The "forged" memos, the "third possibility," and the stupid criminal

[Skinner]

Like many of you, I've been extremely frustrated with how the media has completely ignored the substance of the allegations about Bush's National Guard Service (and the fact that none of these allegations have even been disputed by the White House), and instead has been focusing on the allegedly "forged" memos. I've been thinking about this a lot, and I want to talk through this with all of you to hear what you think.

It seems to me that there are exactly three plausible explanations for the memos:

#1 -- The memos are real. They were typed on a 60's/70's-era typewriter which had a superscript "th" and proportional spacing and the typeface Times New Roman.

#2 -- The memos were forged by a Kerry supporter to smear Bush (AKA: The "Democratic Dirty Tricks" scenario, AKA: "The Stupid Criminal Theory").

#3 -- The memos were forged by a Bush supporter to smear Kerry (AKA: The "Rove Dirty Tricks" scenario).

Currently, it seems that the media consensus is #2, The Democratic Dirty Tricks scenario. To be fair, they are not pointing the finger at the Democrats, but the underlying assumption of all this "forgery" talk is that it must have been a Kerry supporter who did it. After all, the memos smear Bush, right? Riiiiiight.

I do not know the truth. Unlike everyone else on the planet, I am not an expert on typewriters, fonts, etc. But I do have a brain in my head, and I've been thinking through all of these possibilities. And applying logic to the situation, I would argue that Scenario #2 is actually the least likely scenario. Allow me to explain.

Imagine that you are a Democrat who is trying to smear George W. Bush about his National Guard Service. You get this idea to write up fake memos, critical of Bush, and make them look like they're from the 1970's. What do you do? Think hard now. What do you do? The answer is obvious:

You find an old typewriter from the 1970s and you use that to type up the forged memos.

What is the last thing you would do? What would be the stupidest possible thing for a would-be forger to do? The stupidest thing to do would be to fire up Microsoft Word and type up a document using the default settings.

In order for the "Democratic Dirty Tricks" Scenario to be true, you have to believe that this is the stupidest criminal on the planet, who couldn't be bothered to find an old typewriter in the attic or on eBay -- preferably one without proportional spacing or a superscript "th". Instead you just type up the fake documents on Microsoft Word and send them through the copy machine a few times.

Think about it. It just doesn't add up. If you're trying to forge documents, this is not the way to do it. Unless, of course, you want to get caught.

In order for scenario #2 to be true, we have to be talking about the stupidest criminal ever. If you are enough of an evil genius to get the documents into the hands of Dan Rather, then you are probably smart enough to get yourself the best typewriter for the job.

So, where does that leave us?

Based on my explanation above, Option 2 is highly unlikely. Therefore, options 1 and 3 are much more plausible.

I am not a conspiracy theorist. I don't believe in LIHOP or MIHOP, and I don't believe Wellstone was "wellstoned." I am a hard-core, dyed-in-the-wool skeptic. But here's what I believe about the memos:

Either they are real, or they were planted by Rove to change the subject and smear the other side. Remember, we're talking about a guy who very likely planted a bug in his own office to smear a political opponent.

Think about it. To borrow Donald Southerland's line from JFK: "Who benefited?"

Nobody is talking about the actual allegations against Bush. Instead, we're talking about the memos. And somehow, the fact that the memos are "discredited" is being used as an excuse to say that all the charges against Bush have been discredited.

If I were a young reporter trying to make a name for myself, I'd be focusing on option 3.

What say you?

ON EDIT: To be clear, the point of this post was not to argue that the documents are fake. The point of this post was to argue that of the three possibilities, the LEAST PLAUSIBLE is #2, which just happens to be the scenario that the media is pushing.

[AngryAmish]

1. #4 possible explaination

Criminal produced it for profit, then sold it to parties that passed them on the CBS.

[Skinner]

2. I would argue that that is a variation of scenario #2 or #3.

It doesn't matter whether they were created by a third party or not. The point is that someone put them in the hands of CBS news because they thought they could benefit.

[Norquist Nemesis]

6. Then the next question is who would buy it?

Who would pay the money to buy the documents with the intent of turning them over to CBS? A Bush supporter might buy them, but I would think it would be to cover it up...not expose it.

So, that would leave a Kerry supporter. The Bush mob would be all over that one following the money.

No, I think they're for real. Then again, maybe it was Nader! :tinfoilhat:

[AngryAmish]

38. Both of you have a good point

But the mens rea for forgery would not be there if the Kerry/Bush supporter believed them to be true.

[okieinpain]

57. me personally, I think they are real tooooo much info in the docs

the bush team has not denied anyting in the docs. nothing, not one word.

[BlueEyedSon]

3. Maybe a REAL DUMB Kerry supporter ....?

[jpgray]

4. Real dumb but smart enough to research Killian, and get docs to CBS?

It just doesn't add up.

[Skinner]

7. This dumb?

Come on. This is somebody smart enough to get the memos into the hands of Dan Rather, and convince him that they are real. Would he be so stupid as to type them up on Microsoft Word?

[BlueEyedSon]

16. OK, OK!

Wouldn't this logic apply to both #2 and #3, leaving #1 as the only possibility?

Why doesn't the media articulate this logic (and its conclusion)?

BTW, I personally would have used MS Word, but would have picked a monospaced Courier-like typeface....

[Skinner]

29. Well, no. This logic doesn't rule out #3.

The whole point of #3 is for the forgeries to be discovered. That's how it works. Just like Rove (allegedly) planting a bug in his own office.

[troublemaker]

59. Sorry Skinner, but "too stupid" defenses are lame. Try this scenario

I've found in investigating everything from UFO stories to art forgeries that many hoaxes start off innocent. People make art copies, fake saucer photos, crop circles, signed baseballs, etc. just for the fun of it. Then the thing exists and someone else gets a hold of it and takes it for real. (Innocently or not)

And I cannot tell you how much authentic artwork has fake signatures because someone who is correctly convinced a work is authentic gilds the lily by adding an amateurish sig. People will mock up ANYTHING as long as they are morally certain it advances the truth.

I have no theory, but we should remember to consider scenarios like this:

Say Burkett saw the Bush people shredding docs from Bush's file in 1994. Maybe Burkett got nosy and poked around to deduce what had been destroyed and goes through Killian's files. At a later date Burkett recreates a few documents (from his own 1990s handwritten notes?) He gives them to somebody... or mails them to somebody. Maybe he didn't mean to say they were the originals, but things got out of hand. Maybe it was an Anita Hill deal, where he shared them with someone with a promise they would not be published. Since he knows they are *accurate* it's harmless to provide them to steer an investigator in the right direction, right? But once they are out of his hands...

I have almost no opinion of the authenticity of these memos. I am agnostic. But I have a lot of opinions about the irrelevancy of arguments both sides have advanced.

That said, I heartily agree that the Rove theme should be advanced everywhere, and that piling onto these things as a litmus test limits the possible later use of the Rove theory, if needed.

I refer you to my caution on these docs:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x805121

[Skinner]

66. That's a great post you're linking to.

I enjoyed reading it. :thumbsup:

[troublemaker]

71. Well, thank you! I'm blushing.

[Snivi Yllom]

99. dead on right

people do stupid things all the time

like vote Republican

[Beetwasher]

5. I Go W/ #1 Until I See Some Plausible Evidence To The Contrary

So far, there is none.

The memos are real and are backed up by MUCH more data and personal testimonies.

[Skinner]

The fact that we believe #1 is true will not make this controversy go away

If the media wants to talk about the memos being fake, then they need to ask themselves the same questions.

[Beetwasher]

26. Well that was quick!

What the deleted guy say? Did he call me an asshole or something!

I agree, the media should be asking ALL kinds of questions about this non-issue. I know CBS will do the right thing.

[Skinner]

32. The deleted guy was a duplicate post.

I accidently hit post twice.

[snowFLAKE]

130. OK, I'll bite

You're a Complete, Total Asshole!

hehehehhehehhe

(Sadly, this post isn't even in the Top Ten of Moranic Posts Posted today at this site)

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[in_cog_ni_to]

8. IF they are forged...I'm in the # 3 boat with you.

This has KKKRoves fingerprints all over it, IF they are forged. Maybe Greg Palast will investigate this one. :bounce:

[molly]

9. I'm sticking with number 1

[Skinner]

15. But my point is this:

If the memos were forged, do you think option #2 is plausible? I believe I have argued convincingly that it is not.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

25. They're not forged.

Why buy the unsupported spin?

[Skinner]

How's that argument working for you?

We keep saying the documents aren't forged. How's that spin working for us?

[Mick Knox]

39. Thats also my 2nd point - it doesnt matter

The press EXCEPT CBS is pumping this based on the premise they are forgeries.

That is what will be remembered - always.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

40. Oh I thought we were talking about the truth, not the spin.

If we're supposed to be pretending they might be fake and a Rove plant, then I'm not with the program.

I just don't see the logic in throwing Dan Rather and CBS to the wolves on this when they are standing by the truth.

Buckhead isn't a plant, because his original criticisms were rapidly discredited. If Rove had planted the docs they would contain elements impossible to produce on a typewriter, not widely available. Doesn't add up.

