Posted on 09/10/2004 3:18:38 PM PDT by Howlin
Edited on 09/10/2004 4:53:58 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Have at it.
******Transcript************
'KEY CHALLENGES TO NATIONAL GUARD DOCUMENTS ANSWERED'
Fri Sep 10 2004 19:03:11 ET
The biggest challenges to the authenticity of the documents featured in the 60 MINUTES segment on President Bush's Texas National Guard service are answered in a report to be broadcast on the CBS EVENING NEWS tonight (6:30-7:00 PM, ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network. The report states that the type style, typewriter and the superscript function critics claim did not exist at the time the memos from President Bush's former Texas National Guard commander were typed were indeed all available. In fact, similar raised "th" superscripts have been found on other National Guard documents the White House has released from the president's file.
Furthermore, Marcel Mately, the document and handwriting expert used to authenticate the documents for CBS News and 60 MINUTES, asserts that copies of the memos critics are examining have been degraded by reproduction though photocopying, computer scanning and faxing and are not reliable representations of the memos.
A transcript is attached:
BUSH DOCUMENTS
EVENING NEWS WITH DAN RATHER
9-10-04
Rather Lead In: There were attacks today on the CBS News "60 Minutes" report this week raising new questions about President Bush's Vietnam-era time in the Texas Air National Guard. The questions raised by our report include:
--Did a wealthy Texas oilman-friend of the Bush family use his influence with the speaker of the Texas House of Representatives .. to get George W. Bush a coveted slot in the National Guard .. keeping him out of the draft and any probable service IN Vietnam?
--Did Lieutenant Bush refuse a direct order from his commanding officer?
--Was Lieutenant. Bush suspended for failure to perform up to standards?
--Did Lieutenant Bush ever take a physical he was required and ordered to take? If not, why not?
--And did Lieutenant Bush, in fact, complete his commitment to the Guard?
These questions grew out of new witnesses and new evidence -- including documents written by Lieutenant Bush's squadron commander.
Today, on the internet and elsewhere, some people -- including many who are partisan political operatives -- concentrated not on the key questions the overall story raised but on the documents that were part of the support of the story.
They alleged the documents are FAKE.
Rather: MANY OF THOSE RAISING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CBS DOCUMENTS HAVE FOCUSED ON SOMETHING CALLED SUPERSCRIPT... A KEY THAT AUTOMATICALLY TYPES A RAISED "TH". CRITICS CLAIM TYPEWRITERS DIDN'T HAVE THAT ABILITY IN THE 70S. BUT SOME MODELS DID....IN FACT, OTHER BUSH MILITARY RECORDS ALREADY OFFICIALLY RELEASED BY THE WHITE HOUSE ITSELF SHOW THE SAME SUPERSCRIPT.
HERE'S ONE..... FROM 1968.
SOME ANALYSTS OUTSIDE CBS SAY THEY BELIEVE THE TYPEFACE ON THESE MEMOS IS NEW TIMES ROMAN.... WHICH THEY CLAIM WAS NOT AVAILABLE IN THE 1970S.
BUT THE OWNER OF THE COMPANY THAT DISTRIBUTES THIS TYPING STYLE.... SAYS IT HAS BEEN AVAILABE SINCE 1931. DOCUMENT AND HANDWRITING EXAMINER MARCEL MATLEY ANALYZED THE DOCUMENTS FOR CBS NEWS.
HE SAYS HE BELIEVES THEY ARE REAL...BUT IS CONCERNED ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT IS BEING EXAMINED BY SOME OF THE PEOPLE QUESTIONING THE DOCUMENTS....BECAUSE DETIORATION OCCURS EACH TIME A DOCUMENT IS REPRODUCED.....AND THE DOCUMENTS BEING ANALYZED OUTSIDE OF CBS HAVEBEEN PHOTOCOPIED, FAXED, SCANNED AND DOWNLOADED.... AND ARE FAR REMOVED FROM THE DOCUMENTS CBS STARTED WITH WHICH WERE ALSO PHOTOCOPIES.
DOCUMENT AND HANDWRITING EXAMINER MARCEL MATLEY DID THIS INTERVIEW WITH US PRIOR TO THE 60 MINUTES BROADCAST.
HE LOOKED AT THE DOCUMENTS AND THE SIGNATURES OF COLONEL JERRY KILLIAN.... COMPARING KNOWN DOCUMENTS WITH THE COLONEL'S SIGNATURE ON THE NEWSLY DISCOVERED ONES.
Matley: "WE LOOK BASICALLY AT WHAT'S CALLED SIGNIFICANT OR INSIGNIFICANT FEATURES TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S THE SAME PERSON OR NOT. I HAVE NO PROBLEM IDENTIFYING THEM.
I WOULD SAY BASED ON OUR AVAILABLE HANDWRITING EVIDENCE, YES. THIS IS THE SAME PERSON."
