ARC's 1st Law: As a "progressive" online discussion grows longer, the probability of a nefarious reference to Karl Rove approaches one

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Calling Ms. Ramirez to the stand. Ms. Ramirez?

Looks like ol' Dan Rather decided to get some chutzpah and sue CBS fir $70 million dollars.

From the NYT:

Mr. Rather, 75, asserts that the network violated his contract by giving him insufficient airtime on “60 Minutes” after forcing him to step down as anchor of the “CBS Evening News” in March 2005. He also contends that the network committed fraud by commissioning a “biased” and incomplete investigation of the flawed Guard broadcast and, in the process, “seriously damaged his reputation.”

Sorry Dan, but your reputation was ruined when you went on national TV and defended a substandard story that was nothing more than a hit piece against a sitting President of the United States.

I'm sure there will be plenty to explore with Mr. Rather in the depositions. No matter what he says in them it all comes down to one of two possible scenarios. Either he was incompetent and nothing more than "a narrator of the disputed broadcast", or he's a liar.

As to Dan's chances, I'd simply advise him to "Don't bet the trailer money yet."

*** UPDATE ***
Stop the ACLU and Michelle Malkin are covering...

Your Co-Conspirator,
ARC: Brian

Comments (1)
St Wendeler said...

A few questions...

The media is saying that Rather is suing because he was fired from CBS.

It was my recollection that he retired. Yes, there was a wink & a nod, but the guy retired... to do other things (such as kick off that great channel, HDNet).

If you retire from a contract, you can't then sue the other party to the contract for breach.

Or am I missing something?

Second, Rather is truly delusional if he thinks that he'll ever see a dime from this suit. From the story in the Times, it seems like it's purely a matter of Danny feeling slighted over his diminished reputation within CBS and in the MSM in general - something which he cause himself.