[ikka]

Shouldn't there be at least ONE vertical or horizontal crease? It seems unusual that there isn't.

[Howlin]

Don't fall for this unless you are POSITIVE. Remember, Burkett said he got the memos out of the trash........this may be a diversion that leads to the blaming of Burkett to get CBS and Kerry off the hook.

[jporcus]

I wonder if fingerprints leave markings that transfer to photocopies? I wonder if there are any filters that can be applied to pick up these markings?

[PJ-Comix]

I noticed that the DUmmies haven't been saying much about the memos for the past few days but now they are weighing in again on this in their hilarious fashion. Here are some recent DUmmie posts on this topic:

To hell with the memos! I'd like to see the goddamned media focus on Bush's CURRENT record. (Which is only a continuation of his past record.)

Right. So CBS News presses ahead knowing that the documents... ...were forgeries? I don't think so. I bet for every one of the experts noted in the WP article, CBS has at least five stating that the documents are real.

There's nothing.. in the memos that is scandalous enough to warrant this level of hype over them being a possible forgery. So, what's all the fuss about?

If the documents are a forgery, only Karl Rove would have put those papers out there. It is consistent with his trickery. In the 2000 campaign, Rove put out braking news, the same day of the first debate, of a tape sent to him of Gore's debate strategy. No one ever saw the tape because it was all a lie placed by Karl Rove to steal news time away from the debate. Rove has played many of the same tricks in the past.

How do we know Karl Rove is not behind this ?

It's up to rove to prove he is not guilty of this Just like it's up to those that believe the docs are forged to prove they are forged.

There is NO evidence to collaborate forgery! That is why CBS is sticking to its story.

[Grig]

I just confirmed the results in the picture at the top. I'll check the other memos AND the USA Today pdf file.

[flying Elvis]

Has anyone tried this with the legit docs posted on the web? It would be nice to compare the two.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I’ll bet that if the real printed originals of these documents ever turn up (say, in a dumpster behind MoveOn.org headquarters), they’ll find the idiot’s fingerprints on them.

It wouldn't totally surprise me to learn that the FBI has the ability to recover fingerprints from copies...

[Grig]

The same cumpled patter is on the May 4 AND the May 19 memo, but it isn't as prononced on the may 19 memo. I had to adjust the levels more to bring it out, and even then it doesn't show on the right side.

[CurlyDave]

For what it is worth, i just tried it on the same memo, but from the USA today version. No crumple marks.

Also, address is not blacked out..

[The Californian]

You know, I wonder if the Clintons are the ones who passed this on to Rather. Perhaps they told him it came from the FBI files. He sure seems adamant that the source is "credible".

[js1138]

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but a fax or photocier would drop out this information. The images are RGB mode, which isn'g surprising since they were scanned.

But the interesting question is when did the crumpling occur? It the original document was crumpled, a photocy would drop out all the grayscale information.

What this means is that the crumpled "original" was scanned by computer into RGB mode. Did CBS only get an electronic file? Or did CBS do the crumpling?

[aruanan]

Cool!

[Wolfstar]

Several LGF readers emailed to say that if you open one of the CBS News Killian memos in Photoshop and adjust the levels, crumple marks show up on the paper.

I will test this tonight in Photoshop. I imported the Adobe Acrobat files into Photoshop last weekend to research the fonts.

[Cableguy]

Amazing. Thanks for the post.