Replies

Look particularly at the word "interference", at the beginning of the second line. It contains four 'e's. Two are at the baseline; two are raised slightly above the baseline. It is inconsistent, even on the same line, within the same word.

This isn't an artifact of a fax, or a copy distortion; if that were true, all 'e' elements would be equally misplaced. These character drifts must necessarily exist in the original document. Similar drifts exist throughout, and for other letters.

I wanted to say a word about the lefties' assertion that character drifts are indications of a typewriter. I just got rid of an Epson inkjet because it did exactly the same thing -- couldn't get any lines straight not within a word or without. So a slippery carriage does not a typewriter make. That's all. Thanks for a great analysis all.

Thanks, but again - you cannot declare an original authentic from a photocopy etc. If you have a chain of custody, testimony etc, perhaps - but by itself NO. Rather has no original document, nor a chain of custody. Perhaps now the news media will realize their "confidential" sources can hurt their credibility.

Look particularly at the word "interference", at the beginning of the second line. It contains four 'e's. Two are at the baseline; two are raised slightly above the baseline. It is inconsistent, even on the same line, within the same word.
This isn't an artifact of a fax, or a copy distortion; if that were true, all 'e' elements would be equally misplaced. These character drifts must necessarily exist in the original document. Similar drifts exist throughout, and for other letters.

I wanted to say a word about the lefties' assertion that character drifts are indications of a typewriter. I just got rid of an Epson inkjet because it did exactly the same thing -- couldn't get any lines straight not within a word or without. So a slippery carriage does not a typewriter make. That's all. Thanks for a great analysis all.

Or look at this obvious fake that I created in Photoshop. Once you rotate the text to get the slant from the forged documents, you also get character drift. I can assure that this document was never printed and was not from 1972. We've been assuming this is a direct copy of a Word document, but a forger could easily have done everything seen in the memos using photoshop, even the letter blurring and dots on the page that imply this was photocopied.

Has anyone considered too that these aberrations were caused by printing on slightly textured and bleedable paper?
Would be interesting to try.