The pajama-clad have been chucking over this excerpt from p. 201 of “Truth and Duty,” fired CBS producer Mary “Don’t Blame Me” Mapes’s whine that those Rathergate memos looked typed to her (even though they looked computer-generated to everyone else) and she was done in by….right-wing bloggers, of course:
“On Web sites such as Powerline, INDC Journal, Allahpundit, and Spacetownusa, the bravehearts of the blogging world worked anonymously in what appeared to be huge numbers, in unison, to destroy the Bush-Guard story, to uphold one another’s wild and hateful claims, to outshout, outargue, and outblog anyone who dared to disagree. And on their Web sites there is no disagreement. They hate in unison, they speak with one angry voice, they each make themselves bigger by staying as close together as possible.”
(Hat tip: INDC Journal.) Of course, anyone who clicks onto those blogs knows that there is nothing “anonymous” about their authors, who all readily identify themselves. And I love the “what appeared to be huge numbers.” That’s what you say when you can’t be bothered to track down the real numbers.
Now, Emily Will, one of the document examiners hired by CBS to investigate its Mapes-produced fraudulent 2004 story about George W. Bush’s Air National Guard service during the early 1970s, has put up her own website detailing all the inaccuracies in Mapes’s effort to characterize Will’s probe as overreaching and off-target (hat tip: Powerline). This time it’s p.167 of the book that’s at issue. Here’s a sample:
“Emily Will and I had an unusual conversation that Monday [Sept. 6], a talk that raised questions for me about how well-suited she was to be working on this project. I called to see how her analysis was going and she told me she had a problem with the documents.”
“Mary Mapes and I conversed on Sunday, Sept. 5 and Tuesday, Sept. 7, but we had no conversation on Monday, Sept. 6.”
“Concerned, I asked her what the trouble was.She said she had done research on the Internet about President Bush’s military record and found that he had been in Alabama at the time those documents were written, so there was no way they could be true.”
“Book version is ABSOLUTELY FALSE. What did happen is that in our conversation on Sunday I outlined several problems with two questioned signatures, and with the typescript of the documents, including the superscripting and the proportional spacing, and I said that I had been researching online to determine the earliest date of production of typerwiters offering those features.”
Keep talking, Mary.