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

TJM definitively ranks the films of John Boorman.

Kid punks CNN chump by speaking truth to retard

Podcast: CBD and Sefton talk birthright citizenship, the 14th Amendment and SCOTUS, no boots in Iran, Artemis II and refocusing NASA, the NBA's hatred of everything non-woke, and more!

In more marketing for Project Hail Mary, scientists say they've found the biosigns indicating life growing on an alien planet. It's not proof, just signatures of chemicals that are produced by biological metabolism, and it could be nothing, but scientists think it's a strong sign that this planet is inhabited by something.

In a paper published in the Astrophysical Journal Letters, a team of scientists announced the detection of dimethyl sulfide (along with a similar detection of dimethyl disulfide) in the atmosphere of an exoplanet called K2-18b. This is actually the second detection of dimethyl sulfide made on this planet, following a tentative detection in 2023.
Tons of chemicals are detected in the atmospheres of celestial objects every day. But dimethyl sulfide is different, because on Earth, it's only produced by living organisms.
"It is a shock to the system," Nikku Madhusudhan, first author on the paper, told the New York Times. "We spent an enormous amount of time just trying to get rid of the signal."

He means they tried to prove the signal was caused by things other than dimethyl sulfide but they could not.

Artemis moon shot a go, scheduled for 6:24 Eastern time tonight
Great marketing arranged by Amazon to promote Project Hail Mary. Okay not really but it does work out that way.

TJM talks John Boorman, director of Excalibur

Good rickroll

What? Skeleton of the most famous Musketeer, D'Artagnan, possibly discovered in Dutch church closet.
Dumas picked four names of real musketeers out of a history book, D'Artagnan, Athos, Aramis, and Porthos. So there was an actual D'Artagnan, though he made most of the story up. (Or, you know, all of it.)*

Charles de Batz de Castelmore, known as d'Artagnan, the famous musketeer of Kings Louis XIII and Louis XIV, spent his life in the service of the French crown.
The Gascon nobleman inspired Alexandre Dumas's hero in "The Three Musketeers" in the 19th century, a character now known worldwide thanks to the novel and numerous film adaptations.
D'Artagnan was killed during the siege of Maastricht in 1673, and there is a statue honoring the musketeer in the city. His final resting place has remained a mystery ever since.

A lot of Dumas's stories are based on bits of real history. The plot of the >Three Musketeers, about trying to recover lost diamonds from the queen's necklace, was cribbed from the then-almost-contemporaneous Affair of the Queen's Necklace. And the Man in the Iron Mask is based on real accounts of a prisoner forced to wear a mask (though I think it was a velvet mask).
* Oh, I should mention, Dumas says all this, about finding the names in an old book, in the prologue to his novel. But authors lie a lot. They frequently present fictions as based on historic fact. The twist is, he was actually telling the truth here. At least about these four musketeers having actually existed and served under Louis XIV.
Fun fact: You know the beginning of A Fistful of Dollars where the local gunslingers make fun of Clint Eastwood's donkey and Eastwood demands they apologize to the donkey? That's lifted from The Three Musketeers. Rochefort mocks D'Artagnan's old, brokedown farm horse and D'Artagnan is incensed.

A commenter asked which should be read first, The Hobbit of LOTR?
Easy, no question -- read The Hobbit first. It's actually the start of the story and comes first chronologically. It sets up some major characters and major pieces in play in LOTR.
Also, the Hobbit is Beginner-Friendly, which LOTR isn't. The Hobbit really is a delightful book, and a fast read. It's chatty, it's casual, it's exciting, and it's funny. In that dry cheeky British humor way. I love that the narrator is constantly making little asides and commentary, like he's just sitting next to you telling you this story as it occurs to him.
LOTR is a very long story. Fifteen hundred pages or so. The Hobbit is relatively short and very punchy and easy to read. If you don't like The Hobbit, you can skip out on LOTR. If you do like it, you'll be primed to read LOTR.
Oh, I should say: The Hobbit is written as if it's for children, but one of those smart children's stories that are also for adults. Don't worry, there's also real fighting and violence and horror in it, too.
LOTR is written for adults. (It's said that Tolkien wrote both for his children, but LOTR was written 17 years later, when his children were adults.) Some might not like The Hobbit due to its sometimes frivolous tone. Me, I love it. I find it constantly amusing. Both are really good but there is a starkly different tone to both. LOTR is epic, grand, and serious, about a world war, The Hobbit is light and breezy, and about a heist. Though a heist that culminates in a war for the spoils.

