Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rathergate: What the Secretary Knew-And Most Importantly-What She Didn't ^ | 9/15/04 |

Posted on 09/15/2004 5:26:26 AM PDT by crushkerry

The latest chapter in the saga of "Rathergate" is that Lt. Col. Killian's 87 year old secretary, Marion Carr, has come out and proclaimed the documents as forgeries. In making that claim she gives very specific reasons, such as the typewriter used at the time, terminology, and date discrepancies.

The left and the mainstream media however, have ignored this and highlighted Mrs. Carr's claim that while the CBS documents are phony, their substance- that Lt. Col. Killian was under pressure to "sugarcoat" then Lt. Bush's records and cover-up his missing a physical - is nonetheless true. As we will show below, this diversion is a red herring. Unlike the specific reasoning for proclaiming the documents a forgery, her opinion as to the truth of their substance is not backed up by any specific fact.

First, we think all of us can picture someone like her. She's clearly a plucky elderly lady who is sharp and has no trouble speaking her mind. In this case she volunteers, to her credit, that President Bush was "selected, not elected", and that he is "unqualified" for the job. Kudos to her for her honestly, something noticeably absent, especially at CBS. Unfortunately for the left, it's that honesty that proves our point that she has no facts to support her claim of the underlying truth in the forgeries.

Clearly the effect of Mrs. Carr's forgery disclosures on CBS vanishing credibility are devastating. What we're going to show you is Mrs. Carr's belief as to the substance of those forgeries is pure speculation. Herein, we give you the "talking points" to throw in liberals faces when they try to divert your attention from the fact that the left got caught with their hands in the cookie jar.

To begin with there are 2 places that we can find where Mrs. Brooks was interviewed. The first was with the Dallas Morning News.and the second was with Matt Drudge

After reviewing both interviews we have made a list of things Mrs. Carr stated to support her belief in the substance of the forgeries. Below we list her reasons, and show why none of them prove her contention to be anything but pure speculation.:

1. She did type "CYA" memos for Lt. Col. Killian that he kept in a personal file, which was locked desk drawer (Although she said she never typed a Bush-specific memo like the one shown by CBS) - DMN interview.

Rebuttal: Let's assume that she did type CYA memos for Lt. Col. Killian and such a personal file did exist and was kept in his desk drawer. How does she know then, that a memo she never saw (the one on Bush) even existed. She claims that Lt. Col. Killian didn't type - because he had her to do it for him. The only way she would know a Bush-specific document was in Lt. Col. Killian' personal file is if she saw it. She admits she's never seen such a memo, or handwritten notes from which other non Bush-specific CYA-type memos were prepared. Thus, the fact that Lt. Col. Killian may have kept such a file in his desk drawer - something his family vigorously disputes - it is of no consequence.

2. She claims that while the CBS memos are forgeries, they accurately reflect the information in the "real ones" (the CYA-type memos she said she typed for Killian) - DMN Interview

Rebuttal There is no possible way she could know this. Why? Simple - because she never prepared such a document in the first place. She never claims to have seen such a Bush-specific document from Lt. Col. Killian, so how in God's name could she know what the "real ones" contained. She makes no claim to having either seen the actual memo from which the CBS forgeries were made, or any handwritten notes from which CYA-type memos were transcribed. Her conclusion is false simply because the foundation from which it comes is pure speculation.

3. She claims the forged CBS memos may have been constructed from "memory" by someone who had seen Lt. Col. Killian's private file. - DMN interview. She makes the same claims in the Drudge interview, saying that "I GUESS is that a hold of the "real ones"

Rebuttal: Again, her belief rests on a collapsing house of sand. First, and most importantly, she has no knowledge whatsoever that a "real one" (a Bush-specific CYA memo) even existed in the first place. Notice her language. The memos "may have been constructed from memory" and "My guess is..". These are not words of someone with direct knowledge of anything. Further, she has no knowledge that that Lt. Col. Killian allowed anyone to see his private files where she claims CYA-type memos were locked away. Finally, she admits that she has no idea what happened to Lt. Col. Killian's private file when he retired (which was 5 years after she did). Accordingly, she is simply speculating as to where the forged memo information originated.

