Idle Political Speculation on Forged Documents

[Whar]

Originally Posted by Randal7

CBS is defending the documents (last I read anyway) by saying people have told them the documents are consistent with what the colonel told them during that time, IE hearsay.

That is not hearsay. If you sit a guy down on the witness stand and ask him "Were you told to go to the store by Jim?" he can answer the question. The witness has direct knowledge of the statement. CBS has defended the papers by citing people who had direct knowledge of the memo or direct contact with Killian regarding his opinion of Bush. They have also stated that 4 expert examined the document and concluded them geniune.

While CBS could still have screw-up they seem done their due diligence.

[Leonidas]

Originally Posted by Whar

That is not hearsay. If you sit a guy down on the witness stand and ask him "Were you told to go to the store by Jim?" he can answer the question. The witness has direct knowledge of the statement. CBS has defended the papers by citing people who had direct knowledge of the memo or direct contact with Killian regarding his opinion of Bush. They have also stated that 4 expert examined the document and concluded them geniune.

While CBS could still have screw-up they seem done their due diligence.

CBS claims they spent 6 weeks verifying these documents, yet liberal paper The Washington Post found four experts in one day to say they were probably fake, not to mention they interviewed the guy's son and widow who both said he never kept documents like that and that the Lt Col always said young Bush was an excellent pilot.

Just goes to show 60 Minutes has an agenda, and they got caught out in the light on it. 60 Minutes clearly has gone the way of the New York Times as a credible news source.

[CamEdwards]

anybody see the "rebuttal" on CBS evening news tonight?

Woo boy. Not a convincing job by CBS.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

anybody see the "rebuttal" on CBS evening news tonight?

Woo boy. Not a convincing job by CBS.

No but now I am curious.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

No but now I am curious.

Here is the print version:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in641481.shtml

[John Galt]

Another interesting factoid (ripped from Salon.com):

Yet independent researcher Marty Heldt notes that he had received an undisputed Bush military document in 2000 from the Vietnam era that clearly contains a superscripted "th." He also notes that when Killian's Aug. 14, 1973, memo is enlarged and the word "interference" is examined, it's clear the two middle e's rest higher on the page than the other two e's; that is not something a modern-day word processor would likely do.

I hadn't read anything about the e's before. This all kind of goofy, but I'm sure it will sort it self out in the next few days.

[CamEdwards]

I checked at 200% of the original document size. You're right. Then again there's another example of kerning in the same word, between the "r" and "f". That's not indicative of a typewriter.

I hope you're right about it all sorting itself out. I'd love for CBS to release their copies to an independent panel of forensic document experts, not the handwriting guy they had on tonight.

[Glengoyne]

The CBS defense that I read on MSNBC had some of the stuff from referenced in John's post. But on NPR tonight, on the ride home, they had a forensic document expert that said that some typewriters had some of the features required to produce the memos as early as the 50s, and there were certainly typewriters in the late 60s that had other features used in the memos. He called them composing typewriters or something like that. He said that they were beyond top of the line for typical use, and they required special training to even use. So he thought it unlikely that someone would have gone through the trouble(and time) of using the features apparent in the documents to writing these types of memos. And that is also assuming that a National Guard Officer even had access to that class of typewriter.

The family says they didn't give the documents to anyone, so I am still curious where they came from.

To me the thing that clicked with me and caused me to say "I bet they turn out to be fakes" was the language used. It fit exactly into what Bush's opponents have been saying. It was too perfect.

I have also heard contradictory things about the signatures and whether they match other Killian signatures from the era. I don't know what to think. It seems it is not a simple slam dunk "No way in hell could that document have been produced in 1972", so this looks like it might linger on without resolution for sometime.

[Joe]

anyone think its possible someone affiliated with the Bush campaign may have released these documents, making them look obviously fake on purpose?

[CamEdwards]

you tell me.

Seriously? I don't think anybody connected (at least directly) with either campaign would be dumb enough to do that. Why do that? If the Bush campaign were behind this, there's no way in hell that CBS would keep the source a secret if/when the story collapsed.

My hunch is that the documents were given to an overeager producer by someone who's interested in seeing Kerry win, but not directly involved in the Kerry campaign. Someone not too bright, because of the obvious nature of some of this stuff. If it were a not so bright person interested in seeing Bush win, but not directly involved in the Bush campaign the memos would probably have been more positive to Bush, and they would have been given to Fox News.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by George W Bush

anyone think its possible someone affiliated with the Bush campaign may have released these documents, making them look obviously fake on purpose?

John mentioned that Karl Rove might be involved at some point earlier. Also I have heard a couple of pundits float that idea. One of them mentioning that Terry McAullife was mentioning that possibility along with the fact that the thought that the documents might have been faked was initially brought to public light on a CBS message board at 9:59 Wednesday night. The post apparently mentioned things like the font being inconsistent, and at that point the memos had only been flashed briefly on the screen.

I just watched both MSNBC and Fox News take a look at the documents, and MSNBC's forensic document expert said that he could not imagine any expert concluding that the documents actually came from a 1970s vintage typewriter. They gave his credentials, and mentioned that he had been doing this for law enforcement for over 20 years. He pointed to things like heading being perfectly centered on the page, and centered with the other text on the page. With a typewriter that just isn't easilly done. One of the talking heads on Fox(I Think) mentioned that, in 1970, a typewriter with proportional spacing and justification would have run several thousand dollars. They simply weren't used outside of the publishing business.

