It’s the coverup

The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info

Last updated on March 6th, 2018 at 12:30 am

Change a few words, and Dan Rather’s review of Watergate becomes a concise description of his own downfall:

From our Reporter’s Notebook tonight, the constitutional (journalistic) crisis and biggest political (media) scandal in U.S. history, the criminal conspiracy known for short as Watergate (Memogate). Now three decades (six months) later, you will see it from a unique perspective, the perspective of a man who was right in the middle of it.

August 9th, 1974 (March 9, 2005), an unforgettable image: Richard Milhous Nixon (Daniel Irvin Rather) resigns amid the shame and scandal of Watergate (Memogate). With a stiff-armed wave, he bids farewell to a nation. The unraveling was triggered two years (six months) earlier by the infamous break-in (forgery) at the DNC headquarters (Bill Burkett’s house) in the Watergate office complex (central Texas). Five men (CBS employees) tied to President Nixon’s re-election committee (to “60 Minutes Wednesday”) were arrested (fired). The White House (CBS), skilled at controlling the media (media but not the blogs), brushed it off as a third-rate burglary (the work of partisan political operatives) …

In the end, those who became more skeptical and questioning about our politicians (journalists) because of Watergate (Memogate) also found new reason to believe in our Constitution (the new media). The system of checks and balances (blogs), put to its greatest test, in the end worked.

UPDATE. The Weekly Standard recalls Dan’s performance in the wake of the Kennedy assassination:

As reporters from around the world descended on the Texas city, Rather went on the air with a local Methodist minister who made a stunning claim: Children at Dallas’s University Park Elementary School had cheered when told of the president’s death.

The tale was perfect for the moment, reinforcing the notion among distant media elites that Dallas was a reactionary “City of Hate.” It slyly played to a local audience, too: The school named was in upper-income University Park, one of two adjacent municipal enclaves that shared a school district and a reputation for fiercely protected, lily-white privilege. Finally, for the ambitious Rather–a native Texan and then a Dallas resident–the account represented the very sort of revealing, local dirt that the throngs of out-of-town competitors would have to work far harder to get.

Except that it wasn’t true, and Rather knew it …

Guy could really have used an editor.

Posted by Tim B. on 03/06/2005 at 05:38 AM
    1. I bet Dan can see NO connection at all. As far as Dan is concerned although the documents were questionable the story he was trying to tell was true. He will never doubt this.

      The ‘true believers’ never will either, no matter how many times all the various points in TANG have been refuted. They believe and KNOW it’s true.

      Posted by CJosephson on 03/06 at 06:08 AM • #


    1. One thing’s for sure, Rather’s tombstone won’t be inscribed in a proportional font…

      Posted by PW on 03/06 at 06:18 AM • #


    1. So much for journalistic integrity in the MSM. This bugger, a hero of the MSM, a revered ‘elder statesman’ of the MSM has built his entire career on a lie.

      How many more are just like him?

      And people wonder why so many are seeking out alternative ways to get facts about the world!


      Posted by MarkL on 03/06 at 06:42 AM • #


    1. Dan Rather, role model for the MSM.  Unfortunately.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 03/06 at 08:39 AM • #


    1. Gee, that’s a new lie for me from Rather.  The lie I learned about in ‘87 (25th anniversary of JFK assassination) was that in December, Rather was one of a select few people to see the Zapruder film.  Rather runs out and reports that he saw JFK’s head snap forward, proving he was shot from the rear.  When the public saw the Zapruder film over a decade later, JFK’s head snapped backward.  Rather started his career with a lie….

      Posted by Jabba the Tutt on 03/06 at 09:30 AM • #


    1. But you have to remember, these people are the guardians (grauniads?) of The Public Record.  Unless of course, you try to get them to release it, as with Tim Russert and John Kerry’s 1971 “war crimes” interview, in which case it suddenly becomes Private Property…

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 03/06 at 11:28 AM • #


    1. McCain Feingold gives media folk exemption from campaign finance restrictions. Alot of talk at the FED now revolves around the definition of “reporter”. In the spirit of that discussion I submit that if a reporter is caught falsifying reports, these exemptions should be resended, and all public utterances prorated from their first “reporting” job should be considered campaign contributions, with their relative monetary values counted against the individual campaign contribution limit.
      Any value in excess of $2,000 will be refered to the Federal procecutors office – for trial to come up with the proper punishment, fine , incarceration, banning from airwaves, what have you.

      Posted by papertiger on 03/06 at 07:36 PM • #


  1. Here on Blog Street this is becoming, sadly, a repeated story. Here, licenses to retail stories of events, and to give forth opinions on everything are virtually free. You can become a blogger more easily than you can register your dog!
    In the MSM they are not only relatively exclusive about who gets to grandstand, but they are also well paid positions, hence guarded jealously.
    We used to look up to those who wrote for major newspapers or did serious features on current affairs TV. Seems like a somewhat devalued status now, for those of us seeking updates on reality rather than propaganda. But, there are some very good people writing for MSM. You just have to seek them out.

    Posted by blogstrop on 03/07 at 05:38 AM • #