If we've lost the perception game it's because there hasn't been pushback and too many people are buying the forgery crap.

[Skinner]

44. The point of my post was not to discredit #1.

The memos could very well be real.

The point of my post was to discredit #2. The media is pushing #2, but I contend that #2 is actually the least likely of the three choices.

[molly]

47. Now I understand - dah - still tired I guess

[Proud2BAmurkin]

49. I know I see the point and it's tempting to push 3 because of media liars

but in doing it we discredit CBS and Dan Rather and allow another fake pile of crap to stand. I think we would be better off pushing back with the truth.

[KoKo]

CBS says the documents were not forged...I've only heard the cables

repeating the forged story. I don't believe a Dem forged them or that Rove would have wasted time with doing it when things were going so well for him. I think it's more that Rove planted the idea knowing there's a willing Conservative Punditry that would keep hammering and the cables would keep it alive.

CBS hasn't backed down and I believe them.

[Nederland]

124. Amen

Not to try to pull people away from your site, but people should take a brief look at what going on outside DU and realize that we are losing this argument big time. As you have wisely proposed, its time to consider what we will say if they turn out to be fakes.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

142. We're not losing the argument the stupid lying media is toeing the rw line

there's a difference

[molly]

46. Go rent "The Insider" with Russell Crowe

which you probably already have memorized. But, my point is that CBS would not have put them out if they had 1 iota of doubt about their originality.

I've missed a lot of this because I was working on local campaigning.

We need to ask where are the people that served with w? You would think one of them would come forward and tell us how proud he was to have been able to serve with a future president.

[Carni]

10. This is SO like the Hatfield book/cocaine intrigue

SOMEONE (popular belief thinks it was Rove but I think it was James Baker) told Hatfield that bush was grounded because of cocaine and sent to PULL in 72--I personally after a lot of ferreting think that is not what happened (I think what happened was probably a lot worse than getting busted doing a few lines)

To get to the point and answer your question this really reeks of a preemptive disinfo strike and my guess would be that this was deliberate disinfo from the WH.

Just my 2 cents

[John BigBootay]

12. I think you are right

I know that I would not be so stupid as to use MS-Word to type a document that hoped would be believed to have originated from the 70's.

Scenario 3 seems most likely to me, but scenario 2 is also a possibility. Basically, it's between a stupid democrat and a clever republican. Unfortunately, both exist.

[Qutzupalotl]

129. It's definitely NOT a Word document.

Word's superscript is lower and smaller.

The text doesn't line up. The font is wrong. Look at the capital Y and lowercase i.

[snowFLAKE]

132. Then, maybe it's a PowerPoint document

Considering that it's trivial to adjust the offset of superscripts in that program . . . .

[Qutzupalotl]

141. Where'd they get the font? n/t

[snowFLAKE]

153. My point was simply that it's possible,

Given enough time and effort, to electronically reproduce anything. The th's are especially trivial - the first column shows that the vertical offset can be adjusted at will, the second shows the same for the horizontal offset, and the third shows the relative size of the superscript is also easily altered. Go ahead and go crazy and see how many permutations of these three variables you can create - close to infinite I'd guess.

[hexola]

162. How did you make that graphic...?

Did you do that with a word processing program? or a graphics editor...

just curious...

[snowFLAKE]

174. With Powerpoint

A companion product to Microsoft Word, I believe.

All part of Bill Gates' decades-long plan to provide computing tools to Empower the People.

[Qutzupalotl]

163. Wasn't the point of the "superscript" argument

to show that they were carelessly created in Word? Should be obvious now that they weren't.

A lot of trouble to set up a Powerpoint slide with margins to match a letter. And why would they alter the superscript? What were they trying to match? A typewriter of the time? Why not just find an old typewriter?

And how did they jiggle the baseline?

[troublemaker]

164. The jiggling baseline is an artifact of multiple xeroxing.

[Qutzupalotl]

165. Not true.

Good guess, but it doesn't happen that way. The jiggling baseline is easily explained by a contemporary typewriter.

[hexola]

170. I just Xeroxed some 12 point Times Roman - 5 generations....

And the type gets thinner...the thin parts become thinner...the serifs get thinner...

I even angled a few of them...

If anything, some of it may have slightly stretched - but evenly - no jiggling

The memos look more like FAX or Mimeograph (remember that purple stuff?) artifacts...or typing.

[snowFLAKE]

175. It's not A Lot of Trouble

It's fairly simple if one has an attention span of Ten Seconds, or so.

[hexola]

137. I noticed the same thing in the lower case L...

The serif is different...more like a little triangle on the Word font...more like a straight line on the original...

Look at the tops of the "l" in the word "I'll" - more like a diving board...

[Mick Knox]

13. It smells like rovian work to me as well

But how on earth did 60 mins fall for it?

I pushed the Rovian angle on day 1, but I've been keeping my mouth shut after the first few days where I spoke about believing they are forgeries. DU did not appreciate that opinion so I just shut up.

Good Post Skinner. It's too bad 60 Mins fell for it because they have damaged themselves and legit AWOL issues; likely beyond repair.

The PERCEPTION of the sheeple will always now be the AWOL mess is based on forgeries.

If the ghost of Killian appears and says they are real, the damage is done and that bell cannot be unrung in the minds of the public, ever.

It was devestating, it was brilliant strategy IMO. 60 Mins took the bait and they do more and more damage by appearing to blindly stand behind the memos while their own experts are speaking out against it.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

21. 60 minutes "fell for" authentic documents. You've been had.

The documents are authentic.

[Mick Knox]

30. we obviously disagree right?

So I could respond you've been had.. and we could post that ad nauseum.

I've told you before - We shall see.

Every day that passes, the more it looks like you will be the incorrect one.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

43. I'm just waiting for evidence of forgery.

I don't think we should lend credence to Laura Bush's and Drudge's "forgery" crap without any evidence.

[Mick Knox]

That dont wash

I've now seen tons of experts on every network (except 1) saying they are forgeries.

This story has legs because there is obviously something to it.

This may have started as a drudge / blogger / freeper thing - its well beyond that now.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

50. "This story has legs because there is obviously something to it"?

You must be joking.

As for experts, haven't you seen the DUers who have exposed them as Repuke activists and shills

There are also experts that say the "forgery" experts are full of crap. Last night's CBS report buried the claims and showed that a word processor would be completely out of the question.

[Skinner]

52. Unfortunately, he's got a point.

The reason this story has not gone away is because the RW spin actually is compelling.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

55. What part is compelling?

That's a serious question.

I took his post to mean there is something genuinely compelling about the rw claims, not that the rw claims are compelling because people are gullible.

[Skinner]

70. They are compelling

because the memos do actually look quite similar to something created with Microsoft Word.

I'm not saying that they were created with Microsoft Word. But this story has legs because they look very similar to documents created with Microsoft Word. The media keeps running with this story because they find the argument compelling, and because it suggests something even sexier: Democratic Dirty Tricks.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

78. Word processor argument isn't compelling because.....

Which do you think is more compelling -

a -- That the memos look similar to something created with a word processor whose font was modeled after....old typewriters

OR

that the memos were not created by a word processor because the "ones" and the "lower case L's" are identical, which only happens on a typewriter

AND

There is a TH in the memo that is not raised, which would have to be deliberately produced on a word processor (the person typing would have to deliberately go back over the "TH" and re-type it so that they were sure to get one that was NOT a superscript....and why would they, if they had typed a superscript before? Makes no sense. Makes much more sense that a person using a typewriter inadvertently failed to create the superscript on one of the "TH's"

[Skinner]

85. I guess my point is that both arguments are compelling.

Which is why the story won't go away.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

89. #2 or #3 are not compelling because the documents are authentic. HOWEVER

If we were faced with the choice between having the stupid lying media push one or the other, obviously #3 is better for our side.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't piss us off that the ones like Olberman pushing #3 are not calling the RW on the bullshit instead.

[John BigBootay]

146. There's a LOT more that makes the docs fishy

Than just the superscript, font and proportional spacing. You know what those things are: The wife and son of Killian, Hodges' recantment, the fact that such a typewriter was unreasonably expensive for a guy who rarely typed, and much more... you KNOW the evidence.

Does all of this PROVE they are fake? No. But they make it extremely possible if not PROBABLE.

[TeeYiYi]

112. I think the MS Word aspect . . .

. . . was discredited by a woman who said that the actual physical documents (original memo and MS fake) had very little resemblance to each other. But because the debunkers were using low res internet reproductions with pixelated fonts, the online visual comparison was an illusion. I saw this on the CBS Evening News several days ago. I also heard another expert on CBS say that there were several characters in the actual memo that would be almost impossible to reproduce using MS Word and that it would take considerable effort if it could be done at all.

TYY

[Carni]

42. That's my second thought

And it COULD be IMO that Rather and CBS have more stuff but they are waiting for a bush denial of the allegations... so they can REALLY stick it to him.

[xray s]

14. I'd like to know who has the originals, and how they got them.

I think CBS knows, and we will all know before too long.

[roseBudd]

83. I thought CBS said the "source" was there when the memos

were created. Perhaps the secretary who typed them. Burkette contacted her and she had old files in her possession, or knew where to find them.

[wicket]

17. The fact that Bush hasn't DENIED what is in the memos..

....leads me to believe #1. Why won't a reporter flat out ask Bush if he refused a direct order to take his physical??? Ugh, so frustrating.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

18. They're authentic

If someone was trying to plant fake documents they would do a better job faking them and would contain elements that a non expert could see with their own eyes. These don't.

[mimitabby]

24. i'll tell you why i disagree with you

imagine the glee and delight the moron freepers must feel
when they "debunk" something like this.
If it wasn't obvious, they wouldn't have "caught" it.
m

[Proud2BAmurkin]

28. Wrong. Their "obvious" signs of forgery have been completely discredited

superscripts and proportional spacing

[NewYorkerfromMass]

19. NYTimes article: "...why not just go out and buy a Selectric for $75?"

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/14/politics/campaign/14guard.html?pagewanted=print&position=

whoever did this is stupid (if forged, but I don't believe they are)

[trogdor]

53. I bet plenty of Guard units had machines like this one...

I found one like it in Kingston, Ontario.

[mimitabby]

20. yes

you make a lot of good points here. When this debate first started,
the first thing I thought of was how easy it was to find an old typewriter cheaply.

[KittyWampus]

22. Wouldn't It Be Keen If We Could I.D. "Buckhead" Who Seems To Have Had

a heads up about these memos and could thus circulate rebuttal talking points crying "Forgery" within two hours.

I mean... subtract the time it took to think up, type and then post his charges about the forgery and he had it on the internet in about ONE hour's time....

That is either one very dedicated and quick thinking GOP Operative or someone who had fore-knowledge.

[StopTheMorans]

23. I know journalistic integrity and "sources"

are an issue, but that would obviously be the point at which to start (i.e. who gave CBS the docs?).

The only reason #1 doesn't seem likely to me is that you'd think that dem oppo-research people would have came up with this before in a previous election (or selection); which leaves #3 as the most plausible scenario. if that's the case, then it would be a matter of seeing who got the docs to CBS, and where they procured them before that.

I don't know how to even go about suggesting that CBS reveal their sources, although if it is #3, don't you think that Rove would have clued Novak in (i.e. b/c if so, it wouldn't make sense that Nofacts is now asking for the sources to be named, unless he knows for certain that CBS won't do it under any circumstance)?

[papau]

27. Appears they are not fake - and today a "new" memo came from a GOP

source and is posted on Drudge - so there seems to be no shortage of Docs

So I believe the docs are real - and based on the GOP lawyer posting so quickly that they were fake, I believe Bush and family - after scrubbing the Doc file - worked out the excuses they would use if the cocaine use or disobying a direct order question ever came up.

Seems they forgot about the 1964 introduction of the IBM Selectric Composer - the Work Station machine my Secr. had in 1967.

Sometimes it is enough to have a good criminal mind - as the Bush famile does and as exposed in Kitty Kelly's book - it also helps to be smart.

On the other hand you can always depend on a lazy or stupid or on the take (- the regular paycheck take from the RW corporate owner), and realize your spin will fly even if you say up is down!

:-)

So again - they are not fake - despite NY Post/ABCNote link to Doc "expert" that says forgery -but He's not on point - the Expert challenges points not at issue - The NY Post's MR. JOSEPH M. NEWCOMER, PH.D. - you are amazing!

And as was posted, Laura Bush says the documents are likely forgeries-'You know they are probably altered," she told Radio Iowa in Des Moines yesterday. 'And they probably are forgeries, and I think that's terrible, really.' - but asked what reason she had to say the WH answer is "Mrs. Bush was asked her opinion and she shared it."


So NEWCOMER, PHD -the DOCUMENT EXPERT OF THE DAY (started with computer typesetting technology in 1972) - SAYS HE CAN MAKE FORGERIES WITH TODAY'S MACHINES! WOW!

http://homepage.mac.com/cfj/expert.htm

The Bush "Guard memos" are forgeries!

First off, before I start getting a lot of the wrong kind of mail: I am not a fan of George Bush. But I am even less a fan of attempts to commit fraud, and particularly by a complete and utter failure of those we entrust to ensure that if the news is at least accurate. I know it is asking far too much to expect the news to be unbiased. But the people involved should not actually lie to us, or promulgate lies created by hoaxers, through their own incompetence.

There has been a lot of activity on the Internet recently concerning the forged CBS documents. I do not even dignify this statement with the traditional weasel-word “alleged”, because it takes approximately 30 seconds for anyone who is knowledgeable in the history of electronic document production to recognize this whole collection is certainly a forgery, and approximately five minutes to prove to anyone technically competent that the documents are a forgery. I was able to replicate two of the documents within a few minutes. At time I a writing this, CBS is stonewalling. They were hoaxed, pure and simple. CBS failed to exercise anything even approximately like due diligence. I am not sure what sort of "expert" they called in to authenticate the document, but anything I say about his qualifications to judge digital typography is likely to be considered libelous (no matter how true they are) and I would not say them in print in a public forum.<snip>

(NOTE:The Selectric Composer does not count - in ABCNOTE and the NY POST- apparently - because ) The probability that any technology in existence in 1972 would be capable of producing a document that is nearly pixel-compatible with Microsoft’s Times New Roman font and the formatting of Microsoft Word, and that such technology was in casual use at the Texas Air National Guard, is so vanishingly small as to be indistinguishable from zero.<snip> LOL

(BUT HE KNOWS OF ).."proportional-spaced typewriters (such as the IBM Executive) and print production technologies (such as the VariTyper)" - (BUT not the Selectric Composer for the Killian memo - and the forms are just that - each line couhavevre been typed by a different typewriter - first Executive - the Composer - then Executive - etc - and probably was) - and while his attempted cut and paste forged signature is "pretty evidently a forgery, because of the artifacts" others with access to 1972 originals could do better - or not.

And never a word about the Selectric Composer - and the ABCNOTE and NY Post run with it!

Amazing.

LOL

but sigh .....



http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB1095112449779 ...

As in Olden Days,
U.S. Media Reflect
The Partisan Divide
September 14, 2004; Page A4

In the final moments of the Republican convention -- after the balloons had fallen and the cameras had turned away -- an unusual commotion broke out in the seats surrounding CNN's convention-floor set. Dozens of delegates turned to where Judy Woodruff and Wolf Blitzer were conducting interviews and started chanting loudly: "WATCH FOX NEWS. WATCH FOX NEWS."

The demonstration highlighted what may become one of the most lasting legacies of campaign 2004: The increasing polarization of the American media and their audiences. The delegates clearly viewed CNN as an enemy in their midst -- and Fox as a friend.

That media gulf widened further last week -- to Grand Canyon-like dimensions -- thanks to CBS's Dan Rather. Questioned about the authenticity of documents he used criticizing President Bush's National Guard service, Mr. Rather was quoted by the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz as saying: "Until someone shows me definitive proof that they are not , I don't see any reason to carry on a conversation with the professional rumor mill."<snip>

[Proud2BAmurkin]

33. You're right, they are authentic. No evidence to the contrary.

.

[drdigi420]

58. glad to see someone gets it

[Nederland]

68. Question

If the Selectric Composer was a viable candidate for producing this memos then someone would have typed a match for comparision by now.

They haven't, why?

[sangh0]

149. Nothing will perfectly match something that's been mimeographed

multiple times, so there's no need to match it to a Selectric Composer. What's needed is to find what typewriter the author actually possessed, and then seeing if it had the superscipt capability.

[Nederland]

79. Another Question

How do explain this analysis that demonstrated that the Composer is physical incapable of reproducing the CYA memo because unlike the memo type, its proportional spacing does not vary based upon proceding characters?

http://www.thegantelope.com/cgi-bin/speak.cgi?entry_id=186

[sangh0]

151. Try to avoid repuke propoganda

That website is associated with the Mackinac org. which is a Scaife funded org.

[Nederland]

93. And yet another question

Here is a comparison of the memo and a document created with the Composer:




How do you explain the fact that the well circulated MS Word produced doc matches more closely than the Composer produced doc?

[sangh0]

154. The recovered document was mimeographed multiple times

Mimeographing is notoriously inaccurate method of copying. Each copy gets a certain amount of distortion. Multiple copies result in distortions of the distortions.

IOW, the results you show CONFIRM that it wasn't MS WORD. If you created it with MS Word and then mimeographed it multiple times, you wouldn't get a match either.

[Nederland]

159. Mimeographing does not produce what you are seeing

Mimeographing cannot stretch the distance between certain characters while leaving other distances on the same line untouched. For example, look at the '14' at the end of the first line. It overlaps exactly, and yet early in the same line the second 'to' is way off. Mimeographing can distort the sizes of characters and introduce salt and pepper artifacts, but it cannot not produce this type of effect.

This document simply was not produced with a Composer.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

31. I suspect the originals exist.

However, the released documents may not be copies of the original. Instead, they were re-generated to create this exact situation and FUD up the house.

