What is behind each of the memos:
Fake Memo | What is says | Why was it created |
February 1,1972 | Asks for an update of flight status for Bush and another officer, Bath | To create a paper trail leading to the May 4 memo. Also, Bath also missed his physical within a month of the time Bush missed his, and many leftwing conspiracy sites beleive that they both got caught doing cocaine in the Guard, but that the records were scrubbed. Also, Bush was later involved in a company with Bath, and they attempt to link Bush and Bath with the Bin Laden's based on this company. |
May 4,1972 | Orders Bush to get his annual physical within 10 days | To change the timeline for Bush getting his annual physical, which wasn't actually due until the end of July. Create the impression that Bush left in a hurried panic for Alabama to avoid drug testing |
May 19, 1972 | Phone call from Bush asking about getting transfered to Alabama because he wants to run a campaign. Followed by discussion of getting the physical later if he decided to keep flying | Show that Bush left town on May 15, called his commander after the fact to see if he could transfer to Alabama. Also, create a confirmation that Killian was aware and ok with the fact that Bush missed the physical. If the order from May 4 was disobeyed, you would expect some sort of official reprimand or follow-up. Since there is nothing in the record, the May 19 memo provides an answer. |
August 1,1972 | Bush suspended from flight status due to failure to perform to USAF/TexANG standards and failute to meet annual physical examination as ordered. Plus order of the creation of a flight review board IAW AFM35-13. | Make it look like there was something more to the suspension of flight status than just missing the physical. Create the impression that a flight review board was ordered, so that they can then ask why Bush has not released this document (ie, there must be a cover-up). It must show that Bush was suspended for using drugs |
June 24, 1973 | Memo concerning a request for evaluation of Bush and a statement about not being able to evaluate Bush since he had been off of the base from May 1972 to May 1973. | To provide a basis for the August 18, 1973 memo, which complains of being pressured by superiors. |
August 18, 1973 | CYA Memo about being pressured to sugar-coat the Bush review. Mentions something about backdating information | Perhaps to show that there was some pressure from higher up for a coverup. However, I wonder what record would need to be "backdated" in order to fit in with the subsequent conspiracy theory that they plan to release. Perhaps we will find out, or perhaps they will abandon the next phase of the plan now that the forgeries have been uncovered |
Ping to #31.
VERY good chart @ #31
Since we know that this documentation is forged, I wonder if the 1973 date is itself a typo.
Proof that stupid people can be diabolical.
Or that someone smart came up with the concept, and someone stupid was responsible for the implementation
Very good points.
Initially, it was clear that individual memos are not, by themselves, terribly incriminating. They only led to speculation.
I was at the point of wondering why Rather and CBS were making such a big deal of them. And defending them so fiercely. I had written it off to their simply becoming irrational about Bush's success and Kerry's failures.
But your work makes it clear there was a larger plan behind it all. The memos had a critical, well-defined role to play in a much larger scheme.
In my view, uncovering this larger strategy belongs on the same plane as the earlier revelations about the forgeries. That the strategy now lies in a shambles doesn't diminish that accomplishment.
Thanks for the ping, Howlin. Rocklobster's work has uncovered the VLWC that existed beneath these shabby forgeries.
No wonder Gunga Dan doesn't want to abandon the Grand Strategy. There is way too much at stake -- for him and the entire Democrat party.
If this plot were to be revealed, think of the consequences...
So memogate is morphing into Kitty Kelly style tabloidism?