Anatomy of a Forgery

The American Spectator ^ | 9-10-4 | Washington Prowler

[hope]

Print Article         Close Window

Anatomy of a Forgery

By The Prowler

Published 9/10/2004 12:09:06 AM

More than six weeks ago, an opposition research staffer for the Democratic National Committee received documents purportedly written by President George W. Bush's Texas Air National Guard squadron commander, the late Col. Jerry Killian. The oppo researcher claimed the source was "a retired military officer." According to a DNC staffer, the documents were seen by both senior staff members at the DNC, as well as the Kerry campaign. "More than a couple people heard about the papers," says the DNC staffer. "I've heard that they ended up with the Kerry campaign, for them to decide to how to proceed, and presumably they were handed over to 60 Minutes, which used them the other night. But I know this much. When there was discussion here, there were doubts raised about their authenticity." The concerns arose from the sourcing. "It wasn't clear that our source for the documents would have had access to them. Our person couldn't confirm from what file, from what original source they came from." The documents that CBS News used were not documents from any of Bush's personnel files from his time in the National Guard. Rather, CBS News stated that they were documents uncovered in the personnel files of Killian. That would explain why the White House or the Pentagon had never before released or even seen them. According to a Kerry campaign source, there was little gossip about the supposedly hot documents inside the office of the campaign on McPherson Square. "Those documents were not something anyone was talking about or trying to generate buzz on," says the staffer. "It wasn't like there were small groups of people talking about this as a bombshell. I think people here weren't sure what to make of it, because provenance of these documents was uncertain." A CBS producer, who initially tipped off The Prowler about the 60 Minutes story, says that despite seeking professional assurances that the documents were legitimate, there was uncertainty even among the group of producers and researchers working on the story. "The problem was we had one set of documents from Bush's file that had Killian calling Bush 'an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot.' And someone who Killian said 'performed in an outstanding manner.' Then you have these new documents and the tone and content are so different." The CBS producer said that some alarms bells went off last week when the signatures and initials of Killian on the documents in hand did not match up with other documents available on the public record, but producers chose to move ahead with the story. "This was too hot not to push. If there were doubts, those people didn't show it," says the producer, who works on a rival CBS News program. Now, the producer says, there is growing concern inside the building on 57th Street that they may have been suckered by the Kerry campaign. "There is a school of thought here that the Kerry people dumped this in our laps, figuring we'd do the heavy lifting on the story. That maybe they had doubts about these documents but hoped we'd get more information," says the producer. "If that's the case, then we're bigger fools than we already appear to be judging by all the chatter about how these documents could be forgeries." ABC News' political unit held a conference call at 7:00 p.m. Thursday evening to discuss the memo and its potential ramifications should the documents turn out to be a forgery. That meeting took place around the time that the deceased Killian's son made public statements questioning the documents' authenticity. According to one ABC News employee, some reporters believe that the Kerry campaign as well as the DNC were parties in duping CBS, but a smaller segment believe that both the DNC and the Kerry campaign were duped by Karl Rove, who would have engineered the flap to embarrass the opposition.

Subscribe

[expatpat]

I understand it came from Texas Veterans for Truth(!), so it was probably a socialist Texas mil officer.

[shhrubbery!]

The oppo researcher claimed the source was "a retired military officer." Wesley Clark, perhaps.....Or John Kerry

Don't forget Carville. A retired marine, sadly.

[Preachin']

"...the documents were seen by both senior staff members at the DNC, as well as the Kerry campaign."


That little fact will destroy the democrats.

And they thought Watergate was bad.

[YaYa123]

You brilliantly said; "This whole document scandal is unreal. Like watching the Watergate scandal unfold in a 24 hour timeframe."

How well I remember that long, drawn out agony! Thank God now we have the internet, armchair sleuths, and conservative voices, or the DNC/Kerry/CBS, might have gotten away with this campaign hoax.

[sitetest]

If this pans out as true - DNC and Kerry campaign put the document sources in touch with CBS, Mr. Kerry will struggle to hold 40% of the vote in November.