CNBC also showed some of the CBS defense of their findings mentioning that subscripts were found on other documents originating from the Air Guard base in Texas. The example they showed was clearly not "in-kind" with the "th" subscript on the Bush memo. The characters were almost as large as the normal text. I'm starting to understand how someone who hasn't even looked at the originals could say that they are 90% certain they were faked. After seeing that piece I think I have also come to the conclusion that if someone doesn't produce a reasonable typewriter from that era with these features and the appropriate typeface, there is no way I will believe these are genuine.

Then on Fox they had a guy on from the Air Guard in Texas. He had some interesting things to say.

First, pilots had until the last day of their birth month to report to their physical. So there is no reasonable explanation why the memo ordering him to take his physical two months prior to the date required would have been sent.

Second, the memo from '73 mentions a superior officer, Staudt, pressuring Hodges to sugar coat Bush's rating. Staudt retired from the Military in '72, so he wouldn't have been in the chain of command at the time the memo was written.

Third, the memo mentions Bush and the OETR. That wasn't the acronym in use at the time, it was instead OER. Since Killian was charged with rating a number of pilots, I am under the impression that he would have known what form he was filling out.

[Leonidas]

These documents certainly look sloppy enough to have been deliberately faked, with the intention of getting caught. My hunch is this was a setup for 60 Minutes. I don't think it will affect Kerry one way or the other. However Tom Harkins has pretty much shot himself in the foot for national credibility, and Terry McAuliffe is pretty much a known scumbag anyway so it's not like he hurt himself. He's said worse things about Bush than what he's said this week.

What's pathetic is just how badly 60 Minutes blew it. Killian's son told them before they even aired the show that he thought the documents were bogus, yet they went ahead with it anyway.

I guess in the end this all probably helps Bush because now the whole issue with his Guard service is an overdone joke. Anyone attacking it now is talking to the wind.

[JPhillips]

The Boston Globe:

Authenticity backed on Bush documents
By Francie Latour and Michael Rezendes, Globe Staff | September 11, 2004

After CBS News on Wednesday trumpeted newly discovered documents that referred to a 1973 effort to ''sugar coat" President Bush's service record in the Texas Air National Guard, the network almost immediately faced charges that the documents were forgeries, with typography that was not available on typewriters used at that time.

But specialists interviewed by the Globe and some other news organizations say the specialized characters used in the documents, and the type format, were common to electric typewriters in wide use in the early 1970s, when Bush was a first lieutenant.

Philip D. Bouffard, a forensic document examiner in Ohio who has analyzed typewritten samples for 30 years, had expressed suspicions about the documents in an interview with the New York Times published Thursday, one in a wave of similar media reports. But Bouffard told the Globe yesterday that after further study, he now believes the documents could have been prepared on an IBM Selectric Composer typewriter available at the time.

Analysts who have examined the documents focus on several facets of their typography, among them the use of a curved apostrophe, a raised, or superscript, ''th," and the proportional spacing between the characters -- spacing which varies with the width of the letters. In older typewriters, each letter was alloted the same space.

Those who doubt the documents say those typographical elements would not have been commonly available at the time of Bush's service. But such characters were common features on electric typewriters of that era, the Globe determined through interviews with specialists and examination of documents from the period. In fact, one such raised ''th," used to describe a Guard unit, the 187th, appears in a document in Bush's official record that the White House made public earlier this year.

Bouffard, the Ohio document specialist, said that he had dismissed the Bush documents in an interview with The New York Times because the letters and formatting of the Bush memos did not match any of the 4,000 samples in his database. But Bouffard yesterday said that he had not considered one of the machines whose type is not logged in his database: the IBM Selectric Composer. Once he compared the Bush memos to Selectric Composer samples obtained from Interpol, the international police agency, Bouffard said his view shifted.

In the Times interview, Bouffard had also questioned whether the military would have used the Composer, a large machine. But Bouffard yesterday provided a document indicating that as early as April 1969 -- three years before the dates of the CBS memos -- the Air Force had completed service testing for the Composer, possibly in preparation for purchasing the typewriters.

As for the raised ''th" that appears in the Bush memos -- to refer, for example, to units such as the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron -- Bouffard said that custom characters on the Composer's metal typehead ball were available in the 1970s, and that the military could have ordered such custom balls from IBM.

''You can't just say that this is definitively the mark of a computer," Bouffard said.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by George W Bush

anyone think its possible someone affiliated with the Bush campaign may have released these documents, making them look obviously fake on purpose?

Thanks for confessing!

[CamEdwards]

Dr. Bouffard is angry. Very angry. Says he's been misrepresented by the Boston Globe.

hxxp://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000859.php

[Glengoyne]

Jphillips

That is an interesting piece. The IBM Selectric Composer was the typewriter the NPR Typewriter "pundit" talked about. He said it had the features required, some built in, some as options. If I read a little more into what he said, the only thing he wasn't sure was available was the typeface/font. The article you link seems to indicate that, that too was possible. So it does appear that most if not all of the aspects of the memo were possible in 1972.

Now I think the debate goes to how reasonable is it to believe that Killian had one of these typewriters at his disposal.

From what I understand about the IBM Selectric and Composing typewriters, and this is the result of reading three web pages linked by Google, and listening to what the two or three pundits that mentioned them on-air had to say about them. Certainly this is far from rock solid info, more along the lines of thinking outloud.