Look to "Buckhead" as being a cog in this machine. Look to Brent Bozell's people to being involved in this in some manner.

[papau]

36. I agree

:-)

[BlueEyedSon]

37. Interesting! nt

[troublemaker]

63. Why can't they be Burkett's copies of docs since destroyed by Bushhies?

[alarcojon]

138. I've also wondered about this

wasn't there a story about Burkett rescuing something from the shredder?

[Fovea]

34. option 3 is sexy

But option one certainly fits the preponderance of other evidence, and Rovian mechanations generally use media shills, as opposed to documents to spread disinformation. Further, the consequences of detection outweigh the benefits.
Don't get me wrong, Rove is a dirty, twisted little twit, but I would be surprized to see him involved on this one.

[Skinner]

51. Are you saying that this story hasn't been pushed by media shills?

This isn't just bloggers and drudge. Everyone is pushing the forgery story.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

54. Yes but how did it start

You would have to prove Buckhead was in contact with Rove and the folks at Power line blog and they decided to challenge the memos on points that would be discredited within a day.

Too big a risk because they would have to be sure that there would be some experts coming out to spout the (discredited) bs and add new bs and they would have to be sure the additional attention to the story wouldn't hurt AWOL. The outcome wasn't predictable.

[Skinner]

60. We don't have to prove anything.

Have the folks pushing Option #2 proven their case? Of course they have not. What matters with the media is not whether a case has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. What matters is whether a charge is sexy or emotionally compelling. We aren't in a court of law. We are in the court of public opinion.

If Option #3 is true, I believe that Rove could have easily anticipated this outcome. An alleged secret Kerry smear campaign is much more interesting than a pampered frat boy skipping out on his guard duties.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

67. Nobody would take that risk. Plot would require......

in order for it to work, the plot would require......

a -- "full of crap" experts would come forth to validate freeper plant

b -- media would report on freeper plant's claims before experts came forth to say previous experts were "full of crap"

c -- experts wouldn't bury any forgery claim with the facts presented on CBS last night (the "1" character and letter l being the same on typewriters only, and the problem with producing a normal "TH" on a word processor)

d -- AWOL story wouldn't continue to chip away at Bush credibility

[Skinner]

87. I disagree. I believe there are plenty of people who would take the risk.

We're talking about a man who already (allegedly) planted a bug in his own office to smear a Democratic opponent.

[troublemaker]

98. But the only risk that would explain this risk-taking is cocaine

Whatever the staus of the docs, this is all an operation to steer news orgs away from the missed physical.

I doubt Rove would undertake this unless there's a coke story they know they cannot count on being suppressed. (Unless Bush was way down in the polls, of course)

[Fovea]

76. No, indeed it has been

but the natural tendency of this administration has been simply to hide docs, not forge them.

For example, why didn't they just release forged energy meeting paperwork? That one has been biting them in the ass forever.

I just think that if I were a reporter with no budget or support from my editor, pursuing the story as if option 1 were true would make the most sense.

[Skinner]

86. I would argue that if #3 is true

the purpose of leaking forged documents would be because they already knew that this issue was going to get a lot more scrutiny, so they felt that this was a way to turn it to their advantage.

But again, I am not saying that I believe #3 is definitely true. The point of my post is to argue that option #2 is the least plausible of the three.

[Fovea]

171. I realize that you point is the dubiousness of point 2

and I agree with that.

[stellanoir]

35. I vote for #3

wouldn't put anything past these creeps and you're absolutely right, anyone who would have forged these wouldn't have had too much trouble getting a period typewriter or verifying what year Killian retired.

But it is so Rovian, to put this red herring out when people were sick of the SBV's and he would have felt they had their impact. Put out something against * that can be quickly discredited so J. Q. Public interprets it as charges discrediting Kerry (the war hero) true, charges against * (the war monger/deserter) false.

They keep the focus off all the disasters * has wrought in 3 & 3/4 torturous years. Iraq is a mess. Afghanistan is run by warlords. N.Korea and Iran are going nuclear. But * served honorably (when he really flaked). It's such subterfuge.

What's even more diabolical is that he targeted CBS, the only one of the three networks to have given voice to the many dissenters (O'Neil, Clarke, Edmonds, etc) over recent years.

Ughhhhh.

on edit- and even worse. . .speak the truth, have it deemed a forgery in order to obfuscate the truth. Yuck

[kaitykaity]

41. Talking about the memos is the distraction of the day.

I don't think Rove is smart enough to think up something
this convoluted that far in advance.

Look, the Bush machine doesn't had a policy componenet. They
don't "plan." They react. They calculate political impact.
They only think in 24-hour news cycles.

They realized this story would hurt them, and so they came
up with a way to attack it that the media whores would fall
for.

That's all there is to it.

The only way to combat it is for Kerry to win in November
and then bust up the media conglomerates and make a serious
effort to revive the Fairness Doctrine.

[grasswire]

45. considerations

1. Rather says the papers come from "unimpeachable" source. Which spells trouble for theory #3.

2. However, theory #3 fits Karl Rove's style to a T. Craig Crawford on MSNBC last night called it a "double agent" possibility.

3. Notice how the media attention to #2 stops at the examination of the memos and does not continue logically to ask WHO would have forged them? And notice how the WH/ENC doesn't drive the story in that direction? Usually the Scaife-funded pundits would be screaming to find out who forged the papers. That question would be 24/7. We haven't even seen Ed Gillespie comment on them, have we?

[Skinner]

48. All good points.

The fact that the RW has not bothered to ask who is responsible is a very interesting angle which I had not considered.

[troublemaker]

61. the two smart party-lines

...So, are the memos real? Flip a coin. The best argument in favor of the memos is that the freeps are usually wrong about everything, but that's hardly a proof. All I *know* is that each day that passes without someone producing a vintage Press Roman type ball with a dedicated "TH" superscript character the odds on authenticity decrease. When such a type ball is produced it won't prove the documents are authentic, but the odds will definitely increase somewhat. That's what we are talking about here... odds, not certainties.

On a related note... do you know why Kerry voted for the Iraq War authorizing resolution? Because he figured the White House was running a scam, trying to suck as many Democrats as possible into voting against it before releasing information they had hidden away just for the purpose of discrediting Democrats. And it wasn't a crazy thing to think. Kerry has survived in public life this long because he's cautious and is reluctant to put his fate in his enemy's hands.

There's just no need for us to march to the top of the hill to bathe in the blood of the dragon or whatever this enforced party-line mania is all about. Nobody knows, so the party-line should have been Kerry's (no comment) or McCaulife's (Real, fake, who knows? Maybe Rove did it.) Those are the two smart party-lines.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x805121

[Proud2BAmurkin]

69. Nope. The real issue with the "TH" is......

the original claim was that only word processors produced raised TH. Last night's CBS report proved that a word processor automatically CORRECTS a normal TH and turns it into a raised one.

A person would have to deliberately go back and create one that was not raised, and the documents contained BOTH raised and not raised. This would only happen if someone was using a typewriter and did not go to the trouble to create the raised TH in one instance but they did in another.

[troublemaker]

75. These are xeroxes

Xerox forgeries are done in pieces. You take a real doc with the centered address and the existing signature, then you drop in new body text. Then re-xerox it whiting out the cut-lines. Thus you get the original typed address but new word-processed body text.

I'm not saying that's what happened, but that is how one does a xerox forgery. The idea is to keep as much real material as possible. (That's why all RW discussion of signatures is silly -- there's no reason for a xerox to have a forged sig if one has access to a real sig to xerox)

[hexola]

115. Could that indicate things have been pieced together - via Xerox...

Something to consider...

and I think you can disable superscripting in Word... - but I do think it is "on" by default...and it changes it automagically, on the fly, - which calls attention to it...less likely to be an oversight...

[AuntPatsy]

64. In your logic it is definately a possibility that both 1 and 3

are fairly accurate. If Rove is known for such tactics, than it is safe to assume he would surely be quilty of number 3. One of the reasons that 3 comes into play so easily is the quick response that night against rather on the subject of the docs being forgery, sneering and laughing outloud is what I saw, it is like they had time to rehearse these responses, not many seem that quick to the take..

And adding number 1 that they are indeed real is also likely and something this admins. likes nothing better to do than to put it in your face a very real document and then tear it to pieces, rather of course the target because of old grudges..

The media of course even today not really talking about the allegations more than they are pressing the forgery claims..I can imagine Rove laughing his butt off watching all this by play, real docs. handed neatly into waiting hands...

And in retrospect, it is seemingly according to the media, only being seen as dirty politics instead of a real threat of having a leader so verily seen as incompetent...

What a concept, put out the truth and then form a smear train aimed at the documents to make Bush supporters feel sorry for him being so picked on..

I don't know, my theory...

[indyjones1938]

73. Skinner -- opinion needed

A theory which I have seen posted here extensively over the last few hours is that a poster named "Buckhead" from FR was the conspirator behind the "forgeries" (if in fact they are forgeries, of which I am not convinced).

