It’s fairly clear to me that the media is about ready to name former Army National Guard Lieutenant Colonel Bill Burkett as the source of the forged memos in the Danron affair and hope that things end there. CBS is, I’m quite sure, ready to pounce upon this line. They probably won’t fire Dan Rather. Instead, they’ll fire producer Mary Mapes (the apparent driving force behind the story) and then plead they were duped by a man who, it just happens, has spent time in mental institutions and can therefore be depicted as a crazy fraudster.

However, it is equally clear that this is not the whole of the story. It is eminently clear to me that others must have been involved in the process that led to this effort to perpetuate a fraud against the American people and, furthermore, that those unnamed others must be exposed and held accountable before we move beyond this. It is now admitted that at least one person within the Kerry campaign, former Senator Max Cleland, apparently spoke with Burkett and therefore had knowledge of these documents.

Let’s go back in time and try to reconstruct what happened based on what we already know. As late as August 13th of this year, Burkett was claiming that:

I have found no documentation from LTC Killian's hand or staff that indicate that this unit was involved in any complicit way to either cover for the failures of 1LT Bush, or to provide him pay or certification for training not completed. On the contrary, LTC Killians' remarks are rare.

Now, let’s flash-forward eight days, to August 21st, the day that Burkett spoke to Cleland. The Washington Post writes:

In an Aug. 21 posting, Burkett referred to a conversation with former senator Max Cleland (D-Ga.) about the need to counteract Republican tactics: "I asked if they wanted to counterattack or ride this to ground and outlast it, not spending any money. He said counterattack. So I gave them the information to do it with. But none of them have called me back."

So, by the 21st of August, Burkett is claiming have information with which the Democrats can launch a “counterattack” against the Bush Campaign and that information is compelling enough to get him on the phone with Max Cleland.

By the 25th of August Burkett was saying, again according to the Post, “that he and other researchers had "reassembled" files showing that Bush did not fulfill his oath to obey his superior officers.”

So, what are we to conclude? While nothing is certain, I would guess that the information that Burkett sought came into his possession some time between August 13th and August 21st, when Burkett spoke to Cleland. The Kerry Campaign, it would appear, first learned of the existence of the forged documents at some point shortly before Burkett spoke to Cleland on the 21st (after all, I doubt if Burkett would be able to simply speak to Cleland without first convincing more junior individuals in the campaign of his “credibility”).

Burkett himself describes having to get through, “get through seven layers of bureaucratic kids” in order to speak to Cleland. Who did Burkett speak to and what did he tell them?

So, we are now left the following questions:

1) What did Burkett mean when he claimed that he and other “researchers” had “reassembled” the files?

2) Who were the other “researchers” who helped Burkett “reassemble” the files?

3) What did the Kerry campaign know about these fraudulent documents and when did they know it?

4) Is Burkett the perpetrator of this fraud, or is he himself a victim of it?

Before we go any further, it is necessary for the Kerry campaign and the Democratic National Committee to disclose any and all known contacts between themselves and Bill Burkett. Whatever the exact circumstances, this man certainly did assist in attempting to defraud the American people and everyone deserves to know if and how he was assisted by both the Kerry campaign the DNC which, after all, must have had some forewarning of this attack to prepare its disastrous “Operation Fortunate Son.”

More importantly, however, what we need to establish is this: did the documents originate with Burkett, or did some other individual or group use a gullible Burkett as a conduit for fake papers, knowing that, given his past history of mental problems, he would make an easy patsy if things went wrong?

If you read his words closely, a better picture emerges. He and fellow “researchers” worked to “reassemble” the files. What does this mean? It seems to me that someone approached him claiming to have first-hand knowledge of the (fake) information contained with the forged memos. This information was then combined with Burkett’s own background knowledge and turned into a finished item.

This story does not end with Bill Burkett and, ultimately, it is not about him. By most accounts Col. Burkett is not a well man. It’s about the people who used Burkett for their own purposes.

Some have noted that these memos seem to be made-to-order for the storyline that CBS, the Kerry Campaign, and the Democratic National Committee wanted to run with. I agree. At the very minimum, both CBS and the Kerry campaign were utterly reckless and irresponsible and, through these things, allowed someone to attempt to influence a Presidential election with fake documents. At the maximum, well, it’s much worse.