The Hobbit Challenge: Read two more chapters. I didn't have much time. Bilbo got the ring.
I noticed a continuity problem. Maybe. Now, as of the time of The Hobbit, it was unknown that this magic ring was in fact a Ring of Power, and it was doubly unknown that it was the Ring of Power, the Master Ring that controlled the others.
But the narrator -- who we will learn in LOTR was none of than Bilbo himself, who wrote the book as "There and Back Again" -- says this about Gollum's ring:
"But who knows how Gollum had come by that present [the Ring], ages ago in the old days when such rings were still at large in the world? Perhaps even the Master who ruled them could not have said."
In another passage, the ring is identified as a "ring of power."
I don't know, I always thought there was a distinction between mere magic rings and the Rings of Power created by Sauron. But this suggests that Bilbo knew this was a ring of power created by Sauron.
Now I don't remember when Bilbo wrote the Hobbit. In the movie, he shows Frodo the book in Rivendell, and I guess he wrote it after he left the Shire. I guess he might have added in the part about the ring being a ring of power created by "the Master" after Gandalf appraised him of his research into the ring.
I never noticed this before. I know Tolkien re-wrote this chapter while he was writing LOTR to make the ring important from the start. And also to make Gollum more sinister and evil, and also to remove the part where Gollum actually offers Bilbo the ring as a "present" -- Bilbo had already found it on his own, but Gollum was wiling to give it away, which obviously is not something the rewritten Gollum would ever do.
But I had no memory of the ring being suggested to be The Ring so early in the tale.

Finish the job, Mr. President!
Melanie Phillips lays out the case for the total destruction of the Iranian government and armed forces. [CBD]

TJM acts like he knows anything about John Wick and screenwriting. It's embarrassing, really.

Podcast: Sefton and CBD talk about how would a peace treaty with Iran work, Democrats defending murderers and rapists, The GOP vs. Dem bench for 2028, composting bodies? And more!

Oh, I forgot to mention this quote from Pete Hegseth, reported by Roger Kimball: "We are sharing the ocean with the Iranian Navy. We're giving them the bottom half."

Batman fires The Batman
Batman is disgusted by the Joachim Phoenix version of Joker
Batman tries to fire Superman
Batman is still workshopping his Bat-Voice

Forgotten 80s Mystery Click: Red Leather Suit and Sweatband Edition
And I was here to please
I'm even on knees
Makin' love to whoever I please
I gotta do it my way
Or no way at all

Tomorrow is March 25th, "Tolkien Reading Day," because March 25th is the day when the Ring is destroyed in the book. I think I'm going to start the Hobbit tomorrow and read all four books this time.
The only bad part of the trilogy are the Frodo/Sam chapters in The Two Towers. They're repetitive, slow, and mostly about the weather and terrain. But most everything else is good. Weirdly, the Frodo-Sam chapters in Return of the King are exciting and action-packed and among the best in the trilogy. (Though the chapters with everyone else in Return of the King get pretty slow again. Mostly people talking about marching towards war, and then marching towards war.)

Sec. Army recognizes ODU Army ROTC cadets for their bravery and sacrifice in private ceremony
[Hat Tip: Diogenes] [CBD]

TJM gives you a brief tour of his movie collection.

Forgotten 80s Mystery Click
One day I'm gonna write a poem in a letter
One day I'm gonna get that faculty together
Remember that everybody has to wait in line
Oh, [Song Title], look out world, oh, you know I've got mine