Posted on 09/13/2004 4:25:02 AM PDT by mcconnell
The Real Robert Strong in Powerlineblog clarifies that he never met and has no "personal knowledge" of Lt. Bush in TANG, cannot authenticate the documents (now deemed as fakes by numerous well known experts in the typography arena). Now, USAToday's interview of Strong described Staudt (who was listed in the fake 1973 CYA memo 18 months after Staudt retired) as a person who "Because of his political connections, he still had the potential to become involved in political decisions with Bush," in the attempt to question Bush' lackings in TANG.
USAToday is seemingly toying while not further advocating conclusively (or even acknowledging several pages of noted discrepancies of CBS' memos by leading typography experts) with the authenticity of the documents by questioning the idea surrounding the already deemed fake documents by attempting to fill the gap of Lt. Bush' "missing" TANG years with past interviews of Dean Roome, a former fighter pilot who lived with Bush in the early 1970s in 2002, and retired general Belisario Flores who ran the Texas Air Guard.
USAToday ends the article with the only acknowledgement that "It (the documents controversy) has sapped the power from an issue that had appeared to be a weapon for the Democrats against Bush."
This seems to come in line with the planned attack of coordination by the Kerry campaign as a signal for other libeal media to steer away on the authenticity of the documents to questioning heavily Bush' missing "years" in TANG.
Until USAToday acknowledge the discrepencies, we can only surmise them to be among the not-so-strange-bedfellows of Liberal media in getting together to push the CBS' memos completely out of the picture.
(Excerpt) Read more at powerlineblog.com ...
If the documents are a forgery, it means that somebody made a serious attempt to interfere with the election. I think we need a congressional investigation here.
A microscope would prove whether or not they were done with a ink jet or laser printer which floats the ink on the surface creating a RAISED letter vs the embeded keystruck letters created by a typewriter. The dot matrix pattern would be totally different from 30 year old technology than what today's printers do, the ink for a typewriter ribbon would be different than what is used in today's computer printers.
A proficient typist would have a smooth pattern of keystrokes vs the uneven of a hunt and peck typist style that at best Lt Col Killian would have done since he didn't know how to type. These would show up to a 'real' crime forensic expert quite easily. BUT you have to have the originals to do so!
Why hasn't an expert in forged documents been called in? Oh, I remember we are working off photocopies, how silliy of me.
NO rooky prosecutor would submit such flimsey evidence, the defense would shoot it down in 2 seconds as being bogus!
BTW where is the reporting on Sen. Kerry's FAILURE to disclose his COMPLETE military records. Six pages does not make a 3.5 year Naval Reserve record?
A copy of the era would be far different than a more recent copy... Dry plain paper copiers were not commonly availabie in the early 1970's. Are the docs in the hands of CBS copied in what would have been cutting edge of that era or were they copied on treated paper, with liquid toner? If the copies were made more recently, who did it & why?
No civilian, no matter what his influence or former job, could have so pressured Bush's superior to do a wrong thing that he would be writing seething Pearl-Harbor file CYA memos. A superior officer could have. It takes someone in the actual chain of command. Never mind who starts it. Someone in the actual chain of command has to do it and that's the person Killian would have named as hindering his work.
On another thread, one of those anonymous CBS insiders is quoted as saying they have no originals and have been told no originals will be coming. Gee! Isn't that odd?
Right, they admit they only have copies. What era were the copies made? Coughing up the documents might raise additional questions, but if they were produced using technology of the early 70's...
I'm sure you're right. Just trying to give 'em ideas, so we can watch them try to find an old dinosaur machine. I don't do e-bay, but it would be kinda nice to see of there are any old copying machines up for sale there.
bump
"We do not have the originals, and our sources have indicated to us that we will not be getting the originals. How that is possible I don't know."The haunted look in Dan's eyes last week even as he began the stonewall was a real joy to me. He's going through torture and he deserves it for abusing his position throughout his career. CBS deserves every bit of what it's going through for letting him, wishing they had more like him, and acting on their wishes.
Dan seemed on the verge of tears.
So the main point is that a regular memo, such as what the fraudulent one purports to be, meant supposedly for filing rather than distribution, would have been quite messy and primitive by today's standards. Where are the typos and strikeouts?
You're talking about a mimeo or mimeograph. As a kid, we'd always smell our papers when the teacher handed out our worksheets. lol There was also a stencil type machine in the late 60's & the prints were actually black, instead of the mimeo purple. Both were the kind of things used for multiple copies. There were other machines to make single copies.
In 1981 we bought what had been a formerly top of the line copier, but we could only afford old & used stuff. Dry plain paper copiers were just becoming available in '81, so that put the older technology out into the secondary market. The treated paper came on a roll & there was a heating element to dry the copy, cuz the toner was liquid & even with the drying element, the copy came out with damp spots.
In 1978 or '79 I used a desktop copy machine, where you needed some kind of special paper to put between your original & the paper you wanted to copy to. After you had all 3 pieces lined up together just right, you sent them through the machine. Using it was a royal PITB. Half the time you'd find out you had faced the treated paper toward the wrong paper & you'd have to toss it out & try again.
Our company never stopped using a typewriter, least they hadn't as of 6 years ago, when I last worked there. We had triplicate, carboned checks & some NCR paper printed forms & converting everything to computer doesn't make sense until your volume justifies making the change. We completely skipped the word processor phase & I think they still use a dot matrix printer for some things. lol
USAToday is showing its
BIAS. On a page devoted to Bush's military records
they include the controversial National guard memos
among other official documents.
Due to the controversial nature of these memos I think
it's a downright lie to pass these off as Bush's Military record.
Big surprise.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-09-09-guard-accusations_x.htm
choose link for Bush Military Records.
http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/election2004/docs.html#gbush
This links to an outside website "findlaw.com" which
includes the memos in a very biased manner.
I wish I had a good old-fashioned typewriter today. I love word processing for documents, but there are times when I just want to address an envelope without going to the printer and changing out the feed drawer.
USA Yesterday, who reads 'em, who needs 'em.
I'm sure you can pick one up on e-bay. One of my sons bought a couple of them at rummage sales, for something like a dollar each. He prefers the tactile feel from using one better than a computer keyboard.
As I said, I have never used a word processor, so have no idea about the different ins & outs of them, less you're talking about word processing with a PC. If you're talking about PC word processing, don't most printers have a single page load option?
The date on the USAT article & even it's update came before the forgery issue got hot. It's prolly better than the previous version. Did they have anything more current?
As far as the findlaw site, they seem to have just put everything out there, without editorial comment. Other than the order or placement of the documents, I don't have any problem with it. IMO, it comes across as being similar to much of the content of CSpan. Make everything available & let people draw their own conclusions.
LOL, I use a small cylindrical object that has a reservoir of that drips out of the end. It's called a pen. Works really well, and it's fast too. Unfortunately, it only has one font, and it's not very legible.
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.