The journey from there to here
Thought I might throw THIS to the wolves. What follows is a transcript of the CBS evening news response to the allegations that the Bush documents are forged, pulled from the Drudge Report. Enjoy, ladies and gents:

'KEY CHALLENGES TO NATIONAL GUARD DOCUMENTS ANSWERED'
Fri Sep 10 2004 19:03:11 ET

The biggest challenges to the authenticity of the documents featured in the 60 MINUTES segment on President Bush's Texas National Guard service are answered in a report to be broadcast on the CBS EVENING NEWS tonight (6:30-7:00 PM, ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network. The report states that the type style, typewriter and the superscript function critics claim did not exist at the time the memos from President Bush's former Texas National Guard commander were typed were indeed all available. In fact, similar raised "th" superscripts have been found on other National Guard documents the White House has released from the president's file.

Furthermore, Marcel Mately, the document and handwriting expert used to authenticate the documents for CBS News and 60 MINUTES, asserts that copies of the memos critics are examining have been degraded by reproduction though photocopying, computer scanning and faxing and are not reliable representations of the memos.

A transcript is attached:

BUSH DOCUMENTS

EVENING NEWS WITH DAN RATHER

9-10-04

Rather Lead In: There were attacks today on the CBS News "60 Minutes" report this week raising new questions about President Bush's Vietnam-era time in the Texas Air National Guard. The questions raised by our report include:

--Did a wealthy Texas oilman-friend of the Bush family use his influence with the speaker of the Texas House of Representatives .. to get George W. Bush a coveted slot in the National Guard .. keeping him out of the draft and any probable service IN Vietnam?

--Did Lieutenant Bush refuse a direct order from his commanding officer?

--Was Lieutenant. Bush suspended for failure to perform up to standards?

--Did Lieutenant Bush ever take a physical he was required and ordered to take? If not, why not?

--And did Lieutenant Bush, in fact, complete his commitment to the Guard?

These questions grew out of new witnesses and new evidence -- including documents written by Lieutenant Bush's squadron commander.

Today, on the internet and elsewhere, some people -- including many who are partisan political operatives -- concentrated not on the key questions the overall story raised but on the documents that were part of the support of the story.

They alleged the documents are FAKE.

Rather: MANY OF THOSE RAISING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CBS DOCUMENTS HAVE FOCUSED ON SOMETHING CALLED SUPERSCRIPT... A KEY THAT AUTOMATICALLY TYPES A RAISED "TH". CRITICS CLAIM TYPEWRITERS DIDN'T HAVE THAT ABILITY IN THE 70S. BUT SOME MODELS DID....IN FACT, OTHER BUSH MILITARY RECORDS ALREADY OFFICIALLY RELEASED BY THE WHITE HOUSE ITSELF SHOW THE SAME SUPERSCRIPT.

HERE'S ONE..... FROM 1968.

SOME ANALYSTS OUTSIDE CBS SAY THEY BELIEVE THE TYPEFACE ON THESE MEMOS IS NEW TIMES ROMAN.... WHICH THEY CLAIM WAS NOT AVAILABLE IN THE 1970S.

BUT THE OWNER OF THE COMPANY THAT DISTRIBUTES THIS TYPING STYLE.... SAYS IT HAS BEEN AVAILABE SINCE 1931. DOCUMENT AND HANDWRITING EXAMINER MARCEL MATLEY ANALYZED THE DOCUMENTS FOR CBS NEWS.

HE SAYS HE BELIEVES THEY ARE REAL...BUT IS CONCERNED ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT IS BEING EXAMINED BY SOME OF THE PEOPLE QUESTIONING THE DOCUMENTS....BECAUSE DETIORATION OCCURS EACH TIME A DOCUMENT IS REPRODUCED.....AND THE DOCUMENTS BEING ANALYZED OUTSIDE OF CBS HAVEBEEN PHOTOCOPIED, FAXED, SCANNED AND DOWNLOADED.... AND ARE FAR REMOVED FROM THE DOCUMENTS CBS STARTED WITH WHICH WERE ALSO PHOTOCOPIES.

DOCUMENT AND HANDWRITING EXAMINER MARCEL MATLEY DID THIS INTERVIEW WITH US PRIOR TO THE 60 MINUTES BROADCAST.

