[bcoffey]

From the article: "CBS can state 'with absolute certainty' that the disputed memos could have been produced on typewriters available in the early 1970s."

There's a simple way for CBS to resolve this: do a demonstration with a 1970s typewriter to which the TANG would have had access.

And if I can think of this, so can CBS.... their silence is deafening!

[Sloth]

There's a simple way for CBS to resolve this: do a demonstration with a 1970s typewriter to which the TANG would have had access.

Heck, I'd be shocked if they could do it with any typewriter, anywhere.

[Rome2000]

Document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines of Paradise Valley, Ariz., who examined the documents for the AP, said she was "virtually certain" they were generated by computer.

Lines said that meant she could testify in court that, beyond a reasonable doubt, her opinion was that the memos were written on a computer.

Dan Rather still thinks he is some kind of God whose word can't be called into question by the "pajama brigade".

Imbecile.

[GailA]

No they must produce the originals to be subjected to scientific testing for rag content, ink composition, paper size, and carbon dating. Only then can you be positively sure. Key strikes are finger prints of the typewriter. No 2 keys strike alike, and no 2 typewriters even the same model produce the same strike. The original type written doc will have indentations where the key struck the paper. A hunt and peck typist would have a different pattern than a fluent typist. If say the K key is worn or chipped it will show up when that key is used each and every time.

An electric or selectric or manual would each produce differing depths of key stroks on the paper.

A computer generated doc will have the ink applied to the surface not imbeded in the paper that a striking key produces.

And what does the Regulation sited in the one memo refer to? The Belmont Club says it's not orders for a physical.