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?
I've had this thought for a few days. Perhaps the original memo's were unreadable, or maybe they were longer and said things folks like Rather would just as soon not get out. So rather than releasing the originals, they just retype them and release the newer version. One that is more readable, and more accurately supports the story they are creating. But now, they face a dilemma. If they admit the documents are re-typed copies of the originals, they are admiting they forged documents. If they don't release the originals, they have to stand by obvious forgeries. There is no easy way out of the situation they've built for themselves. Either way, they lose credibility. Either way, Rather is done.