OK, with all this incredible precision, how did the article leave out any details whatsoever in the form of quotes from her, to the effect the forgeries reflect real events and other specific memos? Why didn't she say: On such and such a date Killian was pressured by so and so" or "Col. Killian told me he was upset by that pressure." Or "Killian ordered Bush to do X and Bush disobeyed." There is nothing like that.
It's the same old lie..."The memos are fake but the information is accurate". She must be a CBS fan.
Of course those are the questions you or I (or anyone on this forum) would ask and the angle any good editor would take. Trouble is, you can't tell if the writer/editor are lazy, sloppy, partisan or new at their jobs. I'd say all but the last.