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,inetnd 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. 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 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 available 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 deterioration occurs each time a document is reproduced, and the documents being analyzed outside of cbs have been photocopied, faxed, scanned and downloaded, and are far removed from the documents cbs started with. 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 newly discovered ones.
>> 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 signatures to be some of the most compelling evidence. We talked to him today by satellite. Are you surprised that questions come about these. We're not, but I was wondering if you're surprised.
>> I knew going in that this was dynamite one way or the other, and I knew that potentially it could do 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 jerry killian, the man credited with writing the documents. And paperwork, like these documents, was his specialty. He is standing by his judgement that the documents are real. When you read through these documents, is there any doubt in your mind that these are genuine?
>> Well, they are compatible with the way business was done at that time. They are compatible with the man I remember jerry killian being. I don't see anything in the documents that's discordant with what were the times, the situation or the people involved.
>> Rather: Strong says the highly charged political atmosphere of the guard at the time was perfectly represented in the new documents.
>> 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 moore has written two books critical of president bush and his service in the guard.
>> There's no doubt in my mind that these documents are stating accurately what we know took place, from the records that are available.
>> Rather:.
>> 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?
>> 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: The "60 minutes" report was based not solely on the recovered documents, but on a preponderance of evidence, including documents that were provided by unimpeachable sources and interviews with former officials of the texas national guard. If any definitive today the contrary of our story is found, we will report it.
God, really needs to show us a sign. Kerry and Rather really need to go down in flames.
Notice that the "expert" only talks about the handwriting, not the font issues.
As for the "superscript" the examples given by Rather are not "above" the line, no? Just compressed typefaces?
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 released by the white house itself show the same superscript. Here's one from 1968.
That's actually a good point. Unfortunately for Rather, the superscript found in other documents is completely different from the superscript in CBS documents.
The kern and height of a 1973-typewriter superscript is dissimilar from the kern and height of the CBS-document superscript. Therefore, Rather is providing evidence against his own documents with his failed obfuscation.
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 available since 1931.
The claim I've read is that the type was available for printing machines, not for typewriters. Is Rather claiming that these documents were produced in a printer shop instead of an office typewriter?
Listen closely. They are going to try to forge them a second time, better, and then allege that all the silly bits detected so far are due to scanning etc. New originals. It is a juvenile idea, to the technically inclined who have seen the PDFs etc. But they haven't given up.
>> "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."
It's the Kerry Offense! Trash the Guard. Whatever it takes to discredit the President.
I forget -- was Dan so worried about the "questions the story raised" when the GOP whistleblower leaked the DemonRat Senate committee memos on canning Bush's judicial nominees, or did he just focus on how they came to light?