-Composing Typewriters were used in the publishing industry by small time "in-house" publishers printing small pieces of work. Universities were given as an example of an institution that would use a Composing Typewriter to publish academic works. They would choose a Composing Typewriter over other typesetting publishing techniques, because of cost and relative ease of use.
-The cost of a Selectric composer in 1970 has been referenced as "Several Thousand Dollars". One of the Talking heads on Fox mentioned "twenty thousand dollars". I'd like to know definatively how much one of these things cost at the time as well as how widely were they sold. Is it possible the expert quoted above didn't have samples of the Selectric because of it's rarity, or it's use as a publishing tool instead of a typewriter?
-Composing Typewriters required special training to use. They aren't "normal" typewriters. This I'd like to hear more about. The pictures of the Selectric look like a normal typewriter, the keys don' t appear to be differently placed. I just don't know.
-The features used to produce these memos, while available, weren't easilly used in practice. So how likely is it that someone who typed their own work, eventhough, according to his son, he was a poor typist, going to go through the trouble of Centering headings and such just to write a memo to himself?

I guess there are just a lot more questions about this than there are answers right now.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

Dr. Bouffard is angry. Very angry. Says he's been misrepresented by the Boston Globe.

hxxp://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000859.php

It's a cheap shot, and really beneath discussion, but I must say that "Kerry Kamp" tickled my funnybone

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

It's a cheap shot, and really beneath discussion, but I must say that "Kerry Kamp" tickled my funnybone

I'm curious about the cheapshot? The top of the article with the reported conversation with the docor? Or the bottom of the page with the clearly biased commentary?

If the doctor is saying he was mis-represented, then I'm sure more will be said about it.

I did read a couple of the posts from readers below, and this little quote is my favorite. It's not from the Doctor.

This is like seeing a Boing 747 in a movie supposedly from World War II, and some partisan defenders insisting that really, jet engines existed and were in use back then so it could have been genuine.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I'm curious about the cheapshot? The top of the article with the reported conversation with the docor? Or the bottom of the page with the clearly biased commentary?

No, the cheap shot was the "Kerry Kamp" comment included in the biased commentary. The actual phrase "Kerry Kamp" is a clear cheapshot that I just found humorous as all get out...

[JPhillips]

Glen: I agree that there are a number of open questions. If pushed, I'd probably conclude that CBS got punk'd. What is clear though is that it isn't an open and shut case of forgery as many would have you believe.

It's very irritating that many of those willing to believe the claims of the first Swift Boat ad are no so vocally crying LIARS! I guess the lesson here is that if you are going to make shit up, don't leave a paper trail.

[sterlingice]

I've figured out who did this!

http://typewriter.rydia.net/

I mean, c'mon, it all fits. Typewriters haven't been talked about this much since the 1980s.

SI

[CamEdwards]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Glen: I agree that there are a number of open questions. If pushed, I'd probably conclude that CBS got punk'd. What is clear though is that it isn't an open and shut case of forgery as many would have you believe.

It's very irritating that many of those willing to believe the claims of the first Swift Boat ad are no so vocally crying LIARS! I guess the lesson here is that if you are going to make shit up, don't leave a paper trail.

Here's a difference, JPhillips. The Swift Boat Guys were (and still are) never shy of doing interviews, even if they were going to get their credibility challenged. You can't say that about whoever gave that document to CBS.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Jphillips

That is an interesting piece. The IBM Selectric Composer was the typewriter the NPR Typewriter "pundit" talked about. He said it had the features required, some built in, some as options. If I read a little more into what he said, the only thing he wasn't sure was available was the typeface/font. The article you link seems to indicate that, that too was possible. So it does appear that most if not all of the aspects of the memo were possible in 1972.

Now I think the debate goes to how reasonable is it to believe that Killian had one of these typewriters at his disposal.

From what I understand about the IBM Selectric and Composing typewriters, and this is the result of reading three web pages linked by Google, and listening to what the two or three pundits that mentioned them on-air had to say about them. Certainly this is far from rock solid info, more along the lines of thinking outloud.


-Composing Typewriters were used in the publishing industry by small time "in-house" publishers printing small pieces of work. Universities were given as an example of an institution that would use a Composing Typewriter to publish academic works. They would choose a Composing Typewriter over other typesetting publishing techniques, because of cost and relative ease of use.
-The cost of a Selectric composer in 1970 has been referenced as "Several Thousand Dollars". One of the Talking heads on Fox mentioned "twenty thousand dollars". I'd like to know definatively how much one of these things cost at the time as well as how widely were they sold. Is it possible the expert quoted above didn't have samples of the Selectric because of it's rarity, or it's use as a publishing tool instead of a typewriter?
-Composing Typewriters required special training to use. They aren't "normal" typewriters. This I'd like to hear more about. The pictures of the Selectric look like a normal typewriter, the keys don' t appear to be differently placed. I just don't know.
-The features used to produce these memos, while available, weren't easilly used in practice. So how likely is it that someone who typed their own work, eventhough, according to his son, he was a poor typist, going to go through the trouble of Centering headings and such just to write a memo to himself?

I guess there are just a lot more questions about this than there are answers right now.

I've been reading stuff about the Selectric since the story broke and at least some people said (although I have no idea what their source was) that the Selectric was extensively used in the military (probably a big, wasteful contract), but probably not in the National Guard.

