Dan Rather sues CBS, Viacom for $70M

[wicket]

LINK

Dan Rather, whose career at CBS News ground to an inglorious end 15 months ago over his role in an unsubstantiated report questioning President Bush’s Vietnam-era National Guard service, filed a $70 million lawsuit this afternoon against the network, its corporate parent and three of his former superiors.

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.” As plaintiffs, the suit names CBS and its chief executive, Leslie Moonves; Viacom and its executive chairman, Sumner Redstone; and Andrew Heyward, the former president of CBS News.

In the suit, filed this afternoon in State Supreme Court in Manhattan, Mr. Rather charges that CBS and its executives made him “a scapegoat” in an attempt “to pacify the White House,” though the formal complaint presents virtually no direct evidence to that effect. To buttress this claim, Mr. Rather quotes the executive who oversaw his regular segment on CBS Radio, telling Mr. Rather in November 2004 that he was losing that slot, effective immediately, because of “pressure from ‘the right wing.’ ”

He also continues to take vehement issue with the appointment by CBS of Richard Thornburgh, an attorney general in the administration of the elder President Bush, as one of the two outside panelists given the job of reviewing how the disputed broadcast had been prepared.

In a statement CBS said, "These complaints are old news and this lawsuit is without merit."

edited to add better link

[OzarkDem]

1. YES!

It will be very interesting to see the facts behind this scam come to light.

[burythehatchet]

3. took the word right outta my mouth

this could be good

[TomInTib]

2. I have often wondered if this day would ever come. nt

[coco77]

4. Now we will hear the facts..

about bush's awol status..

[wicket]

10. It's about time

[The Count]

5. yeah, why was the story discredited again? Go, Dan!

[Dervill Crow]

6. Good for him.

This story should get some mileage now. The scales have fallen from a lot of eyes since that TANG story aired.

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

[tsuki]

7. tsuki - "CBS is old news and without merit." n/t

[Cha]

18. So true..they wrote their

own epitaph.

[tsuki]

19. They did the same to Edward R. Murrow back in the 50's.

[Wickerman]

8. any coincidence that he waited until Rove was out of official capacity?

Just wondering.

[asjr]

9. Could be but I think he has taken this

long to really get his ducks in a row. He must feel he has a good case. Oh, of course, I am convinced but up against the media which have no credentials, this may end up right-wing rigged.

[wicket]

13. I hope you are right

I think that's why he's taken a while too. Had to do some more investigation & now has a solide case.

Give 'em hell Dan!

[wicket]

11. kick

:kick:

[KitchenWitch]

12. Go get 'em Dano!

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

14. Wouldn't it be WONDERFUL if Rather had Absolute Proof up his sleeve that Shrub went AWOL? nt

[raccoon]

15. I hope he wins the suit! nt

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

16. I hope the defendants get their rear-ends handed to them in a hat via a HUGE verdict,...

,...in favor of Mr. Rather!!!

It would be more than merely fulfilling to see a bit of justice rendered against the corporacrats!

Here's to a Dan Rather WIN!! :applause:

[wicket]

17. "Here's to a Dan Rather WIN!!"

I'll drink to that! :toast: