Jump to content

McAuliffe Statement on Breaking News About Bush's Military Record


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

The DNC

quote:

Washington, D.C. - Responding to breaking news regarding George W. Bush's military record, Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe issued this statement:

"George W. Bush's cover story on his National Guard service is rapidly unraveling.

"Tonight's CBS New report made clear that President Bush has misrepresented the nature of his National Guard service for decades to the American people. And now that questions are being raised, only Bush can settle this once and for all by answering the unanswered questions about his Guard service.

"CBS News exclusively obtained documents that flatly contradict two of Bush's often repeated claims about his time in the National Guard - that he received no special treatment and that he fulfilled his duty.

"According to these new military documents, political pressure was applied and strings were pulled for President Bush at every step of the process: to get in the Guard, to stay in the Guard, and to exit the Guard.

"These are serious charges. They have not been leveled by his opponent. Or by a political party. Or by an outside group. They are based on documents from the personal files of Col. Jerry Killian, Bush's squadron commander.

"George W. Bush needs to answer why he regularly misled the American people about his time in the Guard and who applied political pressure on his behalf to have his performance reviews 'sugarcoated'?"


So, what is Terry talking about?

This Is what he is talking about.

CBS news and Dan Rather on 60 minutes 2 last night made a HUGE stink about these documents.

Yeah, Jag, so why did you post this?

Because it is looking more and more lik they are FORGERIES!!! ROFLMAO!!! I just LOVE IT!!!!

CBS is freaking out, ABC is beating them over the head, and Dan Rather is depressed, and royally pissed off.

And why is that?

HEEHEE, glad you asked!!

American Spectator

You need a subscription, so I will just post the salient points.

quote:

Anatomy of a Forgery

By The Prowler

Published 9/10/2004 12:09:06 AM

More than six weeks ago, an opposition research staffer for the Democratic National Committee received documents purportedly written by President George W. Bush's Texas Air National Guard squadron commander, the late Col. Jerry Killian.

The oppo researcher claimed the source was "a retired military officer." According to a DNC staffer, the documents were seen by both senior staff members at the DNC, as well as the Kerry campaign.

"More than a couple people heard about the papers," says the DNC staffer. "I've heard that they ended up with the Kerry campaign, for them to decide to how to proceed, and presumably they were handed over to 60 Minutes, which used them the other night. But I know this much. When there was discussion here, there were doubts raised about their authenticity."

The concerns arose from the sourcing. "It wasn't clear that our source for the documents would have had access to them. Our person couldn't confirm from what file, from what original source they came from."

The documents that CBS News used were not documents from any of Bush's personnel files from his time in the National Guard. Rather, CBS News stated that they were documents uncovered in the personnel files of Killian. That would explain why the White House or the Pentagon had never before released or even seen them.

Snip

"The problem was we had one set of documents from Bush's file that had Killian calling Bush 'an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot.' And someone who Killian said 'performed in an outstanding manner.' Then you have these new documents and the tone and content are so different."

The CBS producer said that some alarms bells went off last week when the signatures and initials of Killian on the documents in hand did not match up with other documents available on the public record, but producers chose to move ahead with the story. "This was too hot not to push. If there were doubts, those people didn't show it," says the producer, who works on a rival CBS News program.

Now, the producer says, there is growing concern inside the building on 57th Street that they may have been suckered by the Kerry campaign. "There is a school of thought here that the Kerry people dumped this in our laps, figuring we'd do the heavy lifting on the story. That maybe they had doubts about these documents but hoped we'd get more information," says the producer. "If that's the case, then we're bigger fools than we already appear to be judging by all the chatter about how these documents could be forgeries."

ABC News' political unit held a conference call at 7:00 p.m. Thursday evening to discuss the memo and its potential ramifications should the documents turn out to be a forgery. That meeting took place around the time that the deceased Killian's son made public statements questioning the documents' authenticity.

According to one ABC News employee, some reporters believe that the Kerry campaign as well as the DNC were parties in duping CBS, but a smaller segment believe that both the DNC and the Kerry campaign were duped by Karl Rove, who would have engineered the flap to embarrass the opposition.


WHOOPS!!!

ROFLMAO!!!

Kerry and the Democrats are unraveling BIG time, when you have to go to forged documents in order to make your opponent look bad, you know that something is definitely wrong.

Look for the meltdown very soon, it is coming to a head!!

I just love it so!! ROFLMAO!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yahoonews

They are just eating it up, and it is still the top story!! ROFLMAO!!!

quote:

There was no explanation why the Pentagon was unable to find the documents on its own.


Well,um, well, maybe BECAUSE THEY ARE FORGERIES, so the pentagon wouldn't have had a copy of them to find on their own!!

I am breathless with laughter here, I am absolutely ROLLING!!

These "documents" were made on a computer, in Times Roman font, the rank is done wrong, his first and middle name are missing, and the family of the deceased are having a cow, because these documents supposedly came from his personal files, and the family DID NOT give ANYONE any of his personal files.

WHOOPS!!!

The nedia bias has just shown it's ugly head, and CBS and Dan Rather are gonna get screwed BADLY.

I just love this so much, I have not laughed this hard in months!!!

Edit:

It just gets BETTER and better!!

New York Post

quote:

CBS'S BIG BLUNDER?

By JOHN PODHORETZ

September 10, 2004 -- THE populist revolu tion against the so- called mainstream media continues. Yesterday, the citizen journalists who produce blogs on the Internet ÔÇö and their engaged readers ÔÇö engaged in the wholesale exposure of what appears to be a presidential-year dirty trick against George W. Bush.

What the bloggers and their audiences did was call into profound question the authenticity of four documents proudly trumpeted by CBS News in a much-heralded investigative report on Wednesday night's edition of "60 Minutes" about the president's National Guard service in the early 1970s.

These were "previously unseen documents . . . obtained by '60 Minutes,' " the network bragged Wednesday night on its Web site. Their author, supposedly, was Bush's squadron commander, Jerry Killian, who died 20 years ago.

They "include a memorandum from May 1972," CBS reports, "where Killian writes that Lt. Bush called him to talk about 'how he can get out of coming to drill from now through November.' " A document dated "18 August 1973" complains that Killian is being asked to "sugar coat" Bush's record. "I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job," the document says.

Liberals went wild with glee about the story, especially after the onslaught on John Kerry's Vietnam record by his fellow Swift-boat veterans.

Kevin Drum, the most talented of the left-wing bloggers, wrote: "This story is a perfect demonstration of the difference between the Swift-boat controversy and the National Guard controversy. Both are tales from long ago and both are related to Vietnam, but . . . in the National Guard case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence provides additional confirmation that the charges against Bush are true."

Drum simply assumed that the documents were above-board. So did The New York Times and The Washington Post, both of which put the story on its front page on Thursday.

They were doubtless swayed by the fact that CBS said " '60 Minutes' consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic."

Maybe "60 Minutes" should have tried another expert or two.

CBS made the four documents available in their original form on its Web site Wednesday night.

And by yesterday morning, they were being examined with a fine tooth comb.

The Minneapolis lawyers who run powerlineblog.com were on the case early. Two of the blog's readers directed their attention to a note left on an Internet bulletin board on the freerepublic.com Web site ÔÇö the 47th posting on the topic there.

Post No. 47 pointed out that there was something off about these documents from the 1970s: The spacing between the letters and the words was proportional, and only a few IBM electric typewriters could achieve that effect back then.

From there it was off to the races. Once anyone who had had experience writing and typing in the 1970s began examining the documents, it was impossible not to see some weird anachronisms that suggested they had been crafted not on a 1970s typewriter, but using Microsoft Word.

Charles Johnson, who runs the wonderful littlegreenfootballs.com, simply typed one of the memos over using Microsoft Word's New Times Roman font and, lo and behold, the document came out exactly identical to the one on the CBS site, down to the letter spacing.

The documents contain such features as superscript lettering, which is done automatically by Microsoft Word, and curly quotation marks. A brief glance at a Web site called selectric.org, run by an amateur typewriter fanatic, reveals dozens of IBM electric typefaces ÔÇö and none of them has curly quotation marks.

By 3 o'clock, the very careful and honest Jim Geraghty, who produces invaluable material every day on nationalreview.com's Kerry Spot, was saying flatly, "CBS had better have one heck of a defense for this."

Yeah, it had better. I thought on Wednesday that it was scandalous for "60 Minutes" to turn over a good deal of its time on Wednesday night to one Ben Barnes, a one-time Texas political powerhouse who now claims he got George W. Bush into the National Guard.

The problem is not, as some would have it, that Barnes has raised half a million dollars for Kerry. The problem is that Barnes has already lied about this on videotape, and I use the word "lied" without difficulty, where he says he pulled strings for Bush when "I was lieutenant governor of Texas."

The thing is that George W. Bush was sworn into the National Guard in May 1968. Ben Barnes didn't become lieutenant governor until 1969.

From the lies of Ben Barnes to the apparent forgeries of who-knows-who-did-it ÔÇö why has "60 Minutes" exposed itself in this way?

We all know why. Its producers and others in the media think George Bush deserves to be beaten up now because of the beating administered to John Kerry in August. In some weird way, the editors and producers believe this is fairness at work.

Instead, they have unmasked themselves. Or rather, they have been unmasked by ordinary people who can see what they and their hired experts evidently could not.


To say that I am LOVING this, would be an understatement!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

These "documents" were made on a computer, in Times Roman font...

You just don't get it, do you? What kind of an idiot are you?

CAN'T you SEE that BILL Gates WAS so IMPRESSED with THE typing OF the MILITARY back IN 1972 THAT he PATTERNED the NEW Times ROMAN font AFTER this MEMO and OTHERS like IT? Geez, AND you CALL yourself A military INTELLIGENCE expert?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got some REAL proof here now, this is just too good.

OK, here is the original document.

1.gif

Here it is retyped in Word.

2.gif

Here they are overlapped.

3.gif

Whoops, Game, set match!!

They are forgeries, and it has been done with the other 3 documents that CBS revealed last night as well.

All 3 are FAKES....

The mainstream media, the Democratic party, AND the Kerry campaign are gonna be eating BIG time crow in the morning.

Kerry just lost the election.... ROFLMAO!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter if it's proven to be a forgery. It's what they would have written at the time anyway, and probably did but the Pentagon conveniently "lost" the documents and the guy "conveniently" died 20 years ago.

Besides, everybody knows that technology is first invented for government purposes and then eventually works its way into the consumer marketplace. If fancy typesetting and word processing is common today, that just proves that the military had it back then but kept it Top Secret. These are probably the documents that Sandy Berger stuffed down his other pant leg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's that fact that CBS touted them as being authentic "They were doubtless swayed by the fact that CBS said " '60 Minutes' consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic." ". They should have, as the article states above, made a concerted effort to get a second opinion. Not to mention the fact that they knew they were frauds and looked straight faced as they proclaim the authenticity of those documents while licking their chops.

I wonder how they are going to worm out of this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this on another website:

quote:

Microsoft announces release of Word '73

Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) today announced the release of its long-awaited '73 release of its popular Word word processing program. The new release allows implementation of popular word features, such as superscripting, proportional fonts, and center justification, on older technology, such as IBM selectric typewriters, and quill pens.

Said prominent Kerry supporter Bill Gates "While some users, principally those born after 1980, have questioned why we should implement MS Word on pre-PC tehnology, we in Redmond recongize a sudden need for our product, particularly for retroactively producing important memoranda for political campaigns. There are thosen who argue MS Word did not even exist in 1973! Well it does now!

Microsoft realizes that there is an issue with the superscripted 'th' character. It will be corrected in version 1.1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting overlay there Jag, but they don't quite match up exactly. What's odd is the alignment and kerning appears to be off slightly the further to the right that the text goes and then seems to come back in line. Could be distortion from the fax copy, but I'm not sure.

They may yet be proven as forgeries, but I don't think it was done specifically in Word. Check out the lower case 'G' in the word (flight) on the second line, it's totally different and DOES look like a mechanical font versus a bitmap or TT.

Reserving my judgement for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only are they forgeries Grizzle, they are BAD forgeries.

Read the following for the National review.

quote:

THE CBS PAPERS [Jed Babbin]

I spoke to Col. Bill Campenni (USAF ret) earlier this morning. As I've written before, Campenni was a member of the President's squadron and flew with him often. Campenni told me that there are a whole slew of reasons -- beyond those being debated now -- to question the authenticity of the CBS papers:

1. The 4 May 1972 order and the 1 August 1972 memo both have a letterhead for the wrong organization. Correspondence and orders in those days would be issued in the name of the parent organization -- the 147th Fighter Interceptor Group -- rather than the squadron. The letterhead is typed. They used printed ANG letterhead;

2. Orders were issued on the standard USAF orders form. (I still have a stack of my old ones. There's not a "memo" among them). Campenni remembers that orders weren't issued as "memos" like the 4 May 72 document;

3. The Killian "CYA" memo of August 1973 refers to pressure by Gen. Standt. The problem with this is that Standt retired in 1972. Why would anyone be worried about pressure from him?

4. Jerry Killian, according to Campenni, never went near a typewriter. In the Air Force, in those days, notes -- if anyone kept them at all -- were handwritten. That raises questions about both the 19 May 72 and the 18 August 73 memos. And, lest we forget, bureaucrats -- not fighter jocks -- write "cya" memos.

5. Orders -- like the purported 4 May 72 order to take the flight physical - wouldn't normally have been signed by Killian. They would be signed by a senior sergeant "by order of" Killian.

If, as it appears, someone faked these papers they did a bad job of it. I can tell you that in the early to mid-1970's when I was on active duty, the active service didn't have anything fancier than the earliest models of the IBM Selectric typewriter, and many offices didn't even have those. The reserves and national guard had our cast-offs, so it's terribly unlikely they could have produced anything as fancy as these papers. (Is it just my imagination, or is Dan Rather's nose growing longer every day?)


And the Inplosion continues, not only has this story gotten legs, it has boots on, and it kicking Dan Rather, CBS, the Democrat party, and the Kerry campaing in the Glutious Maximus!! ROFLMAO!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't you get it??? They consulted a HANDWRITING analyst, meaning that the memo above must have been HANDWRITTEN by Col. Killian. I'm sure Microsoft saw some of his letters to his wife later and they copied the font from those.

(man that guy had steady hands)

Another thing. Have they checked the paper? Is it 3-hole punch Xerox paper you can buy from the store that was manufactured a month ago, or it it 30 year old paper? I'm guessing there must have been some paper manufacturing changes in the last 30 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Kerry and Bush were to engage in any free-form debate, Bush would loose miserably. As it stands , they are pretty much scripted giving GW the ability do his homework. It kind of defeats the whole purpose of having a debate if you ask me.

I want to see how candidates can think on their feet, not regurgitate some canned response to questions they get beforehand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is really sad IMO. CBS and Dan Rather have totally lost all credibility with this. It is so obviously a forgery that I don't believe they had an "expert" look at or verify the documents at all.

Then again, Al Gore says he invented the internet, maybe he secretly had MS word running on a computer in 1973. hmmmm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Andergum:

This is really sad IMO. CBS and Dan Rather have totally lost all credibility with this. It is so obviously a forgery that I don't believe they had an "expert" look at or verify the documents at all.

Then again, Al Gore says he invented the internet, maybe he secretly had MS word running on a computer in 1973. hmmmm

I don't understand how so many of you have already come to the conclusion these are forgeries (actually I do and it's called partisanship.)

NO one has thus far come out and said that these are indeed forgeries. The fact remains that while they appear suspicious, the technology to produce such a document was possible at the time, even if it was rare.

The "expert" they had look at the docs was to analyze the signatures not the typeface.

A little skepticism goes a long way, but you guys would make terrible jurors.

Something tells me even if the documents are proven true none of you will retract your opinions and will insist they are still forgeries.

I'm still waiting for all the facts, it's what level headed people do.

As for Al Gore, that's another lie perpetuated by the republicans.

"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet" Al Gore 1999

He never used the word "invent" that was the republicans doing and I guess part of their inability to comprehend the spoken word.

In the 1980's Al Gore, along with others, fought continually to increase funding for the military's emergency network, Arpanet (because he saw the potential for it's uses in the private sector) that ultimately grew into the Internet that we all use today. Why shouldn't he take some credit for promoting the system? That's what politicians DO. But don't take my word for it, check it out for yourselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THe fact is that they are indeed Forgeries, it has been proven beyond ANY reasonable doubt.

CBS and Dan Rather are TOAST!!

And if you guys wish to discuss the debates, please start your own thread.

The fact is that Bush will win the debates handily.

He is down to earth, he tells it like it is, and is comfortable in front of crowds of people.

Kerry is not comfortable in front of crowds and is not at all personable.

If a question comes at Kerry that he has not prepared for, he's lost, and there will be plenty of those, and Kerry is going to lose these debates, not over facts or answers, but attitude.

Just like Gore, his holier then thou, I am more intelligent then you are and total disresepct for the president is gonna kill him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

The fact remains that while they appear suspicious, the technology to produce such a document was possible at the time, even if it was rare.

Do you really believe that "rare" technology would be given to a Lt. Colonel at a lowly Texas Air National Guard base for routine office typing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Schacher:

quote:

The fact remains that while they appear suspicious, the technology to produce such a document was possible at the time, even if it was rare.

Do you really believe that "rare" technology would be given to a Lt. Colonel at a lowly Texas Air National Guard base for routine office typing?


Don't be mistaken, I have serious doubts myself and lean towards the idea that they are forgeries, but it has not been proven one way or the other. Until then everything is speculation and I'm not one prone to jump to conclusions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curiosity got the best of me and I wanted to see how rare proportional spaced typewriters were at the time. Turns out, not so.

The IBM Selectric Executive model first introduced in the 1940's supported 4 different widths for characters as did each successive model up through the early 70's. They were known for their near typeset quality of printing and often used as interface keyboards for computers.

These were available in retail so it's not impossible to imagine one of those could have been used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

The IBM Selectric Executive model

I used one in high school, in 1973. The Indiana based school, had received a government grant, putting them in every high school in the state.

I think those documents, are likely...forgeries. And this, because of the "lack of" response from bush and co, but the SAME thing which leads me to this suspician, also leads me to believe the bush people were behind their distribution.

I have to admit, it would be a good ploy, to make bush's shitty military record, less important, while increasing the speculation, that he had successfully completed his obligation.

Thus; neutralizing TWO very important character flaws, for a man leading our country....and at the same time... arrogantly willing to bow up at the WORLD in ignorant contempt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...