And just a side note - given Killian's rank and stature (and the time this occurred), I would seriously doubt he would have typed this - he would have dictated it and had it typed by a secretary. I have no actual knowledge on this, but I really can't imagine any ranking officer typing their own stuff at that time.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by John Galt

I've been reading stuff about the Selectric since the story broke and at least some people said (although I have no idea what their source was) that the Selectric was extensively used in the military (probably a big, wasteful contract), but probably not in the National Guard.

And just a side note - given Killian's rank and stature (and the time this occurred), I would seriously doubt he would have typed this - he would have dictated it and had it typed by a secretary. I have no actual knowledge on this, but I really can't imagine any ranking officer typing their own stuff at that time.

The bit about Killian typing his own stuff, was from his son. So who knows. I do agree with you on your question about how likely that was.

Also the type-writer people are pointing to is not a run of the mill IBM Selectric, but an IBM Selectric Composer. As I understand it, the features at question were available on the Composer, but not a typical typewriter.

We will see. Oh and not everyone believed everything the Swift Boat Vets said.

[Solecismic]

Seems like a non-story to me, other than the further erosion of confidence in network news. Dan Rather's legacy.

[Dutch]

EDITED FOR CONTENT

[CamEdwards]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Seems like a non-story to me, other than the further erosion of confidence in network news. Dan Rather's legacy.

well, there is the matter of where the memo came from. If it was leaked to CBS by Karl Rove, something tells me it becomes an issue.

If it was leaked to CBS by Robin Rather (Dan's daughter, a Travis County Democrat, and a donor to the Kerry campaign), something tells me that becomes an issue.

My opinion is it's a little early to declare this a non-story.

[JPhillips]

Cam: CBS has no reason to reveal the source. Should Novak reveal who gave him Plame's identity? While I'm sure the source could provide more info, as journalists they shouldn't reveal the source unless the source okays it. CBS News would be idiotic to reveal their source on this or any other news story.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Cam: CBS has no reason to reveal the source. Should Novak reveal who gave him Plame's identity? While I'm sure the source could provide more info, as journalists they shouldn't reveal the source unless the source okays it. CBS News would be idiotic to reveal their source on this or any other news story.

They certainly aren't going to reveal the source, if they turn out to be valid. On the other hand, if it turns out they were duped, they might just be willing to do so. If they were duped, then someone gave them the documents and then told them they saw them created. I'm guessing that they have also accounted for the whereabouts of the papers since they were written. The family denies any role in the papers. They say Killian didn't have a home office or keep personal files at home. I'm wondering if he had a secretary or clerk, that would have done his paper work. That person would seem to be the most likely "suspect", as it were.

[Dutch]

Casting further doubt on the memos, The Dallas Morning News said in a report for its Saturday editions that the officer named in a memo as exerting pressure to "sugar coat" Bush's record had left the Texas Air National Guard 1 1/2 years before the memo was dated.

The newspaper said it obtained an order showing that Walter B. Staudt, former commander of the Texas Guard, retired on March 1, 1972. The memo was dated Aug. 18, 1973. A telephone call to Staudt's home Friday night was not answered.

"60 Minutes" relied on the documents as part of a Wednesday segment — reported by Rather — on Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard from 1968 to 1973.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132119,00.html

That's weird.

[CHEMICAL SOLDIER]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Damn! I had never even noticed that camera in my office. Thanks a bunch.

No more having sex in the med room for me.

[CamEdwards]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Cam: CBS has no reason to reveal the source. Should Novak reveal who gave him Plame's identity? While I'm sure the source could provide more info, as journalists they shouldn't reveal the source unless the source okays it. CBS News would be idiotic to reveal their source on this or any other news story.

I did an informal poll with other journalists about this on Friday. I've yet to talk to a reporter or editor who says "if the memo's are fake, CBS should still not reveal their sources." To a person they say if the source burned them, you burn the source.

[Glengoyne]

I am for some reason obsessed with this topic. I am watching football and googling IBM Composing Selectric.

The museum of printing http://www.museumofprinting.org/Collection.html
Lists the Composing Selectric among other typesetting tools. It also says it was "computer driven". I am wondering how big this thing is. It mentions different balls that can be switched in and out for different print effects.

I found a PC magazine piece as well http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1644869,00.asp

Pop-Quiz:
Which image was typed on an IBM Selectric Composer?
Which one was typed in Microsoft Word?
(See below for answers and an explanation.)



A great deal has been made of the fact that some documents that are claimed to have been typed in the early 1970s look very much like documents prepared in Microsoft Word in 2004. This fact proves nothing, because (1) a document may well have been typed on a typewriter in the 1970s and (2) virtually the same document can be prepared on a computer in 2004. (Some other comments on this issue, from a notably better-informed perspective, may be found here.)

In order to demonstrate that it proves absolutely nothing to show that a document can be reproduced a computer, consider the two images below. One of them was typed on an IBM Selectric Composer typewriter; the other was typed in Microsoft Word. The fact that the two resemble each other does not prove that both of them were typed in Microsoft Word. It only proves that Microsoft Word (by default) uses a typeface very similar to one that was available in the early 1970s for the IBM Selectric Composer. (For a brief description of the IBM Selectric Composer, try this link.)

Here are the two images. Which one was typed forty or more years ago on a typewriter, and which one was typed on a computer today? The answer is at the foot of this page (scroll down when you're ready).

The image that was prepared in Word was typed without any adjustments whatsoever to the spacing of the type. I reproduced the hyphenation of the IBM original by manually inserting hyphens (without spaces afterwards) after the same letters where hyphens occur in the IBM text.

The source of the image made on an IBM Selectric Composer was the printed manual for that IBM typewriter. A scanned image of the manual may be found at here. The manual (as stated in a note on its second page) was actually typed on an IBM Selectric Composer in order to demonstrate its capabilities. (As the note explains, the large-type headlines in the manual were not typed on a Selectric Composer, but everything else was typed on that machine).

If you go to the page numbered 100 in the scanned IBM manual, you can find a list of type elements in different sizes, including ones with capitals sized 5 and 6 points. Superscripts may not have been quite as difficult to type on a Composing Selectric as many people say they were.

Of course, none of this demonstrates that the documents dated from the early 1970s are in fact genuine. It only demonstrates that the fact that the disputed documents can be reproduced in Microsoft Word is not convincing evidence that they are inauthentic.

The identifications of the two images may be found one screen (more or less) below this line. Scroll down...







Answer: The one on the LEFT was made in Microsoft Word.

A personal note: I performed this experiment in typography because I have been interested for years in the history and technology of type, not for any partisan political purposes, except to the degree that the public interest is better served by truth than by falsehoods.

Then I found a link to the message board for a blogger. In a thread discussing the documents the above article was linked, the blogger himself posted a reply.

1. This talks about an IBM Selectric *Composer* -- a high-end typewriter
that was sold as a typesetting machine by IBM. It cost in the
neighborhood of $4,000 in early 1970s dollars. Whether or not this is
the sort of thing you'd find in the TANG is questioanble.

The issue is not whether or not there were typesetting machines that
could reproduce the memo in the 1970s -- certainly there probably were,
and from what I've read elsewhere about the Composer, you could get some
of the effects seen in the memos.

So the issue is how likely is it that this TANG officer, who didn't
type, wrote these memos on a IBM Selectric Composer when every single
other piece of documentation coming out of his office both before and
after these memos looks nothing like these documents.

2. The author doesn't seem to understand the point of the MS Word
demonstration. The point isn't that you can, with a lot of work, make a
document today look like one from a 1970s typewriter. Of course you can.
But notice he has to do a lot of extra work in Word -- add hyphens
manually, etc.

What Charles Johnson did was type the memo in and noticed that the line,
letter and word spacing matches exactly with the 1970s memos. There are
a number of problems with that, including the fact that the military at
that time used paper that was 8" wide rather than 8.5" so it is *very
odd* that the margins match up perfectly.

It is also very odd that there are three memos, if I remember correctly,
that have perfectly centered typewritten letterheads. And by perfect I
mean you can overlay them and they are as identical to each other as you
would get by producing them on a laser printer today. That suggests that
some sort of typesetting system -- MS Word or this Selectric Composer or
some other typesetting equipment -- were used, which again is very
suspicious. If they are genunine, this man went to a lot of effort to
have typographically lovely memos that were for his personal files
(which his wife and son maintain simply didn't exist).

3. "If you go to the page numbered 100 in the scanned IBM manual, you
can find a list of type elements in different sizes, including ones with
capitals sized 5 and 6 points. Superscripts may not have been quite as
difficult to type on a Composing Selectric as many people say they were."

Actually it is relatively difficult and, in any event, would involve
swapping out balls. Again, it's not impossible, but if you're typing a
short 250-300 word memo that you're, are you going to take the time to
swap balls back and forth just to get superscripting? That just doesnt't
add upp.

4. "Of course, none of this demonstrates that the documents dated from
the early 1970s are in fact genuine. It only demonstrates that the fact
that the disputed documents can be reproduced in Microsoft Word is not
convincing evidence that they are inauthentic."

Of course not. The point is there are a whole variety of things odd
about the documents. Any one of them alone would not be anything more
than an oddity, but the totality taken together about the documents
taken into account that everyone from the officer's wife to his former
commanding officer say the documents appear to be fake means CBS has to
step up to the plate and authorize an outside, independent look at the
documents. It is CBS that bears the burden to demontrate that they are
authentic.

I really agree with a lot of his points. I think that since the IBM Composing Selectric was available in the seventies it is not a simple slam dunk that these are faked. I think the focus needs to be placed on how widely available this typewriter was, and whether it would have seen any realistic utilization outside of the "publishing" industry. A second question I'd like answered is do the superscripts available at the time match the ones found in the Document. MS word can match them exactly, but can the Selectric? The superscripts that CBS touts as existing on documents from the Texas Air Guard, do not come close to mathing those in the memos.

I'm beginning to wonder what the "over-under" on a CBS mea-culpa is. Perhaps on the next edition of sisty minutes two? Hey maybe this was all about ratings.

[CamEdwards]

Glengoyne,

If you want to see what the memo would have looked like were it written on a Composer (which would basically be like you or I using a freakin' printing press to make a memo)... try hxxp://shapeofdays.typepad.com/the_shape_of_days/2004/09/the_ibm_selectr.html

He got a guy who actually ownes a Composer to type out the memo. It's very interesting.

The leap of logic that it takes to believe these are real is astounding, yet CBS persists that the memos are the real deal. And even if they're not, Rather says, what's important are the questions they raise.

Umm... no. Fake memos can't raise real questions.

I still say this is a big deal, not necessarily politically, but for CBS and the media. I've actually regained a little bit of confidence in the media as I've seen them cover this story (albeit with some problems). As to the over-under on a mea culpa, the last time 60 Minutes used fake memos in a news story (1997) it took them two years to formally apologize, and that was after a lawsuit had been filed.

