Replies

1 posted on 09/14/2004 7:38:25 PM PDT by ambrose

2 posted on 09/14/2004 7:38:39 PM PDT by ambrose (http://www.swiftvets.com)

And, I read that she isn't a George Bush fan, but is telling the truth, despite her non-support of W.

3 posted on 09/14/2004 7:41:33 PM PDT by mattdono (Chris Matthew is Zell Miller's b*tch! (and the MSM is FR's b*tch!))

Over here.

Seems that MSM is spinning up a new line of defense.

The documents were forgeries, but they are forgeries of real documents.

Okay, so why not release the 'real' memos instead of the forgeries?

Huh?

And this all comes out after the documents are proven to be forgeries?

Would the MSM ever gone with these hearsay statements if there hadn't been a forged document controversy?

Are we in the Twilight Zone or something?

4 posted on 09/14/2004 7:41:39 PM PDT by ambrose (http://www.swiftvets.com)

Hmmmm. Could it be we have a source for the memo's???

5 posted on 09/14/2004 7:46:53 PM PDT by Rokke

The problem with that theory is the Colonel mentioned. He had retired by the date shown.

8 posted on 09/14/2004 8:10:57 PM PDT by Nateman (Rather : I did not have factual relations with the DNC!)

Killian, after he typed a personal memo, used to always take it over and show the secretary. It used to drive her nuts because she could never figure out how Killian was getting the proportional spacing.

19 posted on 09/14/2004 8:40:48 PM PDT by dano1

I noticed that the DUmmies haven't been saying much about the memos for the past few days but now they are weiging in again on this in their hilarious fashion. Here are some recent DUmmie posts on this topic:

To hell with the memos! I'd like to see the goddamned media focus on Bush's CURRENT record. (Which is only a continuation of his past record.)

Right. So CBS News presses ahead knowing that the documents... ...were forgeries? I don't think so. I bet for every one of the experts noted in the WP article, CBS has at least five stating that the documents are real.

There's nothing.. in the memos that is scandalous enough to warrant this level of hype over them being a possible forgery. So, what's all the fuss about?

If the documents are a forgery, only Karl Rove would have put those papers out there. It is consistent with his trickery. In the 2000 campaign, Rove put out braking news, the same day of the first debate, of a tape sent to him of Gore's debate strategy. No one ever saw the tape because it was all a lie placed by Karl Rove to steal news time away from the debate. Rove has played many of the same tricks in the past.

How do we know Karl Rove is not behind this ?

It's up to rove to prove he is not guilty of this Just like it's up to those that believe the docs are forged to prove they are forged.

There is NO evidence to collaborate forgery! That is why CBS is sticking to its story.

27 posted on 09/14/2004 8:50:37 PM PDT by PJ-Comix (I hereby nominate Buckhead as the FREEPER OF THE YEAR!!!)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794