I thought "hot documents" were supposed to offer important insights into current events that we might not be able to see otherwise. This story was pretty uninteresting when it happened four years ago, and it HAPPENED FOUR YEARS AGO. This particular document is also spectacularly boring in its own right. Just because these documents are easy to get ahold of right now doesn't absolve you of the responsibility to find actual newsworthy material.

It's all over the papers, idiot.

---

Rather’s Lawsuit Shows Role of G.O.P. in Inquiry

By JACQUES STEINBERG Published: November 16, 2008 (New York Times)

When Dan Rather filed suit against CBS 14 months ago — claiming, among other things, that his former employer had commissioned a politically biased investigation into his work on a “60 Minutes” segment about President Bush’s National Guard service — the network predicted the quick and favorable dismissal of the case, which it derided as “old news.”

Sorry you're disappointed. Please send your suggestions for newsworthy documents to documents@slate.com. thanks, HD

<link>

This story has gotten really strange. Everyone wants to make

the story about the fake document, but is it? Dan Rather

stumbled over some obvious facts and then got fired because

he used a fake document that happened to be accurate.

CBS then tried to buy its way back into GOP favor by

kicking Dan Rather to the curb and hiring GOP-approved

investigators to "prove" that Dan Rather was wrong.

Dan Rather got his facts right with tainted evidence; so he's only

kind of wrong. So what happens to the CBS investment in buying

GOP favor now that the GOP has lost control of congress and the

White House? Will they need to suck up to the Democrats? Will

it cost more or less money to buy CBS some access to the Democrats?

Where is Diogenes with that lamp?