Let's hope they learned something from that experience.

[Dutch]

Source Pulls Support for Memos on Bush Guard Service
Sunday, September 12, 2004

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132157,00.html

Says he was read the memo's over the phone, never saw them directly....sad ploy by our faithful free media to affect the outcome of our elections!

[gtmarc]

Amazing how the Republicans can change the topic and how most people will willingly follow them.

There was actually something important on this story this last week, that the Republican smoke screen about typewriters has managed to mostly obscure.

The story about Bush and the National Guard had previously been that the Texas National Guard had released him from any further service so that he could attend Harvard Business School.

Now its emerged that the Texas National Guard did not release Lt. Bush early. They did say he could go to Harvard, but the condition was that Lt. Bush sign on with a National Guard unit in Massachusetts. There's absolutely no record of Lt. Bush ever contacting the MA National Guard.

The day after I saw that, this bs about the typewriters and the CYA Memo to File document began.

Amazing to me that here we are in a war, with a government that's constantly saying we need to give up our rights for security, and in an economy that's losing jobs and if anything barely out of a recession, and both the Democrats and Republicans seem mainly to want to talk about what these two did during Vietnam.

I don't like Democrats or Republicans, but to me this Bush crew has been so incompetent they need to go.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by gtmarc

...
There was actually something important on this story this last week, that the Republican smoke screen about typewriters has managed to mostly obscure.

The story about Bush and the National Guard had previously been that the Texas National Guard had released him from any further service so that he could attend Harvard Business School.

Now its emerged that the Texas National Guard did not release Lt. Bush early. They did say he could go to Harvard, but the condition was that Lt. Bush sign on with a National Guard unit in Massachusetts. There's absolutely no record of Lt. Bush ever contacting the MA National Guard.
...

Interesting. Did I miss something about Bush and Harvard Law or the Air Guard in Massachusetts? I thought the story had been he was in Alabama working on a political campaign. Also wouldn't your issue be somewhat mitigated by the fact that he received an honorable discharge from the Air Guard? I didn't think they handed out Honorable Discharges to AWOL soldiers.

The Bush people didn't bring this story out. This memo scandal was started by CBS on sixty minutes two. So while yes this has become a focus of interest, it is not controlled by the Bush campaign. If someone hadn't been so motivated to smear the President, then these memos wouldn't have been in the news. Perhaps there would have been some worthwhile coverage in it's place. Then again, most likely not. I think we are SOL until the debates.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Interesting. Did I miss something about Bush and Harvard Law or the Air Guard in Massachusetts? I thought the story had been he was in Alabama working on a political campaign. Also wouldn't your issue be somewhat mitigated by the fact that he received an honorable discharge from the Air Guard? I didn't think they handed out Honorable Discharges to AWOL soldiers.

The Bush people didn't bring this story out. This memo scandal was started by CBS on sixty minutes two. So while yes this has become a focus of interest, it is not controlled by the Bush campaign. If someone hadn't been so motivated to smear the President, then these memos wouldn't have been in the news. Perhaps there would have been some worthwhile coverage in it's place. Then again, most likely not. I think we are SOL until the debates.

Sadly, it looks like the Dems have decided they do not want to attack issues, but concentrate on what happened 35 years ago. Let me paint the picture I see of the two:

G.W.B.- Rich kid who got out of Vietnam by wealth and influence and didn't exactly serve with the best intentions.

John Kerry- Volunteered to serve, got three purple hearts and Silver and Bronze Star (wish it would end there). Then he came home, called those he served with war criminals, compared them to Ghengis Khan, claimed he entered Cambodia when he didn't, threw medals that were supposed to be his but belong to someone else....

advantage Bush.

[JPhillips]

Grant: This is hardly limited to Dems. Don't you remember SBVT?

[miked]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

I did an informal poll with other journalists about this on Friday. I've yet to talk to a reporter or editor who says "if the memo's are fake, CBS should still not reveal their sources." To a person they say if the source burned them, you burn the source.

They should release their sources to the same degree Novak should. Novak willingly participated in what is a capital offense (I believe). That is the lowest form of journalism I've seen. Isn't what happened to that CIA officer considered treason? If the law can't make Novak spill the beans about who committed treason, why should anyone reveal this POS memo source?

[Buddy Grant]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Seems like a non-story to me, other than the further erosion of confidence in network news. Dan Rather's legacy.

Do you mean a non-story in that you personally would prefer not to hear about it or a non-story in that you think nobody else should hear about it? As for erosion of confidence in network news, that sounds premature in this case. If this story is accurate (and regardless of the WN in this forum, that is still being debated) shouldn't this kind of reporting actually increase your confidence?

[Fritz]

"Are you going to vote for Bush because you think Kerry didn't earn his medals given before you were born?"

I was born.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by miked

They should release their sources to the same degree Novak should. Novak willingly participated in what is a capital offense (I believe). That is the lowest form of journalism I've seen. Isn't what happened to that CIA officer considered treason? If the law can't make Novak spill the beans about who committed treason, why should anyone reveal this POS memo source?

1) Actually, I believe the penalty attached is up to 10 years in prison.
2) Intent is required as part of the crime
3) No, what "happened" to the operative is question isn't covered under "treason", but rather under a different statute. Or, at least the discussions I've read about the situation all make reference to a different law, one that is specific to covert operatives.

