Some problems I see about the Curtis Affidavit

[karlrschneider]

First, let's, for the sake of argument, assume everything he says is true (or 99% is, when is anything absolutely correct?)...the only potential corroboration for his meetings and efforts would have to come from the other principals, the Yang/Wong woman, Feeney and/or the "1 or 2 other people who drifted in and out of the room" The chances of any of those people affirming his story are, well, very slim to zilch. I'm not a lawyer but I've been through dozens of legal proceedings the past 40 years, and one affidavit from one guy isn't enough to convene a Grand Jury or an official accusation, let alone an indictment.

And as far as the MSM is concerned, forget it. There is no way in hell that any of the major newspapers or TV networks will touch this with a 10 meter pole after the drubbing Dan Rather took (of course it was undeserved but we know how that crap works these days.)

We like to say "Google is our friend", but some of the stuff they have cached from Curtis' website makes him look a little loopy (thanks to rog and monkie for finding this stuff...see other threads) and you can bet your butt it will be used against him when the RW spinbastards get wind of it (anybody doubt they haven't already?)

Anyway, I think we ought to soft-pedal this 'sensational' stuff and not let it distract us from something that's probably more potentially productive, like the upcoming recount in Ohio.

JMO