I dug up the original FR thread from 09/08 when "Buckhead" first raised the red flag over the memos, and I found its tone to be very suspicious. Here is the text:

"Howlin, every single one of these memos to file is in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatino or Times New Roman.

In 1972 people used typewriters for this sort of thing, and typewriters used monospaced fonts.

The use of proportionally spaced fonts did not come into common use for office memos until the introduction of laser printers, word processing software, and personal computers. They were not widespread until the mid to late 90's. Before then, you needed typesetting equipment, and that wasn't used for personal memos to file. Even the Wang systems that were dominant in the mid 80's used monospaced fonts.

I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old.

This should be pursued aggressively."

To me, this does not sound like a message board poster noticing anomalies off the cuff. Examining the tone of this post is very interesting.

First of all, its tone is entirely declarative. I would think that someone noticing oddities in a document would employ a more cautious and interrogative tone. They would raise questions and suspicions about the font or superscripts and ask for feedback. I would expect key phrases like "Did anyone else notice...?" or "Have any of you ever seen...?" or even indirect-declarative phrases like "I wonder when typewriters first had superscripts."

Buckhead sets out his thesis in the first sentence, then goes into an unusual amount of detail, mentioning specific fonts and typewriter systems. What I consider to be the clincher is the final sentence, in which he uses an imperative, authoritative tone. This tone is very unusual.

Throughout the post, Buckhead speaks with authority, confidence and certainty, rather than curiosity, caution and suspicion.

I keep reading the post to myself over and over, trying to get into the author's mindset, and I can't shake the feeling that this was a pre-written piece that he simply copied and pasted when the time was right. :wtf:

What do you think?

[Proud2BAmurkin]

84. Was "howlin" part of the conspiracy, because.......

looking at the Buckhead post it appears he was replying to one from "howlin" who provides the link to the memos at the cbs web site.

[indyjones1938]

92. n/t

Well, Howlin didn't directly raise the forgery charge. Buckhead not only raised the charge, but practically wrote a novel to back up his "theory."

When you read through the entire thread up to Buckhead's post, the tone was not of "debunking" the memos or proving they were forgeries - it was of anger and disgust and downplaying the charges.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

100. but Buckhead didn't raise it before howlin pointed to the documents

and if he was a plant why would he raise such stupid points that were immediately discredited. They would have had him talking about more sophisticated problems that weren't discredited as easily

[troublemaker]

88. We know the WH had the docs for at least a day, so the

(obviously) coordinated roll-out of the forgery theory doesn't require that Buckhead made the docs. It does, however, say what it ays, which is that the forgery story was NOT, NOT, NOT, NOT a ground-up blogosphere phenomenon. It was a conventional top-down political operation. (Everyone writing these MSM 'power of blogs' stories is a fool)

[Yuna]

180. Apparently

Tom Delay is now doing so.

[sangh0]

56. IMO, asking "Who benefits" is key

I agree with you. I don't what the truth is, but #2 is definitely the least likely scenario.

[Skinner]

62. That is my point.

I do not know what the truth is either. But like you, I also believe that #2 is the least likely scenario.

[troublemaker]

65. It is, yes. But there are more than three scenarios

No smart Dem political operative forged these. Agreed. Goes without saying.

But please see post #59 to expand your scenario horizons. Very little human action is truly intentional. (And few motives are absolutely claer) We are a species of counter-productive fuck-ups.

[trotsky]

72. Your reasoning is dead on, Skinner.

Good summary of everything to this point. I have just been discussing the issue with a couple of freepers in real life, and here is how they counter the "stupid criminal" defense:

The "forger" was so smart with computers, that they knew enough to take the basic Word doc and alter it ever so slightly to make it APPEAR like it could have been made on a typewriter.

Which of course makes no sense whatsoever, since if they knew enough to make it look like it had come from a typewriter, still, why wouldn't they just go get a damn typewriter?

[mahatmakanejeeves]

74. the least likely scenario

you said:

>>
I would argue that Scenario #2 is actually the least likely scenario. Allow me to explain.

Imagine that you are a Democrat who is trying to smear George W. Bush about his National Guard Service.... What do you do? The answer is obvious:

You find an old typewriter from the 1970s and you use that to type up the forged memos.
....

The stupidest thing to do would be to fire up Microsoft Word and type up a document using the default settings.

In order for the "Democratic Dirty Tricks" Scenario to be true, you have to believe that this is the stupidest criminal on the planet, who couldn't be bothered to find an old typewriter in the attic or on eBay....
<<


Someone who answered your post asked "why not buy a Selectric for $75?" My reply is, "why not pull a Selectric out of a trash pile?" where I see them all the time. Well, I used to see them all the time. By now, trash pile Selectrics are probably headed directly to eBay as rare collector's items. If you insist on paying money for one, go to a church rummage sale; you might have to pay $5 for it. That, by the way, is more than I've ever paid for a Selectric.

I own a couple of Selectrics. Were I a forger, I would use one of them or another typewriter in use during the late 60s and early 70s, such as an Olympia (on which it is trivially easy to type a "th" character), a Royal, or a Remington to churn out fake documents. The type would be monospaced, because that's what typewriters did. I certainly wouldn't waste any time on a computer.

However, it isn't necessary for me or anyone else to forge documents showing that Bush blew off his obligations to the NG, and that is because we have the facts on our side.

Here are the questions the WH has never answered. They could answer them in fifteen seconds. No distractions about kerning, proportional spacing, hanging chad, whatever. Just answer the questions.

1. Did Lt. Bush refuse a direct order from his commanding officer?

2. Was Lt. Bush suspended for failure to perform up to Texas Air National Guard standards?

3. Did Lt. Bush ever take the physical he was required and ordered to take, and if not, why not?

4. Did Lt. Bush complete his Guard commitments?

[Skinner]

81. Exactly.

Those are the questions that matter. The talk of forgeries are a distraction. And they are a distraction that clearly benefits one side.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

91. I agree 100%

Talk of forgeries, superscripting, etc. means that the facts are ignored. Karl Rove is delighted.

Edited to add: watch this turn into double post. If I were doing this on a typewriter, there'd be Ko-Rec-Type all over the screen. See: I even have a roll of that lying around. How's that for provenance?

[troublemaker]

95. Never give a sucker an even break

(Offered just a nod to your screen-name, but also probably a Rove mantra)

[mahatmakanejeeves]

102. Never give a sucker an even break

Did I write that too?

checking.... The IMDB server is slow. Must be all those freepers headed over there right away to discredit me.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0033945/
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001211/

Officially, the credit goes to Otis Criblecoblis. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

I still think "The Bank Dick" is the funniest movie of all time.

[troublemaker]

111. Ha! At first I thought Prescott Chaplin was fake. (Or a Bush relative...)

[Name removed]

77. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

80. Bye stupid lying freeper

.

[troublemaker]

82. Quick, call the Washington Times!

[theboss]

90. There is a huge problem with both #2 and #3 however

In both instances, a forged document does not alleviate CBS' culpability, regardless of the source. If CBS is basing a story on forged documents, it is at fault. It's the gatekeeper here.

The damage is done. Instead of proving once and for all that Bush received preferential treatment, CBS has turned the story into allegations of dirty tricks by Democrats and the "liberal media." Now any criticism of Bush is suspect. This is what happened at the New York Times with the Blair fiasco.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

94. CBS didn't "turn the story into allegations of dirty tricks"

CBS presented authentic documents proving AWOL received special treatment.

[Skinner]

96. CBS believes that the documents are real.

And -- my conspiratorial rantings here notwithstanding -- I do trust their judgement on this. Unfortunately, many in the media do not.

You are correct that this (in the mind of the media, at least) has made all criticism of Bush's Guard Service suspect.

[KoKo]

97. Plus neither Dems nor Rove needed to waste time forging documents.

We didn't need false memos to go after Bush. Lying about a War is huge and all the other issues that aren't getting out there were enough to bring Bush down if presented properly. I'm no fan of Kerry's Campaign Managers...I think they've worked against Kerry by not prodding him to get a more pointed message out against what Bush has done, but I do not believe that they are so incompetent that they wouldn't find the proper way to forge documents (as Skinner said, by at least finding a typewriter from the period) and even hiring a good forger which I'm sure someone could have connected them with.

The very fact that folks here are thinking the documents are forged is amazing to me...and I'm one those DU'ers Skinner called Conspiracy Theorists, who do believe in LIHOP/MIHOP...and think it's possible Wellstone was Wellstoned. But, I'm also hugely skeptical of everything and don't see either Rove or Kerry Ops wasting time with this.

The Forgeries are a Red Herring.