[CamEdwards]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Interesting. Did I miss something about Bush and Harvard Law or the Air Guard in Massachusetts? I thought the story had been he was in Alabama working on a political campaign. Also wouldn't your issue be somewhat mitigated by the fact that he received an honorable discharge from the Air Guard? I didn't think they handed out Honorable Discharges to AWOL soldiers.

The Bush people didn't bring this story out. This memo scandal was started by CBS on sixty minutes two. So while yes this has become a focus of interest, it is not controlled by the Bush campaign. If someone hadn't been so motivated to smear the President, then these memos wouldn't have been in the news. Perhaps there would have been some worthwhile coverage in it's place. Then again, most likely not. I think we are SOL until the debates.

When he went to Harvard he was transferred to a Reserve unit in Denver. This is because he was allowed to go on inactive or standby reserve status (I can't remember which).

Now, if we really want to continue in this vein, we could talk about what John Kerry did while he had inactive or standby reserve status. Kerry had that status from 1970 to 1978, according to documents on his website. That means his trip to Paris to meet with the North Vietnamese, his testimony, his throwing of the medals, etc. were all done while he was technically a member of the Navy Reserve.

As a conservative, I'm finding it amazing that the Demcrats are continuing in this vein. Whoever's in charge of making decisions like this really needs to be fired.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Grant: This is hardly limited to Dems. Don't you remember SBVT?

Yup, I remember that they would only gotten play on Right Wing Radio if John Kerry hadn't spent his whole convention playing only to his war record and then his whole August keeping them on the newspaper covers instead of DEALING WITH ISSUES!!! I expect Bush not to highlight the issues. If Kerry has a vision when in the heck does he plan to show it? Is his vision to refight the Vietnam war? That seems to be his plan so far.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

Whoever's in charge of making decisions like this really needs to be fired.

Could not agree more. Worse run campaign ever!

[Solecismic]

These guys are making me look bad. A couple of months ago, I predicted an easy win for Kerry. At least 150 EVs. Now, it could go either way. I still think Kerry pulls it out, but it may be another one of those that isn't called until 3 a.m..

What a horrible campaign Kerry has run. He makes Dukakis look good in comparison. Even Edwin Muskie and his crying game would be an improvement.

[JPhillips]

Grant: We remember things slightly differently. I remember CNN running the first SBVT ad before Kerry responded. In fact the SBVT ad only ran in a few states, but by the time Kerry responded a majority of the country claimed to have seen or knew about the ads. It was the "liberal" media that provided a free forum for the SBVT.

Now, Kerry certainly handled this poorly. We are in complete agreement here. But, you can't blame Kerry for ads.

[Ksyrup]

Consider the source, of course (American Spectator)...but this article suggests that the documents may have come from someone in the Kerry campaign:

Here We Go Some More

By The Prowler

Published 9/13/2004 12:08:06 AM

While CBS news anchor Dan Rather can say there is no internal investigation under way over the alleged forged documents used as the foundation for an investigation into President George W. Bush's National Guard service, you wouldn't have been able to tell from the 15 or so 60 Minutes and CBS News" staffers working away feverishly on Friday and Saturday to try to nail down their story. On Friday, according to CBS News sources, Rather spent the day on the phone and dealing with CBS suits who were nervous about the fall out from the story. "All Dan could say was that this was an attack from the right-wing nuts, and that we should have expected this, given the stakes," says a CBS News producer. "He was terribly defensive and nervous. You could tell." All day Friday, Rather, his producer on the story, Mary Mapes, and other 60 Minutes staffers were scrambling to shore up support from their sources on the story. That effort didn't go so well. By Saturday, one of their key sources, retired Maj. Gen. Bobby Hodges, had said that CBS misled him, and that he had never been shown the memos in question. "We pulled the trick of only calling some sources at the last minute to reconfirm," says the CBS producer. "Someone called Hodges, I think, on Monday night and read him parts of the document. The late contacts are a standard practice so we don't tip off the competition or our sources." Hodges is a critical loss for CBS News' credibility. He was the superior officer of the man CBS claims wrote the memo, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984. MEANWHILE, OVER THE WEEKEND journalists from around the country were attempting to track down the original source of the documents. "We're having a hard time tracking how we got the documents," says the CBS News producer. "There are at least two people in this building who have insisted we got copies of these memos from the Kerry campaign by way of an additional source. We do not have the originals, and our sources have indicated to us that we will not be getting the originals. How that is possible I don't know." One individual several news outlets were looking at was Bill Burkett, a former Texas National Guard officer. Burkett in the past has cooperated with both press and Democratic Party opposition researchers in slinging mud at President Bush. Burkett gained some national attention earlier in the campaign when he claimed he was at National Guard headquarters in Austin 1997, when he overheard Guard officials and a representative of then Governor Bush discuss how to sanitize Bush's files. That story was fully discredited. Nonetheless, Burkett sat down for at least three different interviews with CBS News for the story now at the center of the controversy. One of those interviews was with Rather's producer, Ms. Mapes. "There are rumors here that if there are any real documents, they are hand-written notes from Killian that someone like Burkett was holding, and that instead of using the hand-written notes, someone typed them up to look more official," says the CBS News producer. "They would look better on TV and posted on line if they were typed, but on a number of levels, that story just doesn't hold up. There are too many inconsistencies factually with what is in the memos." THE MOST GLARING ISSUES now are the seemingly phony P.O. Box addresses used in the headers of at least one of the memorandums. Such post office box addresses were not used by the National Guard at that time. Yet another issue: the 18-month gap between the retirement of Col. Walter "Buck" Staudt on March 1, 1972, and August 18, 1973, when the Killian of the disputed memos claimed that Staudt was putting pressure on him to sugarcoat an evaluation of Bush. Almost everyone involved in the National Guard in Texas says Staudt would have had virtually no influence in the active units nearly a year and a half after leaving the service. PERHAPS MOST TROUBLING to the CBS News staff looking into how its story went off the rails is the timing of the memos' appearance. "Some 60 Minutes staffers have been working on this story for more than three years off and on," says the CBS News producer. "There have been rumors about these memos and what was in them for at least that long. No one had been able to find anything. Not a single piece of paper. But we know that a lot of people here interviewed a lot of people in Texas and elsewhere and asked very explicit questions about the existence of these memos. Then all of a sudden they show up? In one nice, neat package?" This CBS New producer went on to explain that the questions 60 Minutes folk were asking were specific enough that people would have been able to fabricate the memorandums to meet the exact specifications the investigative journalists were looking for. "People were asking questions of sources like, 'Have you ever seen or heard of a memo that suspended Bush for failing to appear for a physical?' and 'Have you heard about or know of someone who has any documentation from back in the 1970s that shows there was pressure to get Bush into the National Guard?' It was like they were placing an order for a ready-made product. That is the biggest problem I have with this. It's all too neat and perfect for what we needed. Without these exact pieces of paper, we don't have a story. Dan has as much as admitted that. Everyone knows it. We were at a standstill on this story until these memos showed up." REPORTERS ARE ALSO LOOKING at staff and associates of Sen. Tom Harkin, who enthusiastically held a press conference on Thursday morning using the forged documents as the tent pole for attacks against President Bush. Harkin called Bush a "liar." "Harkin has been pushing this story for a while," says the CBS producer. "Not this specific story, but the 'Bush is a liar about his record' story. His people seemed particularly interested in making sure they could keep their boss up to date on what was going on." That Harkin was the individual selected to be the attack dog on this particular issue was an interesting one, give that Harkin himself has a checkered history about telling the truth about his involvement in the Vietnam War. WITH MORALE AT WHAT some Kerry campaign insiders consider an all-time low, Sen. John Kerry, who unlike Tom Harkin did serve in Vietnam, did what any true leader does. He sets up a conference call. During the Labor Day weekend, during meetings with senior staff, campaign director Mary Beth Cahill suggested to the candidate that he try to buck up the troops, since the media onslaught against him, as well as the dipping poll numbers, were affecting staff in Washington and in satellite offices around the country. Kerry acknowledged their concerns by gathering the Washington staff into the central office space in their McPherson Square suites and speaking to them via speaker phone. Kerry told them that things were going well on the road. The crowds were enthusiastic, and he could feel the campaign was moving in the right direction with the new senior staff additions. "He actually said that he felt the campaign had turned the corner," says a Washington-based staffer. "Some of us couldn't help but laugh given that he's made fun of Bush for saying the same thing. You hear stuff like that and you just feel sick. You look over at people like [Joe] Lockhart and Cahill and they seem to understand it too." Kerry further undercut his own efforts, when he hung up his side of the call before any questions could be asked by staff members. "[Kerry] doesn't seem to want to acknowledge that he has problems," says the staffer. "I'm low level, but there are a few people here who have stopped coming in to work or to volunteer. We've got some issues, and the guy who should be trying to help fix it doesn't seem to care." Cahill seems to understand this. On Thursday, since the candidate wouldn't face his own staff, Cahill pulled out the big guns. She invited her old boss, Sen. Ted Kennedy down to the Washington offices to further raise the morale of Kerry's staff. Kennedy actually said little about Kerry, beyond the fact that he was a fighter who would continue fighting. After mentioning Kerry, Kennedy then went on a 10-minute diatribe about President Bush. "His face was turning red, he was really getting into it," says the Kerry staffer. "Then the next day we saw him make the same speech on the floor of the Senate. Guess we were the dress rehearsal." THERE ARE OTHER PROBLEMS with the Kerry campaign. According to several Kerry and DNC sources, Kerry advisers have been furiously holding focus group meetings in an attempt to find some issue of national concern that might cut their way in the coming weeks. But nothing they've looked at seems to be working. Of course, even if they were to find something there is no guarantee their man would run with it. For example, some media types thought having his old pal John Sasso along on the road would help focus Kerry a bit more on his stump speeches. Judging by Kerry's performance last Thursday in North Carolina, they're not sure anymore. While talking about the economy, health-care policy, Kerry went off speech and began stumbling immediately. Kerry said that he would always tell the public the truth, and if the audience didn't believe him, they could "[g]o to a web site. It can be johnkerry.com or go some other place. Go to truth.com, if there is one, and find out what's really happening," Kerry said. Truth.com won't set you free, but at least you'll be able to see a bit more clearly. Truth.com is operated by Truth Hardware, makers of a complete line of locks, window hinges and remote-controlled power window systems.

[Arles]

Here's another similar story to what Ksyrup posted:

http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewPolitics...20040914a.html

I don't know if this Burkett guy was actually part of the Kerry campaign, but it's pretty obvious he had an agenda against Bush.

If this proves to be true, I don't think that the Kerry campaign will be all that damaged from this. I do see CBS taking a pretty big hit though.