CBS Moves to Label Dan Rather a Complete Fool

P

Patriot Games

Guest
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/tv_rather_lawsuit/2007/11/15/49920.html

CBS Moves to Dismiss Rather's Lawsuit

Thursday, November 15, 2007

CBS asked a judge Thursday to dismiss a $70 million defamation lawsuit that
veteran television newsman Dan Rather filed against the network and its
parent company, arguing that he waited too long to take legal action.

The former anchor's lawsuit claims his bosses made him a "scapegoat" for the
controversy that arose over a disputed story about President Bush's military
service.

CBS' motion argues the lawsuit should be dismissed because it was filed in
September, more than two years after he was removed from his "CBS Evening
News" post.

All of the claims in Rather's lawsuit against the network and Viacom Inc.
"are barred by New York's one-year-statute of limitations for defamation,"
CBS said in a 30-page reply motion filed in Manhattan's state Supreme Court.

CBS' court papers also contend that all of the claims relating to breach of
the newsman's contract with the network should be thrown out "as CBS did not
breach any obligations to Rather."

CBS issued a statement after filing the motion, saying the company was
"mystified and saddened by the baseless and self-serving allegations and
distortions of fact raised in his (Rather's) lawsuit."

Rather's lawyers, Martin R. Gold and Edward J. Reich, in a statement said:
"It is unfortunate that CBS is trying to delay discovery of the facts and
the trial of Dan's claims. We are confident that the court will reject these
tactics."

Rather's lawsuit says he was made a "scapegoat" to placate the Bush
administration after questions arose about a story he narrated that
concerned the president's military service during the Vietnam War.

Rather narrated the September 2004 report that said Bush disobeyed orders
and shirked some of his duties during his National Guard service and that a
commander felt pressured to sugarcoat Bush's record.

Rather, whose final months at CBS were clouded by controversy over the
story, said the defendants' words and actions damaged his reputation and
cost him significantly. He left "CBS Evening News" in March 2005.

Besides CBS Corp. and Viacom, Rather's lawsuit names CBS President and CEO
Leslie Moonves, Viacom chairman Sumner Redstone and Andrew Heyward, former
president of CBS News, as defendants.

The lawsuit seeks $20 million in compensatory damages and $50 million in
punitive damages.
 
I thought Dan already labeled himself that when he became involved in supporting
false claims regarding Bush's military service....AAC


On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 07:06:46 -0500, "Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.com> wrote:

>http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/tv_rather_lawsuit/2007/11/15/49920.html
>
>CBS Moves to Dismiss Rather's Lawsuit
>
>Thursday, November 15, 2007
>
>CBS asked a judge Thursday to dismiss a $70 million defamation lawsuit that
>veteran television newsman Dan Rather filed against the network and its
>parent company, arguing that he waited too long to take legal action.
>
>The former anchor's lawsuit claims his bosses made him a "scapegoat" for the
>controversy that arose over a disputed story about President Bush's military
>service.
>
>CBS' motion argues the lawsuit should be dismissed because it was filed in
>September, more than two years after he was removed from his "CBS Evening
>News" post.
>
>All of the claims in Rather's lawsuit against the network and Viacom Inc.
>"are barred by New York's one-year-statute of limitations for defamation,"
>CBS said in a 30-page reply motion filed in Manhattan's state Supreme Court.
>
>CBS' court papers also contend that all of the claims relating to breach of
>the newsman's contract with the network should be thrown out "as CBS did not
>breach any obligations to Rather."
>
>CBS issued a statement after filing the motion, saying the company was
>"mystified and saddened by the baseless and self-serving allegations and
>distortions of fact raised in his (Rather's) lawsuit."
>
>Rather's lawyers, Martin R. Gold and Edward J. Reich, in a statement said:
>"It is unfortunate that CBS is trying to delay discovery of the facts and
>the trial of Dan's claims. We are confident that the court will reject these
>tactics."
>
>Rather's lawsuit says he was made a "scapegoat" to placate the Bush
>administration after questions arose about a story he narrated that
>concerned the president's military service during the Vietnam War.
>
>Rather narrated the September 2004 report that said Bush disobeyed orders
>and shirked some of his duties during his National Guard service and that a
>commander felt pressured to sugarcoat Bush's record.
>
>Rather, whose final months at CBS were clouded by controversy over the
>story, said the defendants' words and actions damaged his reputation and
>cost him significantly. He left "CBS Evening News" in March 2005.
>
>Besides CBS Corp. and Viacom, Rather's lawsuit names CBS President and CEO
>Leslie Moonves, Viacom chairman Sumner Redstone and Andrew Heyward, former
>president of CBS News, as defendants.
>
>The lawsuit seeks $20 million in compensatory damages and $50 million in
>punitive damages.
 
