Sugar Coat
The Boston Glob grandiloquently claims that the Rather/TANG memos are purrfectly legit:
But specialists interviewed by the Globe and some other news organizations say the specialized characters used in the documents, and the type format, were common to electric typewriters in wide use in the early 1970s, when Bush was a first lieutenant.
Philip D. Bouffard, a forensic document examiner in Ohio who has analyzed typewritten samples for 30 years, had expressed suspicions about the documents in an interview with the New York Times published Thursday, one in a wave of similar media reports. But Bouffard told the Globe yesterday that after further study, he now believes the documents could have been prepared on an IBM Selectric Composer typewriter available at the time.
But
Dr. Bouffard was misquoted pretty seriously:
"What the Boston Globe did now sort of pisses me off, because now I have people calling me and e-mailing me, and calling me names, saying that I changed my mind. I did not change my mind at all!"
"I would appreciate it if you could do whatever it takes to clear this up, through your internet site, or whatever."
"All I'd done is say, 'Hey I want to look into it.' Please correct that damn impression!"
"What I said to them was, I got new information about possible Selectric fonts and (Air Force) documents that indicated a Selectric machine could have been available, and I needed to do more analysis and consider it."
[INDC quotes via
Powerline].
This issue will play out, at least in the major media and the lefty blogosphere, like the Swifties; lots of firm declamations ("it's all lies!"), no actual evidence.
Politics, Goebbels-style.
Posted by Mitch at
September 11, 2004 07:13 PM
| TrackBack
And yet, Oliver "Uncle Fester" Willis, Soros' morbidly obese girlfriendless whore, doesn't care that they're fakes.
Posted by: morris at September 11, 2004 08:23 PMIf it is a forgery, it is probably a Republican plant. Why would the Democrats overplay their hand on an excellent character issue? They have nothing to gain. The uncontroverted facts are damning enough to Bush. By feeding these memos to CBS, then exposing them as forgeries, the Bush campaign can convince a lot of voters that any negative stories on Bush are just phony Democratic propaganda.
Remember Donald Segretti in the 1972 campaign? He infiltrated Democratic campaigns as a volunteer, got hold of some official stationery, then spread false sex rumors about various candidates. He went to jail, but it worked. He got the strongest candidate, Walter Mondale, out of the race. One of Segretti's assistants in that campaign was a young man named Karl Rove.
Posted by: Steve Funk at September 11, 2004 10:47 PMSteve, hate to break it to you old sock, but the Dems have been sawing branches off behind them since at least 2002. Go ahead and believe this type of hamfisted foulup is beneath them if you want, but history ain't gonna back you up on that one.
Posted by: Brian Jones at September 11, 2004 11:55 PMDan Rather, least trusted man in America. Walter must be pissed!
Posted by: Michael at September 11, 2004 11:55 PM"Why would the Democrats overplay their hand on an excellent character issue?"
Because it's not. It's a lousy character issue that's paper-thin, and the Dems know it. They can read; they know Bush served his time.
"They have nothing to gain. The uncontroverted facts are damning enough to Bush."
The uncontroverted facts have not been in evidence from the left!
" By feeding these memos to CBS, then exposing them as forgeries, the Bush campaign can convince a lot of voters that any negative stories on Bush are just phony Democratic propaganda."
Except the feed would seem to have come from the Kerry Kamp, not from the GOP. Absent any proof of a GOP link - and putting Segretti in the same room as Rove isn't even close - I think I'll stick with the "Rather is is going to go down with his ship to save Kerry" theory.
Posted by: mitch at September 12, 2004 03:00 AM