4. She claims that the information in the forged memos about Lt. Col. Killian's "dealing with the problem" (of the President missing a physical) is correct. - Drudge Interview

Rebuttal: Again, Mrs. Carr provides no proof other than her word that this is true. She does not say she spoke with Lt. Col. Killian specifically about Bush - or anyone else for that matter - missing physicals. For instance, her belief would be more credible if she said "Oh, I remember one day Commander X called and raised hell about what Lt. Col. Killian did when Bush missed his physical" or that she recalls Lt. Col. Killian having to deal with superiors (or other influential individuals) that contacted him specifically about President Bush. She offers literally nothing specific to back up her claims. She does state the general rules for physicals and the excuses given by pilots for not getting them (i.e. the flew commercially and couldn’t get them immediately), but she does not tie any of this to President Bush specifically, other than that she remembers the "yak-yak" when he was there. What does she mean by "yak-yak"? The contention that he got in the National Guard because of his connections -just as she claims Sen. Benson's son and other wealthy individuals did, or the "yak-yak" about a missed physical and pressure from above? We don't know either, because she doesn't say.

5. She claims that it was General Staudt, not Lt. Col. Hodges that was applying the pressure to Lt. Col. Killian to whitewash Bush's record concerning his not taking the physical. - Drudge Interview

Rebuttal: No one bothered to ask her how she knows this. Did she get a phone call for Lt. Col. Killian from Gen. Staudt specifically about the President’s not taking his physical? Was there a memo from Gen. Staudt to Lt. Col. Killian specific to President Bush? Did she remember Lt. Col. Killian expressing frustration over the pressure he was getting, or mention it to her in any way? No. She simply claims there was pressure, but gives nothing to support that charge, and even says that Gen. Staudt "MUST HAVE" put pressure on Lt. Col. Killian. Note the important words "must have". A person with direct knowledge would have said Gen. Staudt DID put pressure on Lt. Col. Killian. Until she offers something specific, her claim is worthless. Again the Killian family hotly disputes that anything like this could have happened given the good relationship the two men had.

6. We hate to sound like Bill Clinton, but the terms used here by Mrs. Carr are extremely important - specifically the term "This"

In the Drudge interview she claims to have gotten upset when someone from the White House (she doesn't say who) said the information in the CBS documents were lies. She said what made here really excited was that "I had typed documents with this information and because a person like Bush stood out from the others - because of his association with his father". The word "this" is important here because the "this" she's referring to is the Bush-specific CYA memo. However, in the neither interview does she ever claim that she typed a Bush-specific CYA memo, only that she had typed "documents like this". Again the words "documents like this" is crucial. She is referring to typing general CYA memos. At no point does she say "I typed a document specific to President Bush's not taking a physical and Killian getting pressure to "whitewash" the records.

Again, we're not saying Mrs. Carr is lying. In fact she seems to go out of her way to be specific as to what she did or didn't do. It takes a careful examination of her words to determine that while she is very specific as to why the memos are forged, her belief as to the truth of their substance is purely speculation. Try again guys, the next big forgery is just right around the corner somewhere. Better luck next time.

TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bushmemos; killian; mariancarrknox; marioncarr; rathergate; tang

1 posted on 09/15/2004 5:26:26 AM PDT by crushkerry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: biblewonk; Grampa Dave; JPJones; LincolnLover; jmstein7; backinthefold; .cnI redruM; Lazamataz; ...


2 posted on 09/15/2004 5:27:16 AM PDT by crushkerry (Visit to see John Kerry's positions filleted - and to see our lovely spokesmodel))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crushkerry

Ah--on the strength of this, Dan may claim to be off the hook.

3 posted on 09/15/2004 5:44:26 AM PDT by Mamzelle (Pajamamama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crushkerry
Good analysis but its not sexy - thus no MSM interest. We need a Fawn Hall figure in here somewhere ...
4 posted on 09/15/2004 5:44:54 AM PDT by Tunehead54 (JFK:"I think there has been an exaggeration," Re: Terror Threat: See Beslan for reference. :-()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tunehead54
Oops! ... ;-)

5 posted on 09/15/2004 5:46:57 AM PDT by Tunehead54 (JFK:"I think there has been an exaggeration," Re: Terror Threat: See Beslan for reference. :-()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: crushkerry

I saw on another thread that, contrary to the impression left by the original story, Mrs. Carr was not a private secretary to Killian (per Killian's son) -- more like one of the typing pool. Which makes her a lot less likely source of anything to the point.

6 posted on 09/15/2004 5:50:38 AM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crushkerry
"She's clearly a plucky elderly lady who is sharp and has no trouble speaking her mind."

