Skip to comments.Dan Rather to Discuss Document Authenticity
Posted on 09/10/2004 1:49:38 PM PDT by RWR8189
CBS EVENING NEWS WITH DAN RATHER to address, in detail, the issues surrounding the authenticity of the documents broadcast in the 60 MINUTES report on President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard... Developing...
Well, Rather says the documents are "authentic"...what does that really mean??? All depends on what the definition of "is" is....here we go again.
Is there any reason why CBS could not be sued for liable, given their public assertion that they obtained the documents and know the source and they are not disclosing it?? Could they not be FORCED to provide that information in a court of law??? And what will the Bush administration's comments be about this????
Seriously, there was something nasty about that whole thing too.
I am still undecided on Abu Ghraib, but Memo thing is so plainly, obviously bogus. Even ABC and the Washington Post knows it.
The problem with that argument about the superscript is that I don't think that's the same font as the Killian memos. That document definitely looks typewritten, while the Killian ones don't.
With who? The Federal Prosecutor for the Southern District of NY?
At the risk of repeating someone, Rather's discussion about the authenticity of the documents ought to take all of 2 seconds. He can simply say, "They weren't."
What time is it on? Anybody?
Whatever dude, smoke another
I heard that based on an email from someone calling themselves "HardStarboard," CBS plans to fire Dan Rather - way to go!
Dan - what's that there stain what's on yer blue dress... Ah think ya dun bin caught...
What time does this come on. It has been so long since I watched this tripe I forgot.
Has not addressed issues raised by forged documents? A troll with serious logic problems.
I've seen one doc and it's pretty suspicious.
There are several "th"'s all normal. But one particulary blurred one on the same document shows a small "th", but it looks to me like it's been whited out and the small "th" written in.
Pretty weird that it's the only "th" on the page and is different from all the other "th"s on the page.
"Well, Rather says the documents are "authentic"...what does that really mean??? All depends on what the definition of "is" is....here we go again. "
They are authentic documents... the authenthically forged kind.
While I understand sometimes reporters have sources that don't want to be known what could be the reason here? Were the documents obtained legally or stolen, where did they get them and when, who else has seen or heard of them and when? why did they wait until now to bring them up and not in 2000 or before?...the source needs to be on TV or the docs should not have been presented as genuine.
CBS also needs to have the family's point of view presented as they are the closest living relatives of the alleged author of the docs.
Rather is a fool and their is no fool like an old fool. He thinks the titanic will close its watertight doors and sail away like it didn't hit an iceberg, it will sink sooner or later hopefully taking him with it..
Yeah, that's the one I saw and there's only one "th" in superscript on the page...all the other "th"s are normal size.
Rather will focus on the superscript "TH" and identify a typewriter of the time that could do it, ignoring whether or not a National Guard base would have such a machine. He'll also discuss how other machines of the time could support some of the other features that have come under scrutiny, but not discuss why somebody at the NG would go to such lengths to use features that were complex at the time.
He will complete ignore the issue of kerning, which seems to be the most damning.
He'll protect his sources and refuse to discuss where he got the memo and who his "experts" are who confirmed authenticity.
He'll drop a hint that this is all another VRWC.
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.