very Bad Orange Man (who is right on 85% of all policy calls and extremely, existentially right on 15% of them)

No political party that is NOT also a doomsday religious cult would EVER choose a cataclysmic loss -- and possible extinction as a party -- to support a toxically unpopular favoritism of NON-CITIZEN ILLEGAL MIGRANTS over actual citizen voters.

Only a cult does this.

Now they've lost 84%.

Annunziata Rees-Mogg
@zatzi
If this continues Labour loses 2,148 seats tonight.

That is much worse than the worst case predictions I’ve seen.

Cataclysmic

Update: They've now lost 88% of the seats they're defending. As I mentioned earlier, I think I heard that London will not bail them out, as many of those Labour seats will probably flip to "Muslim Independent" or Green. Detroit's 5am vote will not save them.

Yup, Labour is losing 80% of its seats...

The British Patriot
@TheBritLad

🚨 BREAKING: Labour have lost 80% of all seats contested as of 2:25 AM.<
br> If this continues, Keir Starmer will be out of office next week.

Reform has surged and projected to pick up between 1700-2100 seats.

Wow, up to 1700-2100 seats. It's not incredible that this is happening. It's incredible that the Davos crowd is so absolutely determined to privilege Muslim "migrants" over the actual native population who elects them, no matter how loudly the natives scream that they want to be prioritized, that they will gladly self-extinguish as a party rather than simply representing the interests of their own voters. Astonishing.
Remember, when they call other people "cultists" -- they are the ones so imprisoned in their social reinforcement and discipline bubbles that they will choose political death rather than dare upset the Karen Enforcement Officers of their cult.
Update: Now they've lost 83% of the seats they were defending.

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges

Reform are basically wiping Labour out in the North. It's not a defeat. It's not even a rout. Labour are simply ceasing to exist.

Nick Lowles
@lowles_nick

Tonight’s results are calamitous for Labour. Not just for Keir Starmer's leadership, but for the very future of the party

STARMERGEDDON: In early returns, Reform gains 135 seats, Labour loses 90, the Fake Conservatives lose 36 (and I didn't even know they could fall any further), the Lib Dems lose 4, and the Greens gain 6. Note that the only other party gaining seats is the Greens and they're only gaining a handful of seats.
Update: Reform now up 145, Labour down 98.
Labour projected to lose Wales -- where they've ruled for 27 years.
Fulton County Georgia just discovered 400 boxes of ballots for Labour
Update: REF +156, LAB -107, CON -45
Brutal: In four out of five council seats where Labour is defending, they've lost. 80%.
I'm sure it's not this simple, but Reform is straight taking Labour's and the "Conservatives'" seats. They've lost almost exactly what Reform gained. If understand this right (and warning, I probably don't), all of London's council seats are up for election, and Labour might lose hugely there, as their old voters abandon them for Reform, Muslim Indenpendents, and the Greens.
REF +190, LAB -134, CON -56.

Updates on the Labour collapse in council elections -- which wags are calling #Starmergeddon -- from Beege Welborne. There are about 5000 seats up for grabs, Labour is expected to lose 1,800, Reform will probably gain 1,580, up from... zero. So this would be more than that.
People claim that while Labour has adopted the Sharia Agenda to appeal to the million Muslims it allowed to migrate to the country, those voters are ditching Labour to vote for the Muslim Independent Party or the Greens. Delicious. This shadenfreude is going straight to my thighs.
Oh, and if Starmer loses about as badly as expected, Labour will toss him out of a window Braveheart style and replace him. He will announce he is resigning to spend more time with his Gay Ukrainian Male Prostitutes.

Media bias and senationalism are as old as, well, the media:

That was written by Denny O'Neill and illustrated by, get this, Frank Miller. Editor to the Stars Jim Shooter was in charge at the time.
I always thought the gag was original to the comic book, but in fact the "Threat or Menace" headline was a satirical joke about media bias and sensationalism for a long while. The Harvard Lampoon used it in a parody of Life magazine: "Flying Saucers: Threat or Menace?"

Hamas is Humiliating Trump's 'Board of Peace'
[Hat Tip: TC] [CBD]

Tucker Carlson is pretty sure Trump is a wizard