In article <kb4tj3tp73ivhlef88cndcsa6lg6jkaetl@4ax.com>,
NoAmnesty@earthlink.net wrote:

>I thought Dan already labeled himself that when he became involved in

supporting
>false claims regarding Bush's military service....AAC


Bush was still AWOL even if those particular "smoking gun" documents
weren't legitimate and everybody knows it.
 
"AnAmericanCitizen" <NoAmnesty@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:kb4tj3tp73ivhlef88cndcsa6lg6jkaetl@4ax.com...
> I thought Dan already labeled himself that when he became involved in
> supporting
> false claims regarding Bush's military service....AAC


Hahahahah!!!!

Its about to be very official...
 
"Dennis M" <dennmac@dennmac.net> wrote in message
news:dennmac-ya02408000R1711070233440001@NNTP.InfoAve.Net...
> In article <kb4tj3tp73ivhlef88cndcsa6lg6jkaetl@4ax.com>,
> NoAmnesty@earthlink.net wrote:
>>I thought Dan already labeled himself that when he became involved in
>> supporting
>>false claims regarding Bush's military service....AAC

> Bush was still AWOL even if those particular "smoking gun" documents
> weren't legitimate and everybody knows it.


Do you have any idea how many people go AWOL?

I'm pretty sure I went AWOL at least 600 times....

MCPO: Where's PG?
Buddy: Sleeping.

MCPO: What time did he get in last night?
Buddy: 4 or 5.

MCPO: GATDAMMIT! He knew we had a team meeting this morning! Go get him!
Buddy: Oh, hell no! I'm not gonna wake up. You go wake him up!

MCPO: I'm not waking him up, I'll WRITE him up!
Buddy: He ain't gonna like that.......

Hahahahahhahaha!!!!
 
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 13:07:18 -0500, "Patriot Games"
<Patriot@America.com> wrote:

>"AnAmericanCitizen" <NoAmnesty@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:kb4tj3tp73ivhlef88cndcsa6lg6jkaetl@4ax.com...
>> I thought Dan already labeled himself that when he became involved in
>> supporting
>> false claims regarding Bush's military service....AAC

>
>Hahahahah!!!!
>
>Its about to be very official...



He's a slobbering liberal aka a complete fool.
 
Dennis M wrote:

> Bush was still AWOL even if those particular "smoking gun" documents
> weren't legitimate and everybody knows it.


Liberals and their media pals have to resort to creating fake documents
to support their claim? Hmm..
 
>> Bush was still AWOL even if those particular "smoking gun"
>> documents weren't legitimate and everybody knows it.


> Liberals and their media pals have to resort to creating fake
> documents to support their claim? Hmm..


That Dan Rather had to take a fall for a journalistic mistake does not
prove anything about all liberals.
 
On 17 Nov 2007 23:38:46 GMT, Bert Byfield <BertByfield@nospam.not>
wrote:

>>> Bush was still AWOL even if those particular "smoking gun"
>>> documents weren't legitimate and everybody knows it.

>
>> Liberals and their media pals have to resort to creating fake
>> documents to support their claim? Hmm..

>
>That Dan Rather had to take a fall for a journalistic mistake does not
>prove anything about all liberals.



Right! An example; everyone already knew that they lie a lot.
 
"Bert Byfield" <BertByfield@nospam.not> wrote in message
news:Xns99EBBDB085F8Ccaravelabooks2006x13@66.250.146.128...
>>> Bush was still AWOL even if those particular "smoking gun"
>>> documents weren't legitimate and everybody knows it.

>> Liberals and their media pals have to resort to creating fake
>> documents to support their claim? Hmm..

> That Dan Rather had to take a fall for a journalistic mistake


Mistake? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

> does not prove anything about all liberals.


Of course it does. ALL Libs are scum.
 
Back
Top