[vetwife]

114. Smoke and Mirrors..? I agree but Skinner, maybe the orginals

are out there and Rather knows this and he smiles like a Cheshire cat. The other thing. We know Bush is AWOL. I saw you post on the front page. I heard today the DNC is starting Operation Fortunate Son. Why oh why is it just not plainly asked ..putting the media aside, we know we can't trust them except Rather.. where is your DD214 Mr. Bush? It shows every day you missed. Of course he has the power to conjer one up but why is no one going after the real story ! I had this story out almost a year ago and I am not even a reporter. I too am not a CT and don't believe in a lot of things but there is waaaaaaaaaay too much evidence against the man on so many levels for the Shrub to be getting a free pass. I say the operation Rove is needing a little pressure from those who can push back. Why are so many standing down? Why? I am in Kerry's corner but veterans need to know just where the War President was in 1972?
Not for Vietnam sake, but for Character sake. A lot of people did not go to Nam but not many had the power or wealth to cheat to get out and then not even fulfill the obligation of service once you jumped ahead of the line ! There is the story !

[theboss]

113. Here's the thing: it doesn't have to be a conspiracy

(I'm sick of that word by the way).

It could be one person who tricked CBS. One person is not a conspiracy. Not everything has to be a political thriller. Hell, Jason Blair write a hundred fake stories out of his Manhattan apartment. Everytime there is a big story, Capt. Janks from the Stern show gets on a major newscast. One person with a lot of chutzpah can trick a major media organization. They may not even have an agenda other than just to see if they could do it.

I don't know if the documents are real or not.

But I do believe that every moment we spend arguing about who did what in the 1960s and 1970s is bad for the Kerry campaign. And in retrospect, I think focussing so much on his Vietnam service at the convention was a major mistake, because it made all of this garbage of the last month relevant.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

101. Someone who was smart enough to get these memos to CBS...

If this is possibility #2, involving a Democratic operative who wants to trash Bush by planting forged memos, they would have to have some degree of sophistication in forging Killian's signature and in learning enough about the background of Killian's office to know the names of individuals above Killian, as well as have some of the jargon down to make them read like authentic National Guard memos. The actual wording of the memos has raised no claims of forgery.

Most of all, this person would have to have the ability to get the attention of CBS News and convince them that these are real. That would mean the individual is not just an ordinary partisan crank. It would mean that it's someone with intelligence enough to get through the levels of screening at the network and with the ability to convince others of his/her credibility. That's why I think Skinner's proposal that this same person or persons would have acquired a real typewriter of the period (and a commonly used one at that) makes sense. Therefore, I feel that possibility #2 is the least likely of the three.

[ConsAreLiars]

103. If they were Rovian fakes, they would contain clear evidence of forgery

that could be brought out when needed. Instead we see the usual type of disinformation campaign using lies about the memos (like that Word could generate them and typewriters could not, when the opposite is true), and see the noise machine going into turbo mode. (How many trolls appeared on those threads and got busted? Any stats?)

What we see is just exactly what we would expect if the memos were genuine, and the nature of the attack (no facts, just diversions) is, for me, additional corroboration of the validity of the docs.

And further, if Rove was planning to discredit Kerry by planting some kind of bomb in the campaign, it would have been smarter to use something that did not at the same time point at real crimes by chimpy.

And finally, they have long known about this vulnerability. Remember that before the 2000 vote Bev Harris did a big PR release pointing reporters to her site where the AWOL evidence available at that time was posted. The whole ISP got taken down before the reporters could look at the data there and was kept down until after election day.

[Skinner]

110. Lots and lots of trolls got busted.

I don't know the exact number, but it's been much higher than usual. I don't know if it's because of the memos brouhaha or the fact that the campaign season is upon us.

BTW: I think this is a very compelling argument you make.

"What we see is just exactly what we would expect if the memos were genuine, and the nature of the attack (no facts, just diversions) is, for me, additional corroboration of the validity of the docs."

[ConsAreLiars]

134. If Rove wanted to plant a bomb to later expose he would be smart

enough to use some subject matter that was less likely to "stick." There is a lot of corroboration of the memos' essential content - that smirk shirked - and whenever the content is (occasionally) mentioned it is a negative for their side. A smart bomb would have been less harmful to the bombers. Maybe something about infidelity or drug running or whatever, where the supporting evidence was weaker and the blowback less damaging.

A further observation: It's the cover-up as much as the initial act that makes up the whole of the crime. We know that the "forgery" claims have been pushed hard into the media by the same Scaife-Coors-etc operations that went after Clinton and pushed the Swift Boat Liars. Maybe part of our strategy should include exposing their connections to the WH (see Brock's books) and making their lies a part of the debate (when the "forgery" claims are repeated) as well as focusing on the content as CBS is doing. E.g., "We know that those attacking these memos have been lying about everything from typewriters to computers, but the fact that * was suspended from flying for disobeying a direct order to take a drug test and is still trying to cover this up has never been challenged."

[quaoar]

104. If Rove did it

He's taking a huge risk. The whole forgery allegation thing just keeps the issue before the public and reminds everyone about Bush's Guard service problem -- just like all the rebuttals of the Swift Boat Liars kept that in the news.

For the Rove scenario to be most plausible, he would have to be holding back until the right time some smoking gun piece of evidence to prove the memos are fake.

[Skinner]

107. I'm not arguing that the Rove scenario is most plausible.

I'm arguing that the Democratic Dirty Tricks scenario is the least plausible.

[quaoar]

122. I think they are both implausible

Another risk of the Rove scenario is that Bush will get asked about it in an unscripted moment and blather on or just lie and then more witnesses from back then come forward.

Also, CBS has been working on this story for quite a while, so the plant would have been made a month or more ago.

OTOH, it could be a plant from some other RW operatives on a solo mission.

But I agree that if I were planning to forge such documents to help Kerry, I would not only use a typewriter from the 70s, I would try to find some paper that is at least that old as well. I'd even copy it on a mimeograph.

[hughee99]

145. I don't think Rove would have been taking

much of a risk at all. If Rove had these memos forged, and they worked into the hands of the DNC or the Kerry campaign, and were THEN passed on to CBS, Rove is essentially in the clear. What is the DNC and the Kerry campaign going to do? They can't say they "Rove tricked us!" that doesn't look good for them. They can't claim that Rove himself started the story if it was they, and not he who sent them to CBS. If they are fake, then CBS will naturally look bad, if the DNC or Kerry campaign provided them to CBS, then they will also end up looking bad, but since Rove didn't directly release them, and it's probably going to be next to impossible to prove that he created them, then the people promoting this are just going to look like a bunch of conspiracy theorists who have to claim that they were too incompetent or inept to figure this out in order to make the case against Rove plausible. If the memos are fake, no matter what else happens, CBS and anyone who promotes them will end up looking bad. Rove will play the innocent bystander, or look like a political genius for getting the DNC/Kerry campaign to damage themselves.

[Skinner]

147. Who says CBS got the memos from the DNC or the Kerry campaign?

I don't think CBS has said where they got them.

[hughee99]

148. I didn't claim that anywhere

But I have heard several reports that both the DNC and the Kerry people had seen the memos beforehand. All I'm saying is that IF they provided them to CBS then that's not good for us. I'm skeptical about the authenticity of the memos and I would hate for us to get burnt no matter where they originally came from (Rove, overzealous supporter, paid forger as several of the theories in this thread have suggested)... In any case, I don't see where there's any risk to Rove unless he himself provided CBS with the memos, and if that was the case then CBS should have been way too skeptical to run a story on them.

[ibegurpard]

105. This incident, regardless of one's view of the authenticity of the memos

should bring home to everyone just what we're up against in the media. I admit to being somewhat shocked at the ferocity being directed at CBS by other media outlets. I'm still not sure whether it's an attempt to discredit a competitor or if it's a result of directives from ownership who want to keep a lid on anti-Bush material. In either case, it's pretty disturbing and just confirms what many of us have been saying about the media for some time.

[Skinner]

118. I totally agree.

This forgery BS is extremely depressing. I kinda thought that CBS had built up enough credibility to be above this sort of thing. The rest of the media is acting like a pack of wild dogs.

Its a fucking disgrace. I've never been so frustrated about the state of the media as I am right now.

[hexola]

106. How about this scenario...

The memos are both real and fake...

CBS - or somebody - had some memos - hand written or maybe flawed somehow - not good for TV - and doctored them in some fashion.

So the info maybe legit - but the memos not...

Remember they keep saying these memos are from a "personal file" - not official records...A "personal file" could be anything...crap he cleaned of his desk once a month...

[KoKo]

109. What if someone made a point to keep a "personal file" on this through

the years, figuring it would come up at some point? A reporter, author, someone who had collected information. I can't see that CBS would say "clean these up" so we can show them on the air, or post them on the website. They have lawyers working with them. I'm sure CBS's lawyers are high caliber enough that they wouldn't have allowed "cleaning" up of handwritten notes just for the story. :shrug:

[lunarboy13]

108. And there's one more reason #2 is less plausible.

The signatures on the memos have been authenticated to some degree. So those in the "documents were forged camp" say that someone copied Killian's signature from real memos -- a copy and paste. So if the signatures are real and the memo is fake, where did they get six different Killian signatures? Someone had access to the Killian files and either the documents are real, or they were created by USING parts of Killian's files. Who other than a republican operative would gain easy access to those files?

Plus, the de-bunking methodology was already working soon after CBS posted the memos -- so they had to have had an idea of how to de-bunk well in advance.

Anyway, that's my two cents...

