[Cody Dawg]

Apparently they came from Kinkos... in Texas

Unbelievable.

(And, yeah, yeah...if the mods want to merge it with another thread that's fine with me. Some of the threads are so far off topic that I'm not really sure where it should go.)

Let's see how THIS develops.

Who thinks that the documents are real...

Who thinks that the documents are entirely fabricated...

Give answers for each, please.

[RAILhead]

Heh, I just added this to the end of the other thread.

Maury

[Cody Dawg]

Hey, Maury, guess we both have it covered, then!



I find it very interesting...wonder if Dan would "Rather" have not pushed this issue as much as he did?

[RAILhead]

A fun site to check is RatherBiased.com. They're doing a pretty good job of tracking this story, so check it out thoughout this whole Ratheragte situation.

It's rather hilarious!

(Ahh, whatever -- you were thinking it, too!)

[Cody Dawg]

LOL!

Yes, I'll do that -- that's just Dandy!

[Cody Dawg]

Spouse says, "There's not a dan thing that he can do about his career now.

My son says, "He's like a dansel in distress."

Yes, this is all rather amusing.

I'll bet the other MacNNers have some better quips than these.

[RAILhead]

Here's the article, quoted in full, from The Washington Post...

Documents allegedly written by a deceased officer that raised questions about President Bush's service with the Texas Air National Guard bore markings showing they had been faxed to CBS News from a Kinko's copy shop in Abilene, Tex., according to another former Guard officer who was shown the records by the network.

The markings provide one piece of evidence suggesting a source for the documents, whose authenticity has been hotly disputed since CBS aired them in a "60 Minutes" broadcast Sept. 8. The network has declined to name the person who provided them, saying the source was confidential, or to explain how the documents came to light after more than three decades.

There is only one Kinko's in Abilene, and it is 21 miles from the Baird, Tex., home of retired Texas National Guard officer Bill Burkett, who has been named by several news outlets as a possible source for the documents.

Robert Strong, who was one of three people interviewed by "60 minutes," said he was shown copies of the documents by CBS anchor Dan Rather and producer Mary Mapes on Sept. 5, three days before the broadcast. He said at least one of the documents bore a faxed header indicating it had been sent from a Kinko's in Abilene.

Strong's comments came as CBS News President Andrew Heyward in an interview acknowledged that there were "unresolved issues" that the network wanted "to get to the bottom of." Since the broadcast, critics have pointed to a host of unexplained problems about the memos, which bore dates from 1972 and 1973, including signs that they had been written on a computer rather than a Vietnam-era typewriter.

"I feel that we did a tremendous amount of reporting before the story went on the air or we wouldn't have put it on the air," Heyward said in an interview last night, while acknowledging "a ferocious debate about these documents."

Asked what role Burkett may have played in CBS's reporting of the report, Heyward said: "I'm not going to get into any discussion of who the sources are."

Burkett, who has accused Bush aides of ordering the destruction of some portions of the president's National Guard record because they might have been politically embarrassing, did not return telephone calls to his home. His lawyer, David Van Os, issued a statement on Burkett's behalf saying he "no longer trusts any possible outcome of speaking to the press on any issue regarding George W. Bush and does not choose to dignify recent spurious attacks upon his character with any comment."

In news interviews earlier this year, Burkett said he overheard a telephone conversation in the spring of 1997 in which top Bush aides asked the head of the Texas National Guard to sanitize Bush's files as he was running for a second term as governor of Texas. Several days later, he said, he saw dozens of pages from Bush's military file dumped in a trash can at Camp Mabry, the Guard's headquarters.

The Bush aides Burkett named as participants in the telephone conversation were Chief of Staff Joe M. Allbaugh and spokespersons Karen Hughes and Dan Bartlett. All three Bush aides and former Texas National Guard Maj. Gen. Daniel James have strongly denied the allegations.

Suspicions that Burkett could have been a source for the CBS documents first surfaced earlier this week when Newsweek magazine reported that Mapes flew to Texas to interview him over the summer. Yesterday, the New York Times reported that a CBS staffer, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed that Burkett was a source for the "60 Minutes" report but "did not know the exact role he played."

Yesterday reporters from several news organizations were camped near Blair, Tex., outside Burkett's home, which is on a working ranch, with a gate barring access to a one-story farmhouse and a pickup truck outside. At 6 p.m. Central Time, Burkett walked to the gate on his cane with a black dog by his side to collect his mail. He refused to answer questions over whether he provided the documents to CBS.