HE LOOKED AT THE DOCUMENTS AND THE SIGNATURES OF COLONEL JERRY KILLIAN.... COMPARING KNOWN DOCUMENTS WITH THE COLONEL'S SIGNATURE ON THE NEWSLY DISCOVERED ONES.

Matley: "WE LOOK BASICALLY AT WHAT'S CALLED SIGNIFICANT OR INSIGNIFICANT FEATURES TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S THE SAME PERSON OR NOT. I HAVE NO PROBLEM IDENTIFYING THEM.

I WOULD SAY BASED ON OUR AVAILABLE HANDWRITING EVIDENCE, YES. THIS IS THE SAME PERSON."

Rather: MATLEY FINDS THE SIGNAT'URES TO BE SOME OF THE MOST COMPELLING EVIDENCE...WE TALKED TO HIM AGAIN TODAY BY SATELLITE.

Matley "SINCE IT IS REPRESENTED THAT SOME OF THEM ARE DEFINITELY HIS... THEN WE CAN CONCLUDE THEY ARE HIS SIGNATURES."

Rather: "ARE YOU SURPRISED THAT QUESTIONS COME ABOUT THESE. WE'RE NOT, BUT I WAS WONDERING IF YOU'RE SURPRISED."

Matley: "I KNEW GOING IN THAT THIS WAS DYNAMITE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER AND I KNEW THAT POTENTIALLY IT WAS FAR MORE POTENTIAL DAMAGE TO ME PROFESSIONALLY THAN BENEFIT ME. AND I KNEW THAT. BUT WE SEEK THE TRUTH. THAT'S WHAT WE DO. YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO PUT YOURSELF OUT. TO SEEK THE TRUTH AND TAKE WHAT COMES FROM IT."

Rather: ROBERT STRONG WAS AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER FOR THE TEXAS AIR NATIONAL GUARD DURING THE VIETNAM YEARS. HE KNEW COL. JERRY KILLIAN, THE MAN CREDITED WITH WRITING THE DOCUMENTS.... AND PAPER WORK... LIKE THESE DOCUMENTS...WAS HIS SPECIALTY. HE IS STANDING BY HIS JUDGEMENT THAT THE DOCUMENTS ARE REAL.

Rather: "WHEN YOU READ THROUGH THESE DOCUMENTS, IS THERE ANY DOUBT IN YOUR MIND THAT THESE ARE GENUINE?"

Strong: "WELL,, THEY ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE WAY BUSINESS WAS DONE AT THAT TIME. THEY ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE MAN THAT I REMEMBER JERRY KILLIAN BEING. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT'S DISCORDANT WITH WHAT WERE THE TIMES, WHAT WERE THE SITUATION OR WHAT WERE THE PEOPLE INVOLVED."

Rather: STRONG SAYS THE HIGHLY CHARGED POLITICAL ATMOSPHERE OF THE GUARD AT THE TIME... WAS PERFECTLY REPRESENTED IN THE NEW DOCUMENTS

Strong: "IT VERGED ON OUTRIGHT CORRUPTION IN TERMS OF THE FAVORS THAT WERE DONE, THE POWER THAT WAS TRADED. AND IT WAS UNCONSCIONABLE. FROM A MORAL AND ETHICAL STANDPOINT. IT WAS UNCONSCIONABLE."

Rather: IT IS THE INFORMATION IN THE NEW DOCUMENTS THAT IS MOST COMPELLING FOR PEOPLE FAMILIAR WITH PRESIDENT BUSH'S RECORD IN THE NATIONAL GUARD. AUTHOR JIM MORE HAS WRITTEN TWO BOOKS ON THE SUBJECT.

Rather: "YOU'VE STUDIED PRESIDENT BUSH'S RECORDS FOR 10 YEARS.. ARE THESE DOCUMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE RECORD AS YOU KNOW IT?"

Moore: "THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY CONSISTENT WITH THE RECORDS AS I KNOW IT."

Rather: "PUT IT IN CONTEXT AND PERSPECTIVE FOR US ... THE STORY AND WHAT WE CALL THE COUNTERATTACK ON THE STORY. WHERE ARE WE RIGHT NOW?

Moore "I THINK WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS SOME INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS HAVE COME OUT. THE WHITE HOUSE, YOU SHOULD REMEMBER, HAS NOT DISCREDITED THE DOCUMENTS. THEY'RE RELYING ON THE BLOGOSPHERE AND OTHER PEOPLE TO DO THAT. BECAUSE THE WHITE HOUSE PROBABLY KNOWS THESE DOCUMENTS ARE IN FACT REAL."

Rather Tag: The "60 Minutes" report was based NOT solely on the recovered documents .. but on a preponderance of evidence .. including documents that were provided by un-impeachable sources .. and interviews with former officials of the Texas National Guard. If any definitive evidence to the contrary of our story is found, we will report it.

So far, there is none.

Remember, these are Rather's words, not mine


Gideon MacLeish"

Comments
on Sep 11, 2004
He's going to get eaten alive and deservedly.
on Sep 11, 2004
, I agree, draginol. For the record, I just submits it. I don't writes it.
on Sep 11, 2004

Pardon my francais, but it's total bullshit. I do hope CBS gets their asses handed to them for this.


In fact, similar raised "th" superscripts have been found on other National Guard documents the White House has released from the president's file.


Have they shown any of these other documents?

on Sep 11, 2004

has the whitehouse disputed those cbs documents yet?  and have any members of the gutenberg brigade tried overlaying ms word text on any of the official bush documents?   maybe theyre all fraudulent?

on Sep 11, 2004

similar raised "th" superscripts have been found on other National Guard

check out the signature comparison post at the link draginol posted on another cbs hoax thread #57.  there are a buncha signatures for comparison.  one of the official documents (i think they came from a usa today collection) dated 5/25/71 --so its not one of the 4 cbs dox--has a superscripted th.

on Sep 11, 2004

The other documents look significantly different than these.

Kingbee: Have you used a typewriter? You can't simulate a type writer - any type writer - with the default MS Word settings.

Try reproducing that document anywhere near as identically with any type writer or OTHER word processor you choose. Good luck. Getting it to be that exact with a word processor other than Word would be hard (go ahead, load up Word Perfect and try to do that memo with its default settings).

I wish I still had my IBM Selectric I got years ago. I'd whip up that memo and scan it for you to show you how different it was.

on Sep 11, 2004

BTW, superscripts aren't the issue. Doing superscripts that are very small like that are an issue.

But some of you guys are missing the forest for the trees. It's not like there's some magical typewriter of yore that happens to create documents that just happen to match perfectly MS Word's default settings.

Every type writer and every word processor does thing different, just a little bit in some cases, and a lot in others.

Given the uproar, if there was some type writer from 1973 that could somehow do this, they would have had it out by now. But ther eisn't and there are plenty of documents that have shown that even the Selectric Composer (a $3000 model from the time) couldn't reproduce the document very closely.

Doing super-script is easy on a decent type writer, it's just putting the carriage a little higher. Having tiny "th's" are a little different. How many type writers have a little "th" key on it?

on Sep 11, 2004

You know... I wonder if these people who still insist it's authentic were on a jury.


"Well, this man can't be the murderer, because in the video we have of the murder, the murderer has slightly shorter hair, and therefore must be somebody else with the same exact face, height, etc."

on Sep 11, 2004

what can i say?  heres the very document signature i was talking about    looks like a small superscripted th to me.  this came from that shapeofdays blog site which attributes it to part of the usa today collection of bush service records


on Sep 11, 2004

I loaded up Paint to compare the t in 111th with the t in Lt and they're the same size.

on Sep 11, 2004

Kingbee: Have you used a typewriter?


hell i was the person for whom they invented dedicated word processors.  i was about to get fired for having turned several selectrics into what appeared to be gull rocks with whiteout til i talked the owner of that business into buying a $25k word processor

on Sep 11, 2004

Then why do you sound like you keep getting duped?

I just finish explaining how superscript isn't the issue but rather the tiny "t's" are the issue.

You then immediately show up with a document that has a lower case t that is positioned slightly up as your "proof".  Moving a loser case t up a few milimeters isn't hard. Magically being able to have a super tiny "th" is.

on Sep 11, 2004
You can tell with the naked eye that the t in Lt is the same size as the t in th

I'm as anti-bush as the next democrat... but come on, this one's a fake, no way around it.