About | Portfolio | Backup | Archives | PayPal Tip Jar | Amazon Tip Jar | Shop@Amazon
Advertising


Search BillHobbs.com
Stats, Etc.


TTLB Ecosystem Stats
Powered by FeedBurner


« Facts | Main | Poll: Bush Leads Big »

September 9, 2004

Forgery Update

Glenn Reynolds has a comprehensive round-up of coverage of the investigation into the possibility that the memos that CBS says show George W. Bush shirked his Guard duty three decades ago are forged. Also, even the Associated Press is investigating the possibility that the documents were forged:

Independent document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines said the memos looked like they had been produced on a computer using Microsoft Word software, which wasn't available when the documents were supposedly written in 1972 and 1973.

Lines, a document expert and fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, pointed to a superscript - a smaller, raised "th" in "111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron" - as evidence indicating forgery. Microsoft Word automatically inserts superscripts in the same style as the two on the memos obtained by CBS, she said.

"I'm virtually certain these were computer-generated," Lines said after reviewing copies of the documents at her office in Paradise Valley, Ariz. She produced a nearly identical document using her computer's Microsoft Word software.

PowerLine has much more - and also is following the related media scandal involving the AP report that lied when it reported a crowd at a Bush rally booed when Bush announced that former President Bill Clinton was going to have heart surgery.

Charles Johnson has more, too.

It's looking bad for CBS.

More coverage of the forgery story at ABC News (and NightLine is doing a show on it tonight). Also, Hugh Hewitt has posted the transcript of his radio interview with a document forensics expert. Also, Donald Sensing has a very long and detailed post, drawing on his own extensive military experience and knowledge.

I conclude that the Killian-signed documents are forgeries, forged by someone without a very good knowledge of military correspondence or Air Force publications or procedures. Based on the Air Force's own online library of current and obsolete publications, I conclude that there never was an Air Force Manual 35-13, although there was an AF Regulation by that number. But a lieutenant colonel would never have made such a fundamental error as using "AFM" twice when he meant AFR. Furthermore, it is likely that whatever AFR 35-13 governed, flight physicals wasn't it.
And, finally, the WaPo just posted a story online that will be in its print edition Friday about the possibility the documents were forged.

It's not looking bad for CBS. It's looking very very bad.

Meanwhile, documents of known authenticity show that Bush completed more than his required amount of service, and was granted early release from his Guard hitch in order to go to Harvard Business School. And an honorable discharge. And there are at least three witnesses who saw him pull Guard duty in Alabama during the period of time under dispute.

Not one assertion to the contrary is based on solid facts or documentation.

Posted in Was Bush AWOL? | Linked By |
Please support HobbsOnline by doing your online shopping at Amazon.com
Comments

The fat lady sang -- unless CBS can pull a monkey out of Blather's ass.

Posted by: Sandy P at September 9, 2004 10:09 PM

BUSTED! A "former" Marine would have recognized this as a forgery or even at least shown it to "real" military folks as well as his own supposed forgery experts to ensure its authenticity. Problem is, Blather is one of the very few EX-Marines, which groups him with the most useless pieces of crap on the planet. His anti-Bush/anti-military reporting has finally caught up with him. Can you spell "retirement"?

Posted by: clayusmcret at September 9, 2004 11:28 PM

Nightline was unfortunately soft on all. The possibility (and likelihood) of forgery was suggested, but not pursued very diligently. Rather was kid-gloved. CBS was gently chided. They did manage to get most of the important points in, but softly, softly. I think they are just building a record. They certainly didn't bulldog in and chew on the problem. Serves them right if they're next.

Posted by: JorgXMcKie at September 10, 2004 12:28 AM

PLEASE tell me this is going to bring Blathers career to an end! We have lived with his bias for so long, at the expense of real reporting, that it has turned me completely off on CBS. I used to have some respect for the network but that is gone.

Has he finaly stepped over the line one too many times? If the documents are indeed forgeries, where is the accountability for this fiasco?

Posted by: Mark at September 10, 2004 08:41 AM

Fox and Friends did an extensive review of this on their 10 Aug 04 show. All of the hosts poked holes in the obvious forgeries
claims including the superscript argument. Why doesn't the President come right out and call Harkin the liar that he is?

Posted by: Roundguy at September 10, 2004 09:16 AM
Post a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!









Remember personal info?






Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):




back to top
Lamar!

Find the Good
and Praise It
I Also Blog At...
button-fcs-blog.gif
Advertising

Archives
Blogroll