[TXBSAFH]

I hear they are renaming the San Andreas fault after the president. That way the next earthquake will be Bush's fault. This crud is getting ridiculous

[handy]

Thanks for posting the story. The AS serve is slammed.

[Pete]

But the Force gives Rove power over weaker minds

"There are no superscripts in these documents"
"There are no superscripts in these documents"

"These are fine to use on air"
"These are fine to use on air"

"Move along"
"Move along."

[handy]

These brainiac producers that pushed the story because it was "hot", instead of erring on the side of caution, just saw there careers vanish into thin air. TPTB at CBS are going to punish the Kerry campaign ruthlessly...

Never underestimate the power of greed. There are producers at CBS who did not work on the story that would love to move up & get the jobs of the ones that did work on the story. Notice the source for this is a CBS producer.

The question is, when will someone go on the record that the DNC is the source for the documents.

Already the Dem spiners are saying the docs can from a FOIA request. Not True CBS already said the docs came from a personal file, not a government file.

[jokar]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1210662/posts?page=83#47 Freeper Buckhead brings down Rather. To: Howlin Howlin, every single one of these memos to file is in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatino or Times New Roman. In 1972 people used typewriters for this sort of thing, and typewriters used monospaced fonts. The use of proportionally spaced fonts did not come into common use for office memos until the introduction of laser printers, word processing software, and personal computers. They were not widespread until the mid to late 90's. Before then, you needed typesetting equipment, and that wasn't used for personal memos to file. Even the Wang systems that were dominant in the mid 80's used monospaced fonts. I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old. This should be pursued aggressively.

47 posted on 09/08/2004 8:59:43 PM PDT by Buckhead

[agrace]

This tinfoil hat is comfy.

Snort. Actually, I think mine fits better. Mine is receiving messages that the Clintons set it up. ;)

[Darksheare]

I admit it, it was my fault.
I did it to crush and humiliate Dan Rather.
It was cleverly orchestrated specifically to target the guy with the biggest ego in the propaganda business.
And I did it on purpose with malice aforethought.
And I enjoyed it.
Ice tea anyone?
/ joke

[agrace]

ROFLOL

[Darksheare]

No, No!
It's my fault!
All mine!

Or am I the grassy knoll?


Let me get back to you on this, I have to consult my handbook on whether It's my fault today or if I'm supposed ot be the grassy knoll today.
Hmm..
/ joke

[GSWarrior]

The real tipoff that the memos were fakes was the fact that Killian emailed them ...

Heh heh heh!

[Cicero]

I think it's an eye-opener that The Prowler has laid out the path these documents took: From a mysterious source to the DNC to the Kerry campaign to CBS.

An anonymous source at CBS also says that the people working on the story suspected its authenticity, but their bosses said to go ahead with it anyway.

Here's my analysis. The mainstream media has done this kind of thing at least a thousand times since 1992. A story comes in over the transom from the DNC, or during the clinton years was faxed from the White House basement, that story goes to one of their writers for a little polish, and it's released the very next day. "Talking points" was another name for this well-known process--from the DNC politicians straight to the press and then to the public, nothing but a series of Democrat propaganda releases.

During the clinton years, the media ceased to worry about whether the stories were true. It didn't matter. No one held them accountable. They just moved on to the next lie, and although the internet sometimes shined a little light on this process, the majority of the voters didn't know about it.

So, in a way, there's nothing new about this National Guard Story. In fact it's nothing but the revival of an old propaganda campaign that was run last year too.

Nothing new but one thing. Forgery. That may be the angle that will hang them, because it looks as if CBS is about to be terminally embarrassed.

My fingers are crossed on this.

[ctdonath2]

Original:

Yesterday:

Overlaid:

No way would me fiddling for a few seconds in MS Word produce the exact same results as a 30-year-old typewritten document.

[NEBO]

Bush always gets blamed no matter what.

[Flashman_at_the_charge]

So can we expect to see the degrees of separation between Kerry and 60 Minutes?
</sarcasm>

[NEBO]

I really don't care what Bush or Kerry did 30 years ago so long as it wasn't anti-American treason. That would leave only Kerry as the guilty one.