Yesterday:
Overlaid:
No way would me fiddling for a few seconds in MS Word produce the exact same results as a 30-year-old typewritten document.
Posted on 09/10/2004 6:55:36 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
In the wake of the CBS "60 Minutes" revelation of documents purported by Dan Rather to verify that George W. Bush did not uphold his obligations to the Texas National Guard in the early '70's, ABCNews.com has posted a story questioning the authenticity of those very same documents. Nevermind for a moment that the release of additional documents by the White House verifies that George W. Bush scored in excess of the number of "points" required of an honorable discharge for the six years of service to which he had committed in the National Guard, in fewer than those six years. And that those were enough to allow his commanding officer to release him from duty to work on a political campaign in Alabama in lieu of active service in Texas. Never mind that George W. Bush, following work on said campaign, returned to the Guard and performed additional duty before being so honorably discharged from service. Citing what it calls "one of the country's top authorities on document authentification," Bill Flynn, the ABCNews.com story lists the following evidence in questioning the veracity of the CBS report:
"* The memos were written using a proportional typeface, where letters take up variable space according to their size, rather than fixed-pitch typeface used on typewriters, where each letter is allotted the same space. Proportional typefaces are available only on computers or on very high-end typewriters that were unlikely to be used by the National Guard.
* The memos include superscript, i.e. the "th" in "187th" appears above the line in a smaller font. Superscript was not available on typrwriters.
* The memos inclued "curly" apostrophes rather than straight apostrophes found on typewriters.
* The font used in the memos is Times Roman, which was in use for printing but not in typewriters. The Haas Atlas--the bible of fonts--does not list Times Roman as an available font for typewriters.
* The vertical spacing used in the memos, measured at 13 points, is not available in typewriters, and only became possible with the advent of computers."
In addition, the widow of the signer of the documents in question--Lt. Col. Jerry Killian--has disputed their veracity. Now known as Marjorie Connell (having re-married since the death of her former husband in 1984), Killian's widow is quoted as saying: "The wording of these documents is very suspect to me . . . [I] can't believe these are his words." Killian's son, Gary Killian, who, ABC notes, served in the National Guard with his father, has been quoted as saying that it was not in his father's "nature" to "keep private files like this" and has confirmed that CBS did not get the material for its story from any of Killian's family members. CBS has so far declined to name the source of the documents but stands by their authenticity, publishing that its own (unnamed) expert confirmed to their satisfaction that the documents were authentic.
Though many may be inclined to chalk this latest dust-up to politics-as-usual in a post Gore v. Bush 2000 Presidential Election dispute, the fact that ABC would openly question, at least on the internet, another major (democratic friendly) network news outlet report--and one by the venerable "60 Minutes" no less--perhaps signals something of a change in the course of presidential politics of late.
Between the Democratic and Republican National Conventions, the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" gained traction in criticizing John Kerry for his idiosyncratic description of his own heroics in Vietnam and announced, quite strongly, their opposition to what they saw as distortions of the truth and the record. Kerry's candidacy has taken quite a hit as a result. Polls now show that the combination of the questioning by fellow veterans of the Vietnam War of Kerry's behavior during and after his service, along with the Republican National Conventions' successful focusing upon the Bush Administration's policies regarding the War on Terror, Iraq, and its record on domestic and economic issues, have constituted a serious blow to the challenger's campaign.
It should come as no surprise that in answer to same a network would air such questionable material in an attempt to divert the public's attention from the weaknesses of the challenger's candidacy.
Yet, the challenge by ABC of CBS should come as some surprise. It seems to mean that at least ABC is beginning to recognize that going along with such spurious and questionable reports is a potential undermining of its own credibility--which signals that the network recognizes something that the rest of us already know: that presidential politics are not only about those who run, but also about those who vote.
The polls--including Time Magazine, Newsweek, Washington Post/ABC--all show that since the Republican National Convention Bush leads among registered voters by between 9 and 13 points. Among likely voters, this margin is probably somewhat greater in Bushes favor.
Such margins should tell the networks something about what their real role is in politics: to report the news, not attempt to craft it. It is lamentable that CBS may be the victim of a hoax--but to call it a "hoax" is to ignore the fact that the perpetuation of such a false-hood is also akin to a kind of crime.
John Kerry ought most strenuously to object to such tactics regarding his opponant's records. Not least because of their dubious foundation--but also because such questioning begs for further scrutiny of Kerry's own record during the Vietnam years.
ABC News seems to be coming to understand that the American public, in this election, cares about who will secure us against further attack, who can continue what is amounting to a robust growth in our economy, and who can best insure the continued prosperity of our people and the peace between nations of the world.
This election, like nearly every election that has gone before it, is not about who will do worse, it is about who will do best. Each side, and the media, ought to concentrate upon the records--Bush's as president, Kerry's as Senator--and then let the voters decide.
There is no better indication of how these candidates will govern than what his record says about how he has conducted himself in the face of the realities of his moment. Each candidate offers a record of such moments.
Let us judge them accordingly.
bump
Once CBS has come out with their official retraction, I will be filing a formal complaint with the FCC. The remedy I will ask for is that CBS actually LOSE some of their broadcasting licenses. CBS does not own the spectrum, it was given to them in return for them providing some public benefit; since they have mis-used it by lying, they should be punished.
Someone somewhere is feverishly loooking for a 1970's vintage typewriter to re-create the bogus documents that will subsequently be released to "prove" John Kerry's military antics.
Unfortunately, this scandal has alerted them to fact that the original documents they created can be easily shown to be forgeries.
Good article. I admit to being surprised that ABC has pursued this story so vociferously. I understand the concept of "blood in the water", but for a liberal network to jump onto this story so QUICKLY, without prodding, this surprises me.
From allowing Al Michaels to featuring John Stossel to this, ABC seeems to be angling for all the viewers it can get. CBS is a study in contrast. From The Reagans to the many different 60 Minutes "stories", they've done everything possible to push the liberal agenda.
Yesterday:
Overlaid:
No way would me fiddling for a few seconds in MS Word produce the exact same results as a 30-year-old typewritten document.
Just saw on FNC that in the forged documents,Bush was ordered to report for a physical in May. Typically it would be in the month of your birthday, Bush wasn't born in month of May.
On these documents the "age spots" are more consistent with putting dirt and dust on the copy glass than the diffuse age spots that you would see with yellowed aged paper.
Next on CBS!God condemns G.W. Bush!
In biblical passages just obtained by CBS News, the Almighty issued direct instructions which would seem to condemn the actions of President George Bush's conduct in the Texas Air National Guard. Contemporaries of God have reviewed these documents and confirmed they are in line with His views and manner of expressing himself.
President G.W. Bush has long made known his adherence to biblical teaching, but the White House refused to comment on this apparent discrepancy.
Watch for this story on the next 7 weeks of '60 Minutes.'
I dug out my old Army records 1967-1974 and looked at several documents and the 4 is definitely not the same as the 4 produced on typewriters of that era.
The author hit the nail on the head with this point.
The only way for Kerry to walk away from this, unscathed, is to publicly chastise the Media Wing of the Democrat Party and the bitter partisans in his own campaign. (Heck, he might have to have the DNC play scapegoat and fire Terry McCauliffe!) MOST IMPORTANTLY, though, he's going to have to steal a play from Bush's playbook, and publicly state that Bush "served honorably".
Anything short of that, and the Dirty Tricks charge will be directed straight at him.
Kerry's response about this smear was, "That's for the White House to answer."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.