More interesting to me is that the 04May1972 memo has a neatly done superscript in item 2. Proportional font or not, this is not what typewriters did in 1972.
Nice.
This is looking more and more like Christmas in Cambodia.
You are correct.
The Selectrics looked nice, but the typefaces are NOTHING like a modern word processor and non-impact printer.
There are even detectable differences in word processing software: Many programs can't grok kerning, so you can tell if a document was prepared on one program or another, even if they use the same font.
"More interesting to me is that the 04May1972 memo has a neatly done superscript in item 2. Proportional font or not, this is not what typewriters did in 1972."
Not so. The IBM Executive I had included an "st" and a "th" character above the number row in superscript. Made documents look professional, doncha know. It also had a superscript degree sign.
IBM was very good at producing typewriters. Although the Selectric couldn't do proportional spacing, you wouldn't believe the number of specialized type balls that were available for it. While in the USAF, I used a ball that had both English and Cyrillic characters, all upper case, on the same ball. That way, I could type Russian, then the English translation on the line below. Pretty nifty.
The IBM Executive Typewriter could be had with many special characters. The superscript ones I mention were very popular, since they especially lent a professionally typeset look to documents.
It took a little practice to use the machine, but not that much. I learned it in a week, teaching myself.
Again, I'm not saying the documents aren't fakes, but they COULD have been done at the time using common equipment, and the military did have these IBM Executive typewriters. I know, because I saw them.