I wish I'd been around Friday night to see it, but National Review's Jim Geraghty gives Dan Rather's performance that night a solid fisking which is well worth your time. I'll post more on this entire issue later, but I wanted to point out this part of Rather's introduction.

Today on the Internet and elsewhere, some people, including many who are partisan political operatives, concentrated not on the key questions of the overall story, but on the documents that were part of the support of the story.

On Thursday, you read the following here:

I, once again, would like to be the first to question the timing of the discovery of the fraudulent nature of the documents mentioned below. I believe the timing is designed to draw attention away from the contents of the memos which clearly show that President Bush is a bad person.

So, Dan Rather is apparently reading Hoystory as he determines how to respond to this meltdown. Unfortunately, it's only a selective reading: he missed this and this.