Skip to comments.
FReeper Research Needed: What Evidence is There that the DNC or Kerry Gave CBS the Forged Docs?
Posted on 09/14/2004 5:42:26 AM PDT by jmstein7
Once again, there is an opportunity for FReeper research to make a big difference in this election.
If you have any evidence on the following questions, please post it to this thread.
1) Anything that suggests that the DNC is the source of the forged memos, i.e. that the DNC provided CBS with the forged Guard documents
2) Anything that suggests that the Kerry campaign is the source of the forged memos, i.e. that Kerry's camp provided CBS with the forged Guard documents
If we can get this evidence and make the connection, and get it out to the 'blogosphere, this election will be over.
Start digging!
TOPICS: Announcements; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: kerrygate; rathergate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-157 next last
To: 5by5
Good point - plausible deniability. The papers probably arrived at the desk of a predetermined person from an anonymous source. Arrival was probably in front of a witness (possibly a dupe). The outer envelope contained an inner envelope. The outer envelope was destroyed. Eliminates finger prints, DNA, creates plausible denial etc. In essence, if they keep their mouths shut, they won't get caught..
However, they will brag. Anyone into political chat rooms? Like hackers, they will brag there!
101
posted on
09/14/2004 7:31:57 AM PDT
by
Henchman
(Demand an inquiry by the media into Kerry's dealing with the VC in PARIS!)
To: Red Badger
That is my point.
Dan Rather unwittingly fingered military higher-ups.
102
posted on
09/14/2004 7:33:21 AM PDT
by
mabelkitty
(Watch for a CBS employee in a trench coat going by DeepWord.....)
To: Congressman Billybob
Ouch!
Pray for W and Our Troops
103
posted on
09/14/2004 7:34:27 AM PDT
by
bray
(Some men have skeletons in their closets, some have killing fields!!)
To: jmstein7
One of the documents had the expression "CYA" at the top of the page. Does anyone with a military background know if this kind of slang was allowed in , or commonly found in, official military documents of that era? It seems to me that the slightly vulgar "CYA" didn't come into common usage until the 1980's - am I wrong?
To: cookcounty; All
Personally, I have no leads. I just thought that others might.
105
posted on
09/14/2004 7:41:38 AM PDT
by
jmstein7
(A Judge not bound by the original meaning of the Constitution interprets nothing but his own mind.)
To: mabelkitty
Unwittingly?.....Apropos wording....
106
posted on
09/14/2004 7:42:57 AM PDT
by
Red Badger
(If you shoot from the hip enough times, eventually you'll shoot yourself in the a$$......)
To: jmstein7
One bit of evidence: when asked directly, "Did the Kerry campaign give you the documents?" CBS said they weren't going to answer the question.
Duh!
107
posted on
09/14/2004 7:44:38 AM PDT
by
mrobison
(We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams.)
To: jmstein7
Who else would have made such a bone head maneuver? The changing of the higher level rats in recent weeks was not just a coincidence.
Doogle
108
posted on
09/14/2004 7:48:54 AM PDT
by
Doogle
(USAF...8th AF...Wolf Pack...408MMS ....Ubon,Thailand in "69" Night Line Delivery.AMMO)
To: Aunt Polgara
I am convinced that the forger was a non-geek of at least 35-40 years of age
I agree, but I think your estimate may be too young. I'm 29 years old and was never tought to use "l's" in place of "1's." Simalarly, I was tought to single space after a sentance in contradiction to the double space that appears in the memos. My elders teaching me at the time were 15- 20 years older than myself, therefore I find it likely that the suspect in question is late 40's to early 50's. This would futher emphasize the simplistic errors of the subscript default (backspace cancellation) ect... It is less likely that a person in this age bracket would be proficient in MSWord
109
posted on
09/14/2004 7:54:39 AM PDT
by
icarix
To: jmstein7
Thank you so much for the ping to the research! Unless evidence is forthcoming from CBS (which is very doubtful) - I don't believe you will be able to make the 100% case for the anti-Bush crowd, i.e. the core Kerry supporters.
However, the independent voters may be persuaded by the dog who didn't bark. IOW, if the DNC continues to stand with CBS while all the others fall away under the weight of forgery evidence, then the DNC will appear guilty by their silence.
