I do not fault the panel for failing to say outright the documents are fraudulent. They are acting as finders of fact in a limited capacity——i.e., no subpoena power. And some critical outside—CBS witnesses have refused to appear before them. They have noted clearly, that  in the absence of the originals and given the provenance of the documents, no one can authenticate them, observing  further that in content, format and terminology they are inconsistent with known true TANG documents  How could they say more?

They reveal numerous incidents of information manipulation in which crappy evidence was highlighted and mounds of credible evidence ignored or distorted.

The report shows that at every instance, Mapes's testimony was challenged by others, that Burkett had a bad odor and a Google search (not done) would have revealed this, that CBS acted unethically in offering him money, a book deal, and a praiseworthy intro to the Kerry campaign, and for inducing Lockhart to speak to him.  They state as clearly as they could that CBS gave the impression that they were acting from political bias, but that the record shows ——and it does indeed——that competition to be first with this story was as significant a factor as anything else. (Actually, had I subpoena power I might try to ascertain whether the coincidence of the LAT, NYT. Boston Globe and Salon all pumping Burkett  and falsely claiming Bush received preferential treatment was orchestrated by Kerry.) I think it was, but from the record before it, I doubt the tribunal's conclusions were wrong.

Clarice Feldman   1 10 05