Rather: MATLEY FINDS THE SIGNAT'URES TO BE SOME OF THE MOST COMPELLING EVIDENCE...WE TALKED TO HIM AGAIN TODAY BY SATELLITE.
Matley "SINCE IT IS REPRESENTED THAT SOME OF THEM ARE DEFINITELY HIS... THEN WE CAN CONCLUDE THEY ARE HIS SIGNATURES."
Rather: "ARE YOU SURPRISED THAT QUESTIONS COME ABOUT THESE. WE'RE NOT, BUT I WAS WONDERING IF YOU'RE SURPRISED."
Matley: "I KNEW GOING IN THAT THIS WAS DYNAMITE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER AND I KNEW THAT POTENTIALLY IT WAS FAR MORE POTENTIAL DAMAGE TO ME PROFESSIONALLY THAN BENEFIT ME. AND I KNEW THAT. BUT WE SEEK THE TRUTH. THAT'S WHAT WE DO. YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO PUT YOURSELF OUT. TO SEEK THE TRUTH AND TAKE WHAT COMES FROM IT."
Rather: ROBERT STRONG WAS AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER FOR THE TEXAS AIR NATIONAL GUARD DURING THE VIETNAM YEARS. HE KNEW COL. JERRY KILLIAN, THE MAN CREDITED WITH WRITING THE DOCUMENTS.... AND PAPER WORK... LIKE THESE DOCUMENTS...WAS HIS SPECIALTY. HE IS STANDING BY HIS JUDGEMENT THAT THE DOCUMENTS ARE REAL.
Rather: "WHEN YOU READ THROUGH THESE DOCUMENTS, IS THERE ANY DOUBT IN YOUR MIND THAT THESE ARE GENUINE?"
Strong: "WELL,, THEY ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE WAY BUSINESS WAS DONE AT THAT TIME. THEY ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE MAN THAT I REMEMBER JERRY KILLIAN BEING. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT'S DISCORDANT WITH WHAT WERE THE TIMES, WHAT WERE THE SITUATION OR WHAT WERE THE PEOPLE INVOLVED."
Rather: STRONG SAYS THE HIGHLY CHARGED POLITICAL ATMOSPHERE OF THE GUARD AT THE TIME... WAS PERFECTLY REPRESENTED IN THE NEW DOCUMENTS
Strong: "IT VERGED ON OUTRIGHT CORRUPTION IN TERMS OF THE FAVORS THAT WERE DONE, THE POWER THAT WAS TRADED. AND IT WAS UNCONSCIONABLE. FROM A MORAL AND ETHICAL STANDPOINT. IT WAS UNCONSCIONABLE."
Rather: IT IS THE INFORMATION IN THE NEW DOCUMENTS THAT IS MOST COMPELLING FOR PEOPLE FAMILIAR WITH PRESIDENT BUSH'S RECORD IN THE NATIONAL GUARD. AUTHOR JIM MORE HAS WRITTEN TWO BOOKS ON THE SUBJECT.
Rather: "YOU'VE STUDIED PRESIDENT BUSH'S RECORDS FOR 10 YEARS.. ARE THESE DOCUMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE RECORD AS YOU KNOW IT?"
Moore: "THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY CONSISTENT WITH THE RECORDS AS I KNOW IT."
Rather: "PUT IT IN CONTEXT AND PERSPECTIVE FOR US ... THE STORY AND WHAT WE CALL THE COUNTERATTACK ON THE STORY. WHERE ARE WE RIGHT NOW?
Moore "I THINK WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS SOME INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS HAVE COME OUT. THE WHITE HOUSE, YOU SHOULD REMEMBER, HAS NOT DISCREDITED THE DOCUMENTS. THEY'RE RELYING ON THE BLOGOSPHERE AND OTHER PEOPLE TO DO THAT. BECAUSE THE WHITE HOUSE PROBABLY KNOWS THESE DOCUMENTS ARE IN FACT REAL."
Rather Tag: The "60 Minutes" report was based NOT solely on the recovered documents .. but on a preponderance of evidence .. including documents that were provided by un-impeachable sources .. and interviews with former officials of the Texas National Guard. If any definitive evidence to the contrary of our story is found, we will report it.
So far, there is none.
And he won't shut up. LOL
placemark
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/1212724/posts?page=1
I saw this interview..another good Fox interview.
Geneva was the Arial or Helvetica of the early mac world. That much I do remember. (really, I do...I think...)
In other news, MY phone rang right before the the beginning of this show, so once again I missed Hannity's interview with Killian's family members. GRRRRRRR, I think I'm taking my phone off the hook, till November.
Anyone can cut and paste a signature. Anyone can simulate a signature and photocopy it. This handwriting expert was working with copies. His opinion is worthless. CBS knows where the original can be found, so why didn't they have the handwriting expert examine the original?
Because the original is a fake, that's why.