BTW, and this is just a personal reflection on the issue, I wonder if Rather subconsciously suggested the identity of his source by calling him/her "unimpeachable" - i.e. Clinton. If I were to "follow the money" (which is power) at the DNC, the Clintons stand to benefit the most by Kerry's failure - both in 2008 and retaining control of the DNC until Hillary can win the White House. IMHO, a hoax on Rather would be a good way to assure that Kerry would fail and the Clintons have a track record of destroying their close friends and supporters along the way.
To: jmstein7
They take this stuff very seriously. VERY seriously. If we contact them (if enough of us contact them), they WILL investigate.I was going to wait until I read all the replies before I posted, however may I comment on a concern that I have?
When Clinton's filthy laundry was being aired out, MSM and the DNC buried it, and a few people as well. What's going on with Kerry? The DNC is allowing him to die a slow, agonizing political death. They then come up with these sloppy forgeries to try and discredit President Bush's service record. They're better (slimier) than this!
My concern is that something is very wrong with this picture. This is too easy. Am I the only one who is thinking this thought? I don't know if the FBI would do anything, although they have a legal obligation to do so.
111
posted on
09/14/2004 8:23:09 AM PDT
by
TheSpottedOwl
("In the Kingdom of the Deluded, the Most Outrageous Liar is King".)
To: Dems_R_Losers
I really believe that Dan Rather had no clue that these memos were fakes when he went on the air last Wednesday.
I would gamble this month's paycheck that Dan Rather has retired more typewriters than I've had computers in my lifetime. Add in his hundreds of hours reviewing government documents as part of his job and I'd gamble to say that there is not a court in the nation which wouldn't recognize him as an expert at identifying government documents.
He knew the memos as presented on the air and as posted on the CBS.com website and faxed to the White House were fakes. Sure, he might have presumed that they were re-typed at some point to either cover the source, or to make them more presentable for television.
And that is his out, if there ever is an investigation by the FBI, Secret Service or Department of Defense. He can rest his defense on the idea that the content of the memos was his story, not the format. Unfortunately, the content doesn't even stand up to examination, but doubtful that he'll ever feel the legal heat that he deserves.
112
posted on
09/14/2004 8:33:51 AM PDT
by
kingu
(Which would you bet on? Iraq and Afghanistan? Or Haiti and Kosovo?)
To: jmstein7
What about the RNC and the BUSH CHEYNEY campaign getting involved by demanding the sourcing from ABC and USA Today?
Those two media outlets don't seem to have a dog in this hunt--or at least don't have their journalistic integrity tied up in this the way CBS and Rather do.
If they have the source, and feel there is a good possibility that the docs were forged, don't ABC and USA Today have an obligation under the Journalists Code of Ethics to come forward and reveal the source in this case?
(Somebody posted that mythical ethics document here yesterday)
To: icarix
I agree, but I think your estimate may be too young. I'm 29 years old and was never tought to use "l's" in place of "1's." I took typing at High School in about 69-70 and was taught both the L trick and two spaces after a '.'
Those typewriters had no "1" key, or for that matter, no "0" key.
They were also probably somewhat old. Typewriters that I later purchased for college all had the "new" keys.
It took some effort to unlearn this when I started to use computers regularly.
To: icarix
PS.
I am 50 years old.
Which is right in line with your estimate.
To: All; floriduh voter
ping to 57 for compilation thread.
116
posted on
09/14/2004 8:51:57 AM PDT
by
floriduh voter
(www.conservative-spirit.org NATIONAL & FLORIDA ISSUES)
To: dinasour
To this day I still use 2 spaces after a Period (.). Funny younger folks don't...
117
posted on
09/14/2004 8:54:14 AM PDT
by
antivenom
("Never argue with an idiot, he'll bring you down to his level - then beat you with experience.")
To: antivenom
To this day I still use 2 spaces after a Period (.). Funny younger folks don't... Me too. I've argued about this with my son, who says I'm crazy.
I'm not crazy, just old.
To: TheSpottedOwl
Yes, you are.
You are thinking in terms of 1998.
That was six years ago.
The internet and home computers (let alone work computers and internet access) were not nearly as prevalent as today.
Clinton would never win if he ran in the age of information.
119
posted on
09/14/2004 9:01:03 AM PDT
by
mabelkitty
(Watch for a CBS employee in a trench coat going by DeepWord.....)
To: All
120
posted on
09/14/2004 9:02:46 AM PDT
by
mabelkitty
(Watch for a CBS employee in a trench coat going by DeepWord.....)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-157 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson