As a fact checker, where do you begin? I am being serious. I really don’t know where one starts.
Dan Rather @DanRather
Tweeted on August 27, 2020
[This should surprise no one. I am more surprised that he admits this.*—Joe]
* To be honest Rather, almost for certain, was speaking in a different context than what I originally took it. But I found it so funny that I had to share it in my preferred context.
I would start by checking the frequency Kenneth.
That’s rich coming from the guy who couldn’t figure out that a “Smoking Gun” document printed in Times New Roman Font wasn’t produced on a 70’s era U.S. government IBM Selectric.
“Couldn’t figure it out”? No no no; he was caught red-handed perpetrating a fraud. To say, “He couldn’t figure out” is like saying of a serial bank robber,”He never did understand banking”, or of a serial rapist, “He never quite figured out dating”.
The main point though is; for being caught red-handed in a blatant fraud, Rather is now a martyr and a hero– He was so dedicated to the cause that he was willing to put himself at risk by committing fraud. This is selflessness and righteousness of the highest order among the left. It’s practically sainthood. For such dedication and fervor, he lost his position at the network, but rose again in another capacity, and as such he is a sort of christ figure among the Marxists, students of Critical Theory, lucifarians, and others of a criminal mind.
That was literally one of the responses he got.
Stupid old hack. He deserved everything that happened to him. I remember comparing his credulity to the guy who promoted the Majestic-12 documents.
Well, I would Rather not go there. The irony is white hot.
It’s easy Dan, you start with patience. The reason Dan doesn’t know where to start is that as a journalist his goal is beating others to announce his findings, not waiting for the furor to die down and solid evidence to be collected. The rush to report is the death of fact finding. Once he has reported, his goal then is to make sure that what he reported is viewed as the fact regardless of what the reality of the situation is so any “research” done then will be strictly to verify his conclusions or delegitimize anything that doesn’t agree.
Just call the quote “out of context, but accurate”.
That’s what Dan Rather would do…