All well and good -- and more power to her for so being!

Yet she was an executive secretary, and in that profession, there is an ethos to get your yap shut forever about what transpires in the job. It's like being a personal butler.

No one would hire the butler who would be suspected to later write a tell all -- and the butler who does is diminshed -- loses credibility just by so doing.

And so too with Miss Knox.

It's certainly fine and dandy for her to not support Mr. Bush for President, even to speak against him. However HER line of integrity and goodness is crossed and moves into the very questionable when she uses things she learned on the job to do so, to do so by speaking these privacies in public.

And that questionability -- her willingness now to violate that ethos -- speaks to the veracity of what she says.

If she's ethically impaired in one area -- what about the other. Isn't she more likely to "mis-remember" or "mis-construe" or "sloppily confuse" what happeneded those 30 plus years back.

Yes, she is.

In question herself.

She impugns her own ethics.

7 posted on 09/15/2004 5:58:23 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crushkerry

Some unedited videotape of Mrs. Carr is needed.

8 posted on 09/15/2004 6:18:42 AM PDT by elli1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crushkerry

Do I believe that LTC Killian could have had negative feelings toward politically connected Air Guardsmen (on whose behalf influence may have been exerted)? Sure. I work with middle class and blue collar "unconnected" Guard officers and enlisted personnel who express such feelings from time to time. The facts as we know them, however, are that LTC Killian kept such feelings out of his official correspondence (including LT Bush's efficiency report), and even out of his comments to his own family (which would be a credit to his professionalism, if indeed he resented "LT" Bush's "political" connections). "Office politics" are a part of military life. George S. Patton, Jr. once called himself "the best a.. kisser in the Army", and frequently used his personal wealth and his connections to foster his career and/or to get himself out of trouble. I'm sure that a lot of his contemporaries resented that, but few would have said so on the record.

9 posted on 09/15/2004 6:19:02 AM PDT by pawdoggie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crushkerry
She claims that it was General Staudt, not Lt. Col. Hodges that was applying the pressure to Lt. Col. Killian to whitewash Bush's record concerning his not taking the physical. - Drudge Interview might want to add that Staudt actually retired in March of 1972, BEFORE the memos were even written. From what we have gathered here, whomever did the forgery was dependent on an article that mistakenly stated he retired in 1975.

10 posted on 09/15/2004 6:31:56 AM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bvw

What you said. As a former Certified Professional Secretary, I am deeply offended by this woman's lower-class gossip.

I will charitably stipulate that her mind is clouded by age and dementia ... after all, she couldn't believe the tired "selected ... not elected" lie if she were in full possession of her faculties.

11 posted on 09/15/2004 6:43:48 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Dick Cheney is MY dark, macho, paranoid Vice President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: crushkerry
No one bothered to ask her how she knows this.

Gee, crushkerry, your analysis is good, but you missed an important conclusion. The reason no one asked her how she knows is rather obvious:


LOL ;>)

12 posted on 09/15/2004 6:49:11 AM PDT by RebelTex (Freedom is everyone's right - and everyone's responsibility!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crushkerry

She also smeared Killian by accusing him of violating laws by keeping seperate or personal adverse action reports on military personnel.
Pretty nasty slander (or libel, or whatever the verbal one is).

13 posted on 09/15/2004 6:50:23 AM PDT by mabelkitty (Watch for a CBS employee in a trench coat going by DeepWord.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crushkerry
The Democrats are desperate to replicate an Orwellian atmosphere, in which they can manipulate history, and consequently, present-day truth. It's kind of pathetic, really.

From "1984":

"And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'"
14 posted on 09/15/2004 8:06:38 AM PDT by Darnright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tunehead54
Good analysis but its not sexy - thus no MSM interest. We need a Fawn Hall figure in here somewhere ...

No way.
This woman will be booked on every talk show from Today to CBS news to Dateline to 60 Minutes in 2 seconds flat (you know, all the MSM's that refused to book the swifties).

Next follows the face lift, the boob implants, chemical peels, hair extentions and make over by Donatella Vercase. Not sexy? This woman will look like Bo Derek in 24 hours flat. (You'd be amazed what they can do with pancake make up while the stitches heal on that eyelift.)

This 84 year old womans story of complete hearsay has "legs". Not real legs of course but liberal legs. Vericose veins and all, they'll put lips on this pig (no offense to the dear woman) trot her out and "voila" apropos of nothing her words will become gospel; relegating the family, friends, facts and the forgeries to "non-credible, (biased, emotional, "too close to the situation", trying to protect their husband/father's legacy, e.g. insane!)"

This is exhausting. But keep em talking. No one is listening to Kerry OR his plan to defile, I mean "heal", America. (What's left now re: issues? Fixing our 5% unemployment rate and nationalizing health care? How many more weeks of whining do we have left??)
15 posted on 09/15/2004 9:36:20 AM PDT by N. Beaujon (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: crushkerry
EXCELLENT piece of writing, as usual from! This lady would be rendered moot in either a civil or criminal trial. Which reminds me...WHY ARE WE DOING THE FBI's JOB??? Is there not a criminal case here and why has nobody noticed the blatant lack of interest by the feds in pursuing it?

The 1st Amendment does not apply to slander and libel...nor does it apply to treason.

16 posted on 09/15/2004 10:29:42 AM PDT by Indie (Ignorance of the truth is no excuse for stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

forgot which site, but someone had the scoop on what this old lady was saying before this story broke....
she knew nothing at all about the whole bush ang fiasco
anyone have a link to that info?

now that cbs has used forged documents, the old lady is agreeing with everything they said, even though she is on record already saying she didn't know anything about it

17 posted on 09/15/2004 2:43:29 PM PDT by jer2911tx (john kerry doesn't like rice, or as he calls it 'weapons of ass destruction')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

cbs will try to use the old lady to show even though the documents were fake, the facts were correct....
this is what nro/kerryspot found out about the old lady's story before cbs got ahold of her:

from about half-way down on nro/kerryspot


The Kerry Spot, as a rule, doesn't like criticizing 86-year-old former Air National Guard secretaries. But there is something very odd about the current statements of Marian Carr Knox, former secretary to Lt. Col. Jerry Killian.

As the Houston Chronicle noted:

Knox said she decided to report her recollection of the time period to the media after hearing White House press officials say the information in the memos was false.
Did anyone in the White House say this? I thought they were standing with their rote response, "The President was honorably discharged... The President was honorably discharged..."

Further down, we read:

Last week, Knox said she had no firsthand knowledge of Bush's time with the Texas Air National Guard, although she did recall a culture of special treatment for the sons of prominent people, such as Bush and others.
But she told The New York Times: "We did discuss Bush's conduct and it was a problem Killian was concerned about," Mrs. Knox said. "I think he was writing the memos so there would be some record that he was aware of what was going on and what he had done."

One week she's saying she had no firsthand knowledge of Bush's service, the next she's saying she discussed it with Killian.

Knox also claims in the Houston Chronicle Killian "kept copies to protect himself," contradicting the widow and the son. She says Killian didn't type, that she typed for him - but says she never typed a memo like this. So how did a memo "like this, in this vein, reflecting these opinions," etc. get created? Her contention that the memos reflected Killian's opinion seems more like an assertion or wishful thinking than anything supported by the rest of the facts. Remember, in the verified documents, Killian says nice things about Bush.

I am sure Knox is a very nice 86-year-old woman. But her story seems, at this point, to be unreliable.

18 posted on 09/15/2004 2:49:55 PM PDT by jer2911tx (john kerry doesn't like rice, or as he calls it 'weapons of ass destruction')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: crushkerry

bump for Pajama brigade homework

19 posted on 09/15/2004 6:01:20 PM PDT by lainde (Heads up...We're coming and we've got tongue blades!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jer2911tx
Some of this is starting to make some sense to me now. First off, Laura Bush is the only person that has made any statements about these documents, as far as the White House, that I am aware.

Ok so Killian makes an offhand remark, overheard by Ms Carr, that special treatment brats are a pain in the neck. Someone manages to acquire some documents that concern some other special treatment brats, and since they believe that Bush was probably an SPB himself, then the essence of reality will be maintained if they adjust the documents to include Bush's name. Only, they are having trouble making the changes and inclusions of Bush id info look identical to the originals, so they re-do the entire documents with a work processor and after several runs throught a copier the new ones resemble the original documents, at least, to the dummies eye. I'm just getting it! These people believe they have simply co-produced documents, the contents of which should exist, but do not.

That's what Rather is going on about. unbefrickinleavable.

20 posted on 09/16/2004 12:04:50 AM PDT by My back yard (C'mon Dan, you ruse you lose!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson