Posted on 09/10/2004 2:54:13 PM PDT by jaycost
There is a link to a PDF Document. You'll note that it is on the third page at the top. This must be what CBS is hinting at in its press release.
The differences between this document and the CBS forgeries are quantum.
If this is what CBS is going to hang its hat on, then they are *really* sunk. What is worse? Coming clean when you are caught, or making a lame excuse?
where is the link?
"We didn't do it, nobody saw us do it, you can't prove anything."
-PJ
"* The memos were written using a proportional typeface, where letters take up variable space according to their size, rather than fixed-pitch typeface used on typewriters, where each letter is allotted the same space. Proportional typefaces are available only on computers or on very high-end typewriters that were unlikely to be used by the National Guard.
* The memos include superscript, i.e. the "th" in "187th" appears above the line in a smaller font. Superscript was not available on typrwriters.
* The memos inclued "curly" apostrophes rather than straight apostrophes found on typewriters.
* The font used in the memos is Times Roman, which was in use for printing but not in typewriters. The Haas Atlas--the bible of fonts--does not list Times Roman as an available font for typewriters.
* The vertical spacing used in the memos, measured at 13 points, is not available in typewriters, and only became possible with the advent of computers."
Don't you find it a little odd that there's only one superscript "th" on that report...all the others are in regular type.
In a word - yes!
what page on the pdf is it on i cant find .... its like 17 pages long...
ITs highly arguable that superscript is even printed by a typewrite or even a machine, it is ver blurry and you cant quite make out what it is, you look at it and assume you are looking at a th. Could have been a mistake whiteouted over and then the th penned in.
Either way the type is completely wrong.
Not only that, but the pdf is in a USAToday dot com link.
Ya think maybe Michael Moore "produced" it?
It's not enough to find a document from the era with the "th" superscript. There may well have been some even many typewriters capable of printing the "th" superscript in 1968. But the question is, were there any typewriters capable of printing the "th" superscript within the limited universe of machines that could also have produced the document in question? Thus pointing to a document with courier font for example and a superscripted 'th' will prove nothing whatsoever because the document in question was typed by a machine within a completely different category of typewriters.
There is a superscripted TH available on some typewriters. I questionned this yesterday. However, the TH superscript in the legit Bush documents is the result of a wing-ding key, as I speculated yesterday. The two letters are crushed together and do not extend above the top line of the standard, tall characters. This is plainly unrelated to the superscript on the forged documents.
Not news; you can find a couple of superscript "th"s in http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/9-Miscellaneous.pdf
Superscript "th"s are just one of many things that need explaining in the memos. And they just keep coming. The fact that you can create an identical document in Word using default fonts, spacing and margins seals the deal: it's a forgery.
"It's the seriousness of the charge" that matters.
rather will give the docs minimal time,then spend the rest of the time demanding President Bush answer these serious charges.
Facts be damned,this is dem 101.
And you can also see that most of the "th"'s were not superscripted, but were jsut typed in line as in "4th"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.