60 Minutes Documents on Bush Might Be Fake

CNS News ^ | September 9, 2004 | Melanie Hunter

[Peach]

Thursday, September 09, 2004 2:41 PM EST

By Melanie Hunter CNSNews.com Deputy Managing Editor September 09, 2004 02:34 pm

'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake

(CNSNews.com) - The 32-year-old documents produced Wednesday by the CBS News program "60 Minutes," shedding a negative light on President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard, may have been forged using a current word processing program, according to typography experts. Three independent typography experts told CNSNews.com they were suspicious of the documents from 1972 and 1973 because they were typed using a proportional font, not common at that time, and they used a superscript font feature found in today's Microsoft Word program. More to Come

[william clark]

And what about the discrepancy in the signatures?

[Centurion2000]

Hmm ... is it slander or libel if defamation of character is performed on TV ?

[spyone]

Thanks to all the work done by Freepers last night!

[mnehring]

Drudge is breaking this now!

[sissyjane]

woo-Hoo!!

Lookie here --MSM picking this up??

[pnz1]

Dumb question, who gave the reports to CBS

[Peach]

That wasn't me doing any of the work and research.

I'll put freeper research up against Old Media any day.

Old Media is just too darned tired to do any actual work.

[force recon]

the same guy who did it killed Kennedy and lives in area 51

[Izzy Dunne]

The real shame here is that it took less than 12 hours for Freepers and others to come up with this evidence.

WHY COULD SEE B.S. NOT DO THAT?

Lak of motivatiion, maybe?

[I'm ALL Right!]

Drudge says:

'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake /// 32-year-old documents produced Wednesday by CBSNEWS 60 MINS on Bush's guard service may have been forged using a current word processing program // typed using a proportional font, not common at that time, and they used a superscript font feature found in today's Microsoft Word program, Internet reports claim... Developing...

[Izzy Dunne]

The real shame here is that it took less than 12 hours for Freepers and others to come up with this evidence.

WHY COULD SEE B.S. NOT DO THAT?

Lack of motivation, maybe?

[taxcontrol]

Now if this can just get into the mainstream press.

This would be good fodder for some senior Bush staff to talk about how desperate the libs are to even go so far as to use "obviously forged documents" to attack and slander the President.

[Peach]

You have to understand. Old Media is tired. They are just so darned old. And did I mention they are tired?

[rhombus]

Drudge says:

Sweet. Lame stream media all read Drudge.

[drypowder]

Kerry just keeps getting muddier. Obviously he's not fit to be president.

[Howlin]

Thanks to all the work done by Freepers last night!

Exactly!

And we will NOT get credit!!!!

TankerKC right here on FR is the FIRST person to bring this up!

[plushaye]

I truly salute the Freepers who did the analyses on this. Some of the most amazing investigations I've ever seen, and done in such a short time period too.

[glennherman]

"That wasn't me doing any of the work and research.
I'll put freeper research up against Old Media any day.
Old Media is just too darned tired to do any actual work."


To quote with irony - the late ungreat Jerry Rubin "We are EVERYWHERE!"

[mnehring]

Dumb question, who gave the reports to CBS That is the real story. If they were supplied by the DNC, then this would make Watergate look like a little kid stealing gum.