[troublemaker]

120. Burkett, a Newsweek-outed CBS source, had access to the TANG files

[lunarboy13]

123. yes but the signatures aren't exact copies...

a signature, while unique to a single person, is also unique to themselves. Any of the signatures on the existing files would EASILY be linked to any of the six memos if they served as the source for the forgery.

[troublemaker]

125. We have hardly seen every piece of paper Killian signed

His signature is on *thousands* of documents in the files of everyone at that base at the time. (multiply Bush's file by one zillion)

[hughee99]

155. Wouldn't Killian have docs on file

as public record somewhere, in addition to the hundreds of times that someone signs things in their daily life, (official military docs released under the FOIA, personal documents, credit card receipts, christmas cards, etc)? I'm sure his signature wouldn't require any special access to obtain, just a little bit of searching.

[Sparkly]

116. Are there OTHER, contemporaneous files these could be compared with?

I'm sorry if that's a dumb question (I've been out of the country for a week!), but are other files available through FOIA or whatever, from the same office or person or timeframe, validating the typewriter?

[KoKo]

117. If they had to call in Laura Bush to the rescue, it says to me they are

afraid. That woman never makes a public statement. Showing her saying they are forgeries was designed to go right to the heart of the Repug Right Wing. When I saw her clip on CNN...that was my first thought. Desperation!

[vetwife]

119. We are on to something big here or we wouldn't be trolled so much !

[hexola]

121. opposite reaction - I think they know...

They wouldn't let her go out and say that if they werent holding an ACE...I fear...

[KoKo]

127. If they had an ace why would they need to "use" her? They've never

brought her out before. They control most of the media...to throw Laura out there for something they forged themselves would be counterproductive. :shrug:

[hexola]

131. Do you think she just went out on her own to say that...

I dont - this is election season...every word out of these peoples mouths is on paper somewhere...

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

126. Buckhead was posting about bogus documents just days before CBS story

Ironically, on the Free Republic website, Buckhead was talking about bogus documents just days before (September 4th and August 2nd) the 60 Minutes report. In this case, however, he was claiming that the French had created bogus documents regarding the Iraq-Niger connection and uranium, all to have them become apparently bogus to others in order to discredit the Iraq-Niger uranium connection:

"...Italy Blames France For Niger Uranium Claim
Posted by Buckhead to marron
On News/Activism 09/04/2004 8:06:28 PM PDT · 23 of 37
My read is that France created the bogus documents to conceal real uranium transactions with Iraq. Iraq needed black market uranium because its existing stockpiles were controlled and could not be used without the IAEA and the inspectors and so on finding out. If you recall, the State Department argued that no such uranium sales were possible because the French were in control of uranium in Niger. Yeah, the French would never do anything contemptuous for money..."

And on a previous post to the above, also was talking about the French conconting bogus documents which would be planted and found to be bogus in order to discredit the Iraq-Niger uranium controversy:

"...CIA Leak Probe: Powell's Grand-Jury Appearance (PLAME/WILSON PROBE)
Posted by Buckhead to Shermy; cyncooper
On News/Activism 08/02/2004 3:41:12 PM PDT · 46 of 54
Here's my attempt to win the game show:
The French, who controlled Niger's uranium production, cut a side deal with Saddam and Niger to sell additional uranium under the table. They had off the books production that could be shipped without the books looking wrong. The French did this because this kind of treachery and corruption is so classically French, and because they were being bribed via Oil for Food, also classically French. As British Intelligence picked up on this transaction and reported it to the US, the French got wind of it and concocted the forged documents to discredit the accurate reporting, while assuring the US they would never sell uranium to the Iraqis. The French disinformation campaign exploited and was exploited by the anti-Bush faction at the CIA.
Fire at will..."

[papau]

128. It is good to have the plan- the lie - ready--"bogus forgery" with a whore

media seems to work.

[gasperc]

133. I think they are real and the forgery shit is a smokescreen

to keep people off track and not look at the real issue which is that Bush did not fullfill his national guard duty and is sending national guard troops to their death in Iraq

[Sparkle]

135. #3 has been said here since day 1 on DU.

Some investigative reporter should do it's job and look to Karl Rove's office. Is this fatty that damn powerful that he can't be investigated?

[grasswire]

136. for the record

Freeper Howlin is a nobody granny living somewhere in the midwest. She's not a plant of any kind. I've been monitoring freerepublic for eight years, and know that she often starts their "investigations" by starting a new thread for it.

FWIW, we DU-ers up late last night have narrowed the identity of Buckhead to a probable person: J. Randolph Evans, a high-powered attorney from Atlanta with extensive ties to Newt and others in D.C., who heads up the Attorneys for Bush legal team in Georgia, etc. etc.

You can see our research at http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=806133

And if someone has the nerve to just email Evans and ask him, his email addy is available on his web site.

http://www.agg.com/Contents/AttorneyDetail.aspx?ID=291

[IndianaGreen]

139. The White House released the memos to the media

after CBS gave it copies of them. That is the biggest clue! They knew the memos were forgeries that could be easily rebutted. What is happening now? We are no longer talking about all the other evidence about Bush's TANG, instead we are talking about Memogate. The result? The memos are casting doubt on all of the other evidence about TANG.

That's the conspiracy theory!

A more likely theory could well be that the author of the memos is a disgruntled former TANG member that was denied a claim for benefits and that has a record of mental illness. The author does own an IBM Composer.

[nomatrix]

140. Red Herring.......Greg Palast.....look at this possibility

http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=17565

THE PAY-OFF

"That's far from the end of the story. In 1994, George W. Bush was elected governor of Texas by a whisker. By that time, Barnes had left office to become a big time corporate lobbyist. To an influence peddler like Barnes, having damning information on a sitting governor is worth its weight in gold -- or, more precisely, there’s a value in keeping the info secret.

Barnes appears to have made lucrative use of his knowledge of our President's slithering out of the draft as a lever to protect a multi-billion dollar contract for a client. That's the information in a confidential letter buried deep in the files of the US Justice Department that fell into my hands at BBC television.

Here's what happened. Just after Bush's election, Barnes' client GTech Corp., due to allegations of corruption, was about to lose its license to print money: its contract to run the Texas state lottery. Barnes, says the Justice Department document, made a call to the newly elected governor's office and saved GTech's state contract.

The letter said, "Governor Bush ... made a deal with Ben Barnes not to rebid because Barnes could confirm that Bush had lied during the '94 campaign."

Smoke and mirrors. The focus on the memo's forgery takes the focus off the Barnes/Bush lottery deal.

[nomatrix]

144. Who's now the largest lottery in the world?

http://www.lotterypost.com/news-89939.htm

"Gtech Holdings Corp., the world's largest operator of lotteries, Tuesday posted a 31 percent jump in profit for its latest quarter, helped by continued strong sales."

Big Jump from this

http://www.lubbockonline.com/news/010997/texas.htm

"Another question deals with GTECH's contract with former Lt. Gov. Ben Barnes. Barnes' original contract as a Texas lobbyist for GTECH gave him 4 percent of the company's gross revenues made in the state. That came before GTECH got the contract to run the lottery."

[nomatrix]

150. More from Palast in 2001

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lottery/story/0,7369,425738,00.html

"How appropriate that the Lottery Commission confirmed the Camelot-Gtech group's new licence a week after Al Gore conceded his victory to George W. Bush. So who was the real winner of the presidential contest? Some might say Bill Gates.
One of Dubya's first appointments was of the key Secretary for White House Matters: attorney Harriet Miers, the US lottery commissioner who dealt with Gtech's contract.
'Harriet was always flying to Seattle ', says Lawrence Littwin, the Texas Lottery director Miers fired in 1997. That's no surprise, as her law firm represented Gates at the time. Miers will, of course, have to give up her interest in the law practice while working for the White House.
Some wonder whether Bush, as President, will continue the Justice Department's push to break up Microsoft. Watch this space ..."




http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlo/76R/billtext/HC00153I.HTM

This is why Littwin got fired for investigating GTech, now the worlds largest lottery company.

[Name removed]

143. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Liberal Intellectual]

152. why aren't the media sticking up for rather?

WE ALL KNOW THAT THE CHIMP WAS A DESERTER, AND WE ALL KNOW THAT HIS DADDY GOT HIM A SPOT IN THE GUARD. WHY ARE WE LETTING THESE MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS GET IN RATHER'S WAY AS HE CONDUCTS HIS INVESTIGATION? FOXNEWS IS SAVAGING CBS EVERY DAY AND WE ARE NOT ON THE COUNTERATTACK. WE NEED TO TAKE THE FOCUS OFF OF THESE MEMOS, HOWEVER THEY WERE CREATED, AND BACK ONTO THE REAL ISSUES THAT AMERICA NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT ITS COMMANDER IN CHIMP. WHAT CAN WE DO TO TURN THE TIDE BACK IN OUR FAVOR?!? IT'S VERY DEPRESSING.

