More Controversy Over Bush Docs

Charles Johnson over at LittleGreenFootballs has written about this story and he believes that at this point CBS knows the documents are fake and is trying to stonewall in the hopes that it will all blow over. He says:

I’m almost certain that at least some people at CBS are aware that these documents are fakes. Phonies. Forgeries. And stunningly inept forgeries, at that.

At some point, they’re going to have to admit it; but right now it looks as if they simply don’t care about the truth, and are trying to ride out the scandal, assuming that most people can be bamboozled by their inept excuses.

And with this I agree. But I do not think that this strategy will be effective. The people at CBS have vastly underestimated the force and power of the Blogsphere. This story started like the rush of small pebbles that builds and builds until it is an avalanche which sweeps everything in its path. There is nothing to be done but to wait for the wave to pass. But when it does, the new face of the world of information will have been created and the old landscape will be gone. The liars over at CBS may think that they can snowboard their way out of this, but they will end up buried under the weight of the Blogsphere waiting in vain for the ski patrol to dig them out.

The controversy continues over the authenticity of memos obtained by CBS News that show President Bush's National Guard commander believed Mr. Bush at times shirked his duties and used his political influence.

They only show it if they are real and not forgeries; and that is, of course, the issue. First you have to demonstrate that they are real; then we can talk about the content.

The network is adamantly defending the authenticity of the memos, which were obtained by CBS News' "60 Minutes," saying experts who examined the memos concluded they were authentic documents produced by Mr. Bush's former commander, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian.

Which experts? Experts like Gen. Bobby Hodges, who has said that he was lied to by CBS and that he thinks the memos are fakes?

In a report on Friday night's "CBS News Evening News," Dan Rather noted that many of those raising questions about the 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 1970s. But some models did, Rather reported. In fact, other Bush military records already released by the White House itself show the same superscript – including one from as far back as 1968.

Superscript in today's modern world of computer typesetting is not just raised from the baseline; it's also smaller in terms of font size. Show me a typewriter that can do that.

Some analysts outside CBS News say they believe the typeface on these memos is New Times Roman, which they claim was not available in the 1970s.

Well, I'm a graphic artist and I can tell you that if you wanted this kind of type in the 1970's, you had to go to a professional printer and get a typesetter to do it. Not very likely for a memo I think. And no typewriter yet discussed by CBS could have created all of these attributes in the same document at the same time.

But the owner of the company that distributes this typing style told CBS News that it has been available since 1931.

But not to the general public until the introduction of Macintosh computers and Pagemaker in the mid-eighties. Before that, if you were using a typewriter, you were typing in courier, a mono spaced font, because typewriters were mostly monospaced. Those that weren't, were very expensive indeed, and even those couldn't do the smartquotes and the kerning that is evident in the memos. They were made with Microsoft Word.

Saturday's issue of the Boston Globe reports that one document expert, Phillip Broussard, who had expressed suspicions about the documents, said "he now believes the documents could have been prepared on an IBM Selectric Composer typewriter available at the time."

Well, now he is saying that the Boston Globe misquoted him.

Anchor Russ Mitchell of the Saturday edition of the CBS Evening News says CBS News contacted Broussard Saturday, and Broussard said he could not dismiss the documents as fake, but he needs to do more analysis before coming to a final conclusion.

Also on Saturday, there were reports that retired National Guard Maj. Gen. Bobby W. Hodges - who corroborated the CBS News account - now says he believes the documents were not real, in part because of recent statements of Jerry Killian's relatives.

CBS News responded Saturday, saying, "We believed General Hodges the first time we spoke with him. We believe the documents to be genuine. We stand by our story and will continue to report on it."

The problem with this is that CBS lied to Hodges the first time they spoke to him. I would call that a difficulty with the story, wouldn't you?

In a statement Friday, CBS News said it stands by its overall story.

Well, they can hardly admit that the lied now, can they? What little reputation they have is rapidly going down the drain and they want to stop it. What else were they going to say?

"This report was not based solely on recovered documents, but rather on a preponderance of evidence, including documents that were provided by unimpeachable sources, interviews with former Texas National Guard officials and individuals who worked closely back in the early 1970s with Colonel Jerry Killian and were well acquainted with his procedures, his character and his thinking," the statement read.

"In addition, the documents are backed up not only by independent handwriting and forensic document experts but by sources familiar with their content," the statement continued. "Contrary to some rumors, no internal investigation is underway at CBS News nor is one planned."

What does a handwriting expert know about graphic design and typography? We are talking about a printing issue, not a handwriting one. Experts in the graphic design and printing fields are finding all sorts of problems with the documents, which is why no one thinks they are the real deal. And while we're on the subject, the number of "experts" in CBS's corner is getting thiner by the minute.

Document and handwriting examiner Marcel Matley analyzed the documents for CBS News. He says he believes they are real. And he is concerned about exactly what is being examined by some of the people questioning the documents, because deterioration occurs each time a document is reproduced. And the documents being analyzed outside of CBS News have been photocopied, faxed, scanned and downloaded, and are far removed from the documents CBS News started with.

Well then, provide the originals so we can see them.

Matley did an interview with "60 Minutes" prior to Wednesday's broadcast. He looked at the documents and the signatures of Col. Killian, comparing known documents with the colonel's signature on the newly discovered ones.

"We look basically at what's called significant or insignificant features to determine whether it's the same person or not," Matley said. "I have no problem identifying them. I would say based on our available handwriting evidence, yes, this is the same person."

Matley finds the signatures to be some of the most compelling evidence.

Reached Friday by satellite, Matley said, "Since it is represented that some of them are definitely his, then we can conclude they are his signatures."

How is it that one can say a signature is real based on a copy of a copy of a copy?

Matley said he's not surprised that questions about the documents have come up.

I would say that CBS is very, very surprised indeed. And very, very angry that they got caught with their pants down.