Ergo, this "photo" is legit?
I Don't Think So!
Posted on 09/14/2004 3:18:05 PM PDT by Redcoat LI
Lt Col Killian's secretary says she didn't type the docs. From the Dallas Morning News (registration required):
"The former secretary for the Texas Air National Guard colonel who supposedly authored memos critical of President Bush’s Guard service said Tuesday that the documents are fake, but that they reflect real documents that once existed.
Marian Carr Knox, who worked from 1956 to 1979 at Ellington Air Force Base in Houston, said she prided herself on meticulous typing, and the memos first disclosed by CBS News last week were not her work.
“These are not real,” she told The Dallas Morning News after examining copies of the disputed memos for the first time. 'They’re not what I typed, and I would have typed them for him.'"
"reflected thinking at the time"
that is pure DNC talking point. They are trying to recover the story by reporting gossip made by DEAD people.
Dead voters, Dead gossip.
and YET all the LIVING people who knew Killian, were officers at the Guard and DISPUT SUCH BS are conveeeeeniently not included in the ABC story.
She may be a "sweet old lady" but she is a LYING sweet old lady.
Related thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1216011/posts
The rest is just partisan supposition.
they just mentioned that, then the lady who mentioned it turned and started attacking the swiftboat vets. the guy from microsoft as well and the whole panel chewed her head off.
What channel/network was this?
Whatever. Why then did they make sure to paste in an (at best) poor copy of Killian's signature if it wasn't a forgery attempt? Why not say it's a transcription and include the hand written original?
It doesn't work for the Kensington Stone (look it up) and it doesn't work for Dan Rather.
Mara Lliason, I believe. Dark hair, bright lipstick...
Pure DNC talking point. She is making and unconfirmable lie in order to provide a substance to bypass the forgeries to go to the substance.
She is a liar.
Where was she during the governer's race?
Where was she during the 2000 race?
Why did she not type other CYA memos?
ANSWER: BECAUSE THERE WAS NO GOSSIP!
ANSWER: BECAUSE SHE IS LYING FOR THE DNC!
She is a pathetic old lady who is seeking one moment in the light because she has been forgotten by her family or worse.
The DNC made her feel important to support the BIG LIE propaganda campaign (see adolph hitler) and she bought it faster than you can say "I feel your pain."
If there were any real documents, they would be put out there fast. What would be the point of making forgeries?
How old was she during the Texas governor's race?
Where was she then?
How old was she during his congressional race?
Where was she then?
How old was she during the 2000 race?
Where was she then?
Why disclose gossip now?
ANSWER: she is lying.
Imagine the fun a lawyer would have tearing her "story" to shreads. Mean old lady by the end of cross.
Excellent point.
The point of forgeries is to validate the "gossip" story.
The lie of the forgeries exposes the lie of the story.
CBS could not reopen the NG story YET AGAIN unless they had something "new" hence the forgeries.
Now that the forgeries are exposed, the "new new" LIE is this "old lady" giving heresay about gossip which validates the admitted forgeries.
(honest it is counterfit money but because it looks like real money you should accept it as if it is real money.)
There is NO JURY in the world that would accept her testimony as truthful.
She is a shill for the DNC and she is an sad pathetic useful idiot who is ignorant enough to let herself be used this way.
I agree. That was my point that I so vaguely made.
However, she can't very well say answer the charges even though the documents are false - that's Dan Rather's line.
They are scraping the bottom of the barrel - first thing out of her mouth is "selected, not elected".
Wonder if she is a member of the Travis County Dems?
Could well be. She's believable as the leftist 'rat who started the ball rolling.
Over the last 20 years or so, I have had quite a few secretaries and, as they are called now, administrative assistants. They all knew far more than I ever did about how documents got produced, copied, filed, shipped, and what kind of typing, computing, faxing and copying machines were about. On those points, the Granny is probably highly reliable. But I never share my political views with them, I don’t discuss issues about my partners or senior staff with them, and if one of them claimed to know my views on those subjects they would be lying. And, of course, she is a partisan. So, she is likely to be reliable on the typing issue, where she is making an admission against interest, not reliable on the substance issue. That won’t be how the MSM spin it, but that is the fair way to look at it. The bottom line is the memos are forgeries, and the issue is not what conflicting witnesses say about the views of a man who died 20 years ago, but who committed the forgery in 2004.
Odd she strikes me as a mean old lady.
Where was she in ALL of Bush's previous campaings?
How about when her boss was alive and bush ran for public office?
What were the other cya memos she may have typed?
Convenient she only remembers gossip in 2004 and there are zero legitimate memos to support her gossip.
Oddly this is exactly the kind of journalism the MSM accuses Drudge of covering.
She comes across as an old lady lying and thinks she can get away with it because she is a "sweet old lady".
The type that will cut in line at the theater and say "oh there is a line?"
The type that will cause an accident that kills someone and just say "I have a perfect driving record for 50 years" or "they came speeding out of nowhere".
She is just plain pathetic.
Odd that someone of that rank would commit a court marshal offence and sign it.
Ergo, this "photo" is legit?
I Don't Think So!
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.