Here are the questions:
1. Where is the origin of the documents, if they didn't come from the son or widow? Unless you can point to another close relative...this starts to become a questionable source.
2. If you can't produce other documents in this same group, from perhaps the same typewriter (there would only be one in the house or one in the squadron area...face it...Guard units didn't get nothing much in terms of hardware support)....then your origin of documents is suspicious.
3. Because of the font and spacing problems...this had to be fake...but from who? My guess is a Texas Demo team. It can't be the work of one individual. And based on the amount of effort...it would require a fair amount of homework to know the correct words to say. I'm guessing some young liberal lefty's out of Austin.
4. Did the Democratic national leadership know about this "joke"? I would hope not...but nothing would surprise me.
5. Did the Democratic national leadership call up their CBS source...a naive source probably...and hint that this would be available via someone? Could have happened...it does appear that 60 Minutes went very quickly about using it, and barely did any research. For a pro-operation like 60 minutes...this is very unusual.
6. Did Dan Rather know about the document?
7. If it is a forged document...will there be a national apology to the Killian family and to George Bush? If I were the family...I'd find the guy who wrote the document and demand well over $10 million in damages attributed to Col's good name.
8. Does this damage Kerry's campaign? If I were a member of the staff...I'd be demanding that everyone halt this Vietnam or Guard discussion immedately and start talking the economy. If they don't do that...they can forget about the entire election in two weeks.
Final Comment. This really opens the door for a nasty campaign in 2008...and I'm basically ashame of both parties. I'd rather talk national politics, the economy, and jobs...and all of these "punks" just want to keep talking Nam and Texas Guard...what the hell do I care about either one of them?
Robin Rather, or an associate.
Did Dan Rather know about the document?
See above.
I don't believe the Bush campaign has said one word about Viet Nam, aside from congratulating Kerry on his service. Nor have they uttered a complaint regarding the press scrutiny of the Texas Guard. In response to questions, they have simply provided the documentation.
The fact is that one party wants to deal in substantive issues, while the other one does not.
We had this same situation in September, 2002 -- after the Democrats had demanded a debate on Iraq all summer long. When they got what they had asked for, we discovered they didn't want to debate the issue nor be asked to vote on it. They had merely wanted Iraq as an election issue to campaign upon.
At the same time, the administration had developed and announced the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive war. Talk about something that warranted debate and a national dialogue! But, again, the Democrats wanted no part of a debate on this policy -- and avoided even addressing it.
It is true that we have been ill-served by the political discourse of the past four years. But the sole reason for this is the complete and total absence of a "loyal opposition".
If a substantive debate on real issues cannot be engaged because one side chooses to cheat, smear, distort and evade, it is not the fault of an administration which actually has to govern and is charged with taking action.
We are now at the point in our national political development where one of the two parties must be reformed -- in order to maintain some sort of future equilibrium. And it has become apparent that, before the Democrat party can be reformed, it must first be destroyed...at the polls.
You don't care that Kerry used three extremely minor wounds, one of which almost certainly did not qualify for a Purple Heart, in order to avoid finishing his one year tour in VietNam? I care.