He also said that this situation has pushed him over the edge. He _was_ going to skip the election this year - he just couldn't bring himself to vote for Kerry. Now, however, he's decided to cast his vote for President Bush!
#####
Every new slam by Kerry and the DNC brings a few more voters over to President Bush! Let us pray that he stays protected from the ultimate slam, as the kool-aid drinkers grow more desperate.
Why report to the commander? Is he gonna check the prostate?
See the post I made from RedState on the Boston Globe's sole source for that article. It will just amaze you.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1212732/posts
I have seen (not done by me) a defense to a drug-dealing charge that the dealer said "The law doesn't apply to me, because I was selling talcum powder as heroin." LOL.
Congressman Billybob
Thanks for the link;I missed that thread. There is just NO way that I'm EVER going to be able to keep on top of this. LOL
See #1189
CBS says they don't have the original. With that admission, they must also admit that they can prove absolutely nothing about authenticity....certainly not regarding a signature.
Even I can copy my own signature to another document and print out a new "original."
I think my thread was pulled, maybe because I linked to a blogsite that had the Fox News transcript rather than to the Fox news site itself. My thread had the interview with Col Compenni, who served with Pres Bush at TANG at the same time, and who had major problems with the CBS documents. Here's my thread comment about the interview:
>
It dawned on me that Col Campenni says he has contemporary TANG documents from exactly the same time period, and from exactly the same TANG office (and maybe office typewriter) as the genuine Bush ones and when the CBS documents were supposedly typed up. If he could post those on the web where they could be compared to what we know is genuine and the CBS forgeries?? Anyone able to contact him through Fox News perhaps???
Mine rang when CBS/Dan came on and then the inlaws came over ... grrrr
I need to move and disconnect the phone till Nov .. LOL
That "partisan" crap really ticks me off. Yes, I'm a conservative, but I was a skeptic before I became a conservative. In fact, it was my skepticism that turned me into a conservative in the first place.
I ignored the first threads on this (tin-foil- I thought) until something in one of the titles drew my attention. Now, after going through the evidence and the reports of the Lt. Col.'s family, etc. I am absolutely convinced that these are forgeries.
And I'm rarely absolutely convinced of anything.
I've sent three emails to CBS, want to see them? OK. :)
# 1 - (angry email sent just after CBS broadcast tonight)
Guess what guys - we're onto you. Everyone knows the docs are forgeries. Interesting too, that Dan seemed nervous. Oh I can't imagine why. CBS has lost whatever little tiny bit of credibility they had left, and Dan drove the cart over the cliff. Rest in peace, CBS.
#2 - (after I calmed down a bit)
We're not buying the rebuttal,and here are a few of the reasons why.
1. Your expert was an expert in handwriting, not documents. You ignored everything about the document itself - facets of the accuracy of military style using contemporary examples, whether or not certain abbreviations were used such as the date, the written rank of the signing officer, how things were signed, etc.
2. You focused on the superscript as if the additional example you cited was the same when it was not. And besides, it was typed in Courier.
3. You twisted the truth in that Times New Roman may have been available since 1931 but not on personal typewriters.
4. You completely ignored every single reason why the typeset is suspect, and there are many.
5. Your people contacted Killian's family, but dismissed their opinions because they didn't further your agenda. You also ignored the fact that Killian filed glowing reports of Bush that ARE authentic.
6. You made the ridiculous claim that the copies you provided on your website would be somehow degenerated by the time internet "partisans" perused them, as if due to the magic of computers, the "partisans'" copies wouldn't be identical to yours.
7. You simply rehashed the same things, using the same witnesses, as in the original broadcast without once bringing on anyone new or independent of your investigation, which is VERY telling.
If we were wrong, you'd have this independently investigated. The thing is, we know. And you know that we know. And the best part is, no more biased media using stories to achieve a political end. You call the internet bloggers partisan, when in fact it is you who has brought American media to this point by reporting the news how you think we should see it rather than how it should be told. I could care less whether the fact that you bought a forged set of goods affects this election one way or the other. Much more important is that you're finally being forced to face the very populace you try to affect every night.
Change or die, liberal media. This won't be the last story you're called on, unless you choose to be honest and fair.
XXXXXXXXX XXXX
Ohio
3. - to my local affiliate
He's full of it, and we all know it. There are countless things he did not address in his "rebuttal" tonight. The docs are forged, no doubt. Affiliates should be making loud complains as to his "journalistic" methods. He's done, and he knows it. You know it too.
Damn drug dealers.....(*&_(*
Next thing ya know they'll be news anchors!
:>)
I have posted non stop it seems on this story...I may go watch frivolous TV fare....;)..There are some great threads...My favorites list is loaded lest I lose anything!
In an Orwellian sense he did. He has temporarily convinced people that watch his program that he is right and righteous. Perhaps when he is proven wrong Ivan will dominate the news. It was the worst case of deceiving the public I have seen in recent memory.
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.