[Pallas180]

156. cause the media is CORP OWNED. Rather needs our support, email him at

[e-mail]

we've been getting answers thanking for our support and talking about being deluged by hate mail.

the others have followed WH talking points for 3 1/2 years (as Olbermann showed the e mails and directions he received on live tv)

Dan RAther has taken a big step. either he's about to retire or cant
stand the smothering of a free press anymore.

[Liberal Intellectual]

158. If corp ownership is the problem, what is the solution?

We've got a big problem if the mainstream media's failure to "change the subject" off of these memos and back to Bush's guard service is due to corporate ownership. (I don't believe it.) Don't we need to get more stories out like the CBS story put out there to take the pressure off CBS? To put these memos out there and let Rather twist in the wind over them is criminal. Otherwise, how on earth can we regain the spotlight and get back on the offensive? Frankly, I don't care whether the memos are true or not, I just am furious that we allowed ourselves to be so badly outmaneuvered on this one. What did it take, 4 hours, for some computer geeks to derail this?

[kori]

157. As I said several nights ago they doth protest to much

I have learned several things from this whole flap. The first is you can do about anything you want on MS Word, that does not prove they were forgeries, it just proves you could forge them.

I also learned that CBS and Dan Rather are about the only major news sources that have balls at this point.

Now on to the big debate, I think they are real until pr oven otherwise and the proof is circumstantial at best. Secondly with typewriters, even electric ones you have individual differences, each IBM Selectric will have minor variances, each operator will have minor variances even on the same machine.

What bothers me the most is not the charges they are fake but the avalanche of those jumping on the fake bandwagon. From desperate trolls here, to RW websites, to "independent" news organizations what is the big deal?

I can not figure out why. I thought most of this information that was brought up by these documents was fairly common knowledge anyway. We know Bushie got special privileges to get in, he was given special favors while there, and to get out early with an honorable discharge, obviously another special favor. We know he was suppose to take flight physicals and could never fit them into his busy social schedule after April of 1972. We know the Guard started drug testing in April of 72. We know IF he showed up in Alabama at all it was very little and did not fly. We know that a physical was not voluntary, or a mere suggestion, it was a requirement to keep flying. In the service requirements are ORDERS so we already knew he violated a direct order. Since all of this was fairly well known and we know its been dodged before lets not focus on some memos lets focus on the questions that Dan Rather keeps asking at the close of each broadcast, waiting patiently for his answer from the White House. Forgery or not they are still valid questions. Some commander somewhere was going to put some of this in writing if only to Cover his own ass. The memos, the story, all fits in with the history we all already know on this subject.

[YIMA]

160. #2 with a Clinton twist

At least that's my father's current beliefs. He thinks Clinton has the document made and got it to CBS through the DNC in order to shipwreck the Kerry campaign and set up Hillary for 2008. My father is a lifelong member of the AFL-CIO and hates what this country has become under Bush. I don't know what to think about his theory, but he's been around and has been right before. Just thought I'd bring it up since I hadn't seen it mentioned. :-(

[LittleClarkie]

172. If I ever found out

That Clinton had anything to do with sabotaging either Dean or Kerry so she could get in 2008, I don't know what I'd do.

I'm not fond of her anyway, but that would come close to making her as bad as the current administration.

Anyone but Hillary in 2008.

[David Zephyr]

161. Either #1 or #3, Skinner.

Remember, Rove had his employee mail Al Gore videos of Bush's debate practice...to see what Gore would do with it.

Gore called the FBI immediately and the lady took the fall for Bush and Rove. $$$$

[wiggs]

166. Option #4

Perhaps they are neither real, nor placed by Kerry supporter, nor placed by Rove to discredit Kerry.

We suspect that Shrubs service records were scrubbed in the late 90's, right? Records were compromised. Documents could have been removed (certainly there are missing documents). But some documents could have been placed there or altered to hide the one sorry service record.

Since there would be some anecdotal evidence from fellow guardsmen (or people like Linda Allison) that Bush wasn't a perfect serviceman, they couldn't very well make his records too perfect, too stellar, too clean. Instead, confusing hints at questionable performance could be left in the record.

I'm not saying option #4 is likely, just possible. I personally will believe the simplest story unless hard evidence shows otherwise: the documents are real.

And regardless of the truth of this mystery, the issue should be used to reinforce the story of this president...that he has not been there for American went it has counted...not then, not now.

How does the story of destroyed microfilm records fit into all this?

[ItsMyParty]

167. I think there is one interesting part that no one is touching on

Rather and CBS are not going to take a document that was (so to speak) shoved under their door in a plain brown wrapper. They are not going to take a document that was faxed to them, etc. They would not risk taking the steps they took in revealing this to the nation UNLESS they knew the person who sent them the documents, thoroughly interviewed the person, and is a person they trusted and knew had the means to actually get their hands on such documents. That says to me that it is very likely the person had to be inside the Pentagon (remember there is a hate brawl between the military brass and their civilian bosses in the Pentagon). There have been things pertaining to other issues over the last year or so leaked to the press that were definitely from inside the Pentagon. IN FACT, do you remember info here and there that the press believes actually was leaked from State and by Powell himself?? I am wondering if the person is Powell - but Powell either setting Rather up or was set up himself. Bottom line: the answer to this whole thing is the person who supplied the documents and the fact that it was someone CBS trusted. There has been stories of some disgruntled officer BUT he would have had to have a real doozie of a story of why he was in posession of these memos or they would never have trusted him. We have another Deep Throat on our hands--now it's whether Deep Throat is a turncoat and was setting Rather up or whether Deep Throat was set up himself.

[dave502d]

168. Colin Powell

A furious row has broken out over claims in a new book by BBC broadcaster James Naughtie that US Secretary of State Colin Powell described neo-conservatives in the Bush administration as 'fucking crazies' during the build-up to war in Iraq.

[cheshire]

169. They like to blur the point. I 6 sources say he was AWOL I tend to say he

did. I've been hearing about this for so long. I say WH silence is shouting the truth.

[rullery]

173. The documents are authentic, so I go with #1

I have never been big on conspiracy theories, unlike some who seem to relish them. There is no definitive evidence to show these papers are false, in spite of diligent efforts to discredit them.
I do not believe that CBS and Dan Rather would have come forth with these documents without compelling evidence of their authenticity.

The cable networks have demonstrated their willingness to promote all sorts of phoney accusations, such as the Swift Boat Liars for Bush. I believe that they are too lazy to seek out the truth, but are ready to spread any gossip that they think might improve ratings. Also they are jealous of CBS and Rather, and would love to undermine his credibility.

What does bother me is the amount of time we are devoting to this issue, instead of demanding answers to the questions that have been raised about Bush' service in the Guard, as put forth repeatedly by Rather. Let us get back on track, people. We have to get Kerry elected!

[Junkdrawer]

176. I've been saying #3 since Day One...

As soon as I read the Buckhead post, which had the flavor of "Wow, take twenty steps due North, five steps towards the Old Oak, and dig like mad", I smelled a rat.

I have a copy of "Horns and Halos" I got from Amazon.ca - Amazon US won't sell it. This (and the Kitty Kelley book) is exactly how Rove dodged the AWOL/cocaine charges before.

[unfrigginreal]

177. The reporters are going where they've been pointed

The only ones doing the pointing are the Pukes. I said at the beginning of this mess that the Dems should have been pushing the allegations raised by the memos but as usual, the fear of getting tainted by the memos themselves, kept Democrats from going on the offense and left them on the defense. Of course, we're being tainted by the memos anyway and a blind man could have seen that coming.

[bigpathpaul]

178. Bush AWOL and FRAUD Ads for Download

For anyone interested, I've been developing a series of ads, posted on my web site at: http://www.bigpath.net, specifically aimed at Bush's (lack of) military history as well as the lies about Iraq.

I'm hoping that bold visuals and (hopefully) persuasive text can at least get people’s attention and keep discussions alive both inside and outside these forums. All the ad materials are available in PDF and JPEG formats. If you find any of these useful I strongly encourage you to forward, print, post, hand out and otherwise distribute them in any way you see fit. I'd also encourage you to pass on the link to the site if you think others might find these useful.

I've tried hard to stick to facts. Though the ads are clearly provocative, I don't think there's anything false in them. (Is there a Republican who could make that same claim?)

I welcome your comments, suggestions, criticisms. A few samples:

[John_H]

179. IT doesn't matter if chimp sctibbled them with crayon and then had

a pot-addled pickles type them up on Word.


By doing their job for chimp--which is to "prove" the memos false--they have unwittingly brought the other facets of the issue to the fore.

The results: CCN's poll that 18 percent of swing voters are less likely to vote for bush while only 1 percent is more likely.


For the memos: I say bring them on.

[xrepub]

181. I generally agree

the most likely scenario is #2. However there are dumb criminals, and as hard as it is to believe, there are bush bashers that are as dumb as bush lovers. So I would not rule out #2.

There is probably a lot more to come out on this story, and I believe that the best course is to wait and see.

As a Kerry supporter, the points I like to make are:

The WH has not denied the content of the memos.
There is no conclusive proof that the memos are false.
Bush has the option of mitigating the content by producing his DD214's
Bush has claimed to have released ALL his military records.
No one has seen his DD 214.