Perhaps we can have a little fun with this one though. Any thoughts/
Remember - Democrats.com is a self-described "unofficial" Democrat Party group that was set up before the 2000 elections by a bunch of Clinton White House goons, among them most notably John Kerry's new pollster Stan Greenberg.
This was one sloppy forgery. Why didn't they just cut and paste letters from the newspaper, like kidnappers used to do in the old days.
Insert "infinite number of monkeys typing" wisecracks here...
UPDATE 10: Reader Jon-Erik Prichard adds what strikes me as an especially persuasive point:
[A]nother aspect of the type on [the August 18, 1973 memo] suggests, perhaps proves, forgery.
1. The type in the document is KERNED. Kerning is the typsetter's art of spacing various letters in such a manner that they are 'grouped' for better readability. Word processors do this automatically. NO TYPEWRITER CAN PHYSICALLY DO THIS.
To explain: the letter 'O' is curved on the outside. A letter such as 'T' has indented space under its cross bar. On a typewriter if one types an 'O' next to a 'T' then both letters remain separated by their physical space. When you type the same letters on a computer next to each other the are automatically 'kerned' or 'grouped' so that their individual spaces actually overlap. e. g., TO. As one can readily see the curvature of the 'O' nestles neatly under the cross bar of the 'T'. Two good kerning examples in the alleged memo are the word 'my' in the second line where 'm' and 'y' are neatly kerned and also the word 'not' in the fourth line where the 'o' and 't' overlap empty space. A typewriter doesn't 'know' what particular letter is next to another and can't make those types of aesthetic adjustments.
2. The kerning and proportional spacing in each of the lines of type track EXACTLY with 12 point Times Roman font on a six inch margin (left justified). Inother words, the sentences break just as they would on a computer and not as they would on a typewriter. Since the type on the memo is both proportionally spaced and kerned the lines of type break at certain instances (i.e., the last word in each line of the first paragraph are - 1. running, 2. regarding, 3. rating, 4. is, 5. either). If the memo was created on a typewriter the line breaks would be at different words (e. g., the word 'running' is at the absolute outside edge of the sentence and would probably not be on the first line).
3. The sentences have a wide variance in their AMOUNT of kerning and proportional spacing. Notice how the first line of the first paragraph seems squished together and little hard to read but the last line of the first paragraph has wider more open spacing. Even the characters themselves are squished in the first line (as a computer does automatically) and more spread out on the last line where there is more room.
There's no way a typewriter could 'set' the type in this memo and even a good typesetter using a Linotype machine of the era would have to spend hours getting this effect.
Pathetic, isn't it? Just pathetic.
What is really rich here is that, after this attack, they're completely and openly on the defensive.
If this is a forgery, I'm sure it's another in a long line of Karl Rove's stunts. But it's not a forgery. Come on, CBS vetted it with experts, of which there must be many. On the other hand, the detractors are all right-wing bloggers. (Who you know will attack anything that knocks bush.)
My only question Is how thoroughly did CBS review these documents? How many experts did they show these documents to before going on with the story? What were their background and area of expertise?
CBS is a creditable news source. They didn't get that way by being stupid. These docs were probably gone over with a fine tooth comb until they were sure it didn't have any nits.
what document? it doesn't matter. the guy's a deserter who kills for fun he is doomed to failure I don't care if they say it was hand-typed by Rove and given to Rather by Andrew Card dressed as Huggy Bear.
So Rove gave them to CBS? Is CBS that gullible?
There are real docs that the Whitehouse had and they created forgery forms of these docs and passed them off to discredit the real ones if they ever surfaced. It mucks it up enough that if real versions surfaced, noone would ever believe it - the "forgery" meme is planted.
I agree - its a fraud Walt has showed two other era documents "as proof" that have the superscripted "th" and none of them even closely resemble the document 60 mins had - they fell for it hook line and sinker. They look completely different in the way it was done. If I knew how to PSP them side by side I would but I am looking at them now and this 60 mins thing was a fraud and Rove is ROFL at them.
Oh, please. Like a bunch of amateurs on the Internet would be able to figure out something that CBS News stuck its neck out over and never thought to investigate. Riiight.
Yikes. I started out thinking this was a Rove plant, after reading http://www.warblogging.com / - then I was convinced it wasn't. I've been crazy all day about this thing. Now I'm back where I started. I need to be sedated.
What's with all you paranoid people? Get a grip!!! This is exactly what goo defence attorneys do...CREATE DOUBT!!!! There's absolutely no reason to think these doxs are forgeries! NONE!!!
Document is forgery -- this can become the basis of an allegation that the whitehouse continues to deceive the public by lying to us, sometimes in very clever ways.
CBS has to have something to substantiate the authenticity of the memos. If it doesn't, it has cost itself any credibility it had. Obviously, this wouldn't be good for a it's news division. CBS' story had to be thoroughly vetted!
Oh good GOD! Stop and think for a moment...IF it were discovered that they were a forgery then the media would HOT after the story of who did it and why. The blowback from that would be bigger than the actual story.
What crap. The issue is are they believable? Hell yes. And what the f*ck does a wife or son for that matter really know about husband/dad. Well sh*t, let's ask Hillary. What's really Rovian is to suggest the documents are fake. Chimp has been an underachiever his whole goddamn life, much to our pain, so why would they NOT be authentic?
I'm surprised they ran with this hoax now, instead of 3 days before the election. The Democrats and their willing accomplices in the media just can't get anything right.
UM, SHOULDN'T THIS HAVE BEEN DONE BEFORE THE 60 MINUTES INTERVIEW????
HELLO?
This is good, because it will settle the issue of whether it could, physically, have been done.
Next we're going to hear, yes the documents were fake but the content is factual.