"Get out my way," he told the reporters. "You need to go home."

Earlier this year, Burkett gave interviews to numerous news outlets, including The Washington Post, alleging corruption and malfeasance at the top of the Texas National Guard, many of which have never been substantiated. He has also been a named source for several reports by USA Today, which reported Monday that it had independently obtained copies of the disputed memos soon after the broadcast.

Like CBS News, USA Today has declined to name the source of its memos on the grounds of confidentiality.

Burkett, who served with the Texas National Guard in an administrative capacity before his 1998 retirement, has been involved in a bitter dispute with the Guard over medical benefits after suffering from a tropical disease following a military assignment to Panama. He has told reporters that he suffered a nervous breakdown and was hospitalized for depression after he left the Guard.

Burkett has provided different accounts of exactly what Bush records he allegedly saw in the trash can at Camp Mabry. At times, he has described them as "payroll-type documents" and performance assessments. But in an Aug. 14 posting to a Web log, www.steveverdon.com, he said he saw "a two-page counseling statement" signed by Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, the officer named by "60 Minutes" as the author of its Bush memos.

Author James Moore, who relied on Burkett as a primary source for a book attacking Bush as having wriggled out of his Guard service, said in an interview yesterday that he did not think Burkett provided the memos to CBS. "His life is complicated enough already, and I don't why he would make further complications for himself," Moore said.

On Capitol Hill, meanwhile, 39 Republican House members, led by Majority Whip Roy Blunt (Mo.), wrote a letter to Heyward demanding that CBS retract its report. Accusing the network of becoming "part of a campaign to deceive the public and to defame the president," the lawmakers said: "CBS reporters would not accept such behavior from public officials like ourselves, and we cannot accept it from them."

Separately, Rep. Christopher Cox (R-Calif.), citing reports in The Post and the Dallas Morning News, asked that a House communications subcommittee investigate what he called "the continued use of CBS News of apparently forged documents" intended to damage Bush's reputation and "influence the outcome of the 2004 presidential election." But the panel's chairman, Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), rejected the request, saying that the oversight of network news should be left to the viewing public and news media.

In a related development, White House press secretary Scott McClellan hinted that more documents regarding Bush's National Guard service may soon be released. Asked whether officials in the White House have seen unreleased documents, McClellan called that "a very real possibility." Other officials with knowledge of the situation said more documents had indeed been uncovered and would be released in the coming days.

Staff writers Howard Kurtz and Dana Milbank in Washington and Sylvia Moreno in Baird, Tex., contributed to this report.

I find this article rather interesting!

Maury

[Cody Dawg]

Great post, Maury, as usual.



I have a feeling that it will prove dangerous to Rather's career!

[aberdeenwriter]

Well...

I guess I get to break the news (thanks GAJ!) that the Col.'s Secretary attests that the MEMOS ARE FAKE!!!

(I'm excited by getting the MacNN scoop on this. But we know what to expect of President Bush, so how does this information, even if what she says is true, change things?)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...ess/index.html

CBS revisits Bush's Guard memos

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The growing controversy over President Bush's National Guard records, and whether some of the memos aired on CBS were fake, took another turn Wednesday night.

CBS News reported that the documents it first broadcast last week on "60 Minutes II" appear to be forgeries to the woman who would have typed the original memos in 1972 and 1973.

But Marian Carr Knox, a former Texas Air National Guard secretary, said she did type similar documents for her boss, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian.

"I know that I didn't type them. However, the information in those is correct," Knox told CBS anchor Dan Rather.

Knox, 86, had previously told the same story to the Dallas Morning News in a report that was published Wednesday morning.

The newspaper said Knox "spoke with precise recollection about dates, people and events."

She told the Morning News, "I remember very vividly when Bush was there and all the yak-yak that was going on about it."

In the memos, the author complained he was being pressured to "sugar coat" the future president's performance evaluations and that Bush failed to meet performance standards, including getting a required physical exam.

The author also wrote that Bush -- whose father was a Texas congressman at the time -- was "talking to someone upstairs" to get permission to transfer to the Alabama National Guard to work on a Senate campaign.

The legitimacy of the memos came under fire almost immediately as people posted doubts on a conservative Internet bulletin board. Soon, a number of document experts suggested the memos were not written on a typewriter in the 1970s but generated on a computer at a later date.

Both Killian's former wife and son also questioned their authenticity.

Rather defended his reporting on air Wednesday saying the controversy that followed last week's report did not challenge the "heart" of the story.

He said that a body of reporting, not just the memos in question, show the future president received preferential treatment to get into the Texas Air National Guard and then failed to fulfill his obligations while an airman.

Bush received an honorable discharge, which has not been in dispute.

Knox told Rather that Killian was "upset" that Bush did not obey his order to have a physical, and she said the young lieutenant showed disregard for the rules to a degree that irritated other pilots.

Knox said the information about Bush in the memos was familiar and that she had typed documents for Killian with similar complaints. She also said the colonel did keep private "cover your back" files.

But, she said she did not type the memos that were aired by CBS because they were written in a format she didn't use and there was Army terminology not used in the Air National Guard.

Knox suggested that the memos obtained by CBS News might have been recreations made by someone who had seen the other documents, although she conceded that was "supposition" on her part.

Earlier on Wednesday, CBS News President Andrew Heyward said the network "would not have put the report on the air if we did not believe in every aspect of it." However, he also said CBS News would try to resolve "unresolved issues" related to the report.

"Enough questions have been raised that we're going to redouble our efforts to answer those questions," Heyward said.

The response followed intense criticism from Republicans.

House Majority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Missouri, said he collected signatures from 39 colleagues on a letter sent to the network calling for a retraction and asking CBS News to reveal the source of the documents.

"Clearly, their sources aren't what they need to be, or they're not willing to reveal even the nature of who their sources are," Blunt said. "It's hard for me to believe ... that CBS, an organization with a long and distinguished history in journalism in the past, would be willing to stand by this story when virtually everybody else has questions about it."

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said, "The one thing that is not under question is the timing of these orchestrated attacks by the Democrats on the president's service."

"And these are old, recycled attacks," McClellan added. "The Democrats have made it clear that they intend to try to tear down the president and throw the kitchen sink at us because they can't run on John Kerry's record and because they see him falling behind in the polls."

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Man, what a sad and sorry debacle. I can�t believe the absolute sloppiness of Rather and See-BS to stoop this low, and then continue to defend it. What a sad demise to Rather�s career and reputation.

The feeble attempts at trying to keep the charade going are only digging Rather and See-BS deeper into a hole. I simply can�t believe -even in a lame attempt to wipe all that egg off his face- that Rather would allow such laughable pabulum as this put forth: "I know that I didn't type them. However, the information in those is correct," Knox told CBS anchor Dan Rather.

Ahh, so this is a liberty automatically granted to partisan journalists these days? If they get caught passing forged documents, then just cough up some old lady who didn�t have a thing to do with them, and get her to say that the info is correct! Then of course ignore anyone who says something other than your slant- like the person�s son and wife.

And then this line: Rather defended his reporting on air Wednesday saying the controversy that followed last week's report did not challenge the "heart" of the story.

So now the �I want to believe!/Facts and blatant forgeries don�t matter� school of �BS-journalism� moves out of the Michael Moore camp into the �mainstream� media at See-BS?

This bullcrap is straight out of Moore�s shuck and jive playbook. Amazing to see it from Rather, who frankly, I thought had more integrity.

Shame on See-BS for continuing this farce. Rather than just own up, apologize, and admit they plopped a greasy, steaming, smelly DUMP right in the middle of the dining room table, they�re still shamelessly insisting: �No, no! This isn�t $hit! It�s caviar!�

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:


Ahh, so this is a liberty automatically granted to partisan journalists these days? If they get caught passing forged documents, then just cough up some old lady who didn�t have a thing to do with them, and get her to say that the info is correct! Then of course ignore anyone who says something other than your slant- like the person�s son and wife.

And then this line: Rather defended his reporting on air Wednesday saying the controversy that followed last week's report did not challenge the "heart" of the story.

Shame on See-BS for continuing this farce. Rather than just own up, apologize, and admit they plopped a greasy, steaming, smelly DUMP right in the middle of the dining room table, they�re still shamelessly insisting: �No, no! This isn�t $hit! It�s caviar!�

Could the Col.'s Secretary be telling the truth AND the memos be forgeries?

Funny line about the caviar.

[PacHead]

Kinko's lol.

Dan Rather should be fired, C-BS fined a huge amount of money, and C-BS must reveal the source, so whoever sent it can be dealt with.

[chris_h]

Originally posted by PacHead:


C-BS fined a huge amount of money, and C-BS must reveal the source, so whoever sent it can be dealt with.

Fined by who, and for what, exactly?

And forcing them to reveal the source, eh? How would you justify that, legally?

You are joking, yes?

[spauldingg]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Kinko's lol.

Dan Rather should be fired, C-BS fined a huge amount of money, and C-BS must reveal the source, so whoever sent it can be dealt with.

Yeah. Same goes with this guy.

[voodoo]

Truth? Who cares, right?

The SwiftBoatVets for Lies smeared John Kerry with unsubstantiated lies and accusations. Didn't take long to dig up the TRUTH in that matter. Never the less many USAmerican and perhaps others too still think the SwiftBoat group was telling the truth.

I think it is awful when things like this come up, for either canditate. The only important thing is for Bush to lose but that can be achieved completely by skipping character assasinations and history revision and just by focusing on issues and the 4 year record Bush has as president.

[RAILhead]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Truth? Who cares, right?

The SwiftBoatVets for Lies smeared John Kerry with unsubstantiated lies and accusations. Didn't take long to dig up the TRUTH in that matter. Never the less many USAmerican and perhaps others too still think the SwiftBoat group was telling the truth.

I think it is awful when things like this come up, for either canditate. The only important thing is for Bush to lose but that can be achieved completely by skipping character assasinations and history revision and just by focusing on issues and the 4 year record Bush has as president.

Voodoo, my dear friend, none of the SwiftBoatVets were ANCHORMEN OR EDITORS FOR A MAJOR NIGHTLY NEWS ORGANIZATION. Rather, Dan-o IS.



Your comparison is teh crap.

Maury

[voodoo]

Originally posted by RAILhead:
Voodoo, my dear friend, none of the SwiftBoatVets were ANCHORMEN OR EDITORS FOR A MAJOR NIGHTLY NEWS ORGANIZATION. Rather, Dan-o IS.



Your comparison is teh crap.

Maury

Maury my good and honorable friend, I was trying to make a point about partisan slanders. No matter who makes them it doesn't seem to matter if they are true or not. A substantial amount of people will believe them.

I was trying to be as non-partisan as I could.

[Cody Dawg]

Dan Rather should be fired, C-BS fined a huge amount of money, and C-BS must reveal the source, so whoever sent it can be dealt with.

Yes, remember how upset CBS was with the Janet Jackson "wardrobe malfunction?"

What do we call this? A "forgery malfunction"?



How much does the FCC fine Rather for his "mistake," eh?

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
How much does the FCC fine Rather for his "mistake," eh?

$87 Billion.

Let's make Dan personally fund the liberation of Iraq.

[Cody Dawg]

That's an awesome idea!

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Kinko's lol.

Dan Rather should be fired, C-BS fined a huge amount of money, and C-BS must reveal the source, so whoever sent it can be dealt with.

Yeah that is what I want to know. WHO faked it.

He would be sued for Libel.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by RAILhead:
Voodoo, my dear friend, none of the SwiftBoatVets were ANCHORMEN OR EDITORS FOR A MAJOR NIGHTLY NEWS ORGANIZATION. Rather, Dan-o IS.



Your comparison is teh crap.

Maury

voodoo always makes silly comparisons.

I'd like to know all the truth about the SB guys and if their accusations are true.

I mean there is no doubt Kerry was lying out his lower orifice. I would just like to know what about exactly.

After the election and Kerry goes back to being a nobody, it will probably all come out.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
voodoo always makes silly comparisons.

I do?

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Yeah that is what I want to know. WHO faked it.

He would be sued for Libel.

Libel? That's nowhere near representative of what's going on here.

What we have here is someone creating forged documents with the sole purpose of bringing down the commander-in-chief and top leadership of government during a time of war. That sounds more like treason to me.

[constrictor]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Libel? That's nowhere near representative of what's going on here.

What we have here is someone creating forged documents with the sole purpose of bringing down the commander-in-chief and top leadership of government during a time of war. That sounds more like treason to me.

Sounds more like enemy combatants to me. We should postpone the election.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Libel? That's nowhere near representative of what's going on here.

What we have here is someone creating forged documents with the sole purpose of bringing down the commander-in-chief and top leadership of government during a time of war. That sounds more like treason to me.

Yes but