The video available from the CBS News web site suggests that the "th" superscript proof of forgery is debunked by the fact that other documents in Bush's military records contained superscript examples. THE ONLY PROBLEM IS THE EXAMPLE THEY SHOW IS ENTIRELY DIFFERENT, AND DOESN'T EVEN LOOK TO BE SUPERSCRIPT The reference example they show at around 1:25 into the video is a closeup a "111th" where the "th" has an underline integral to the glyph, but it is not superscript. It does not get elevated above the normal level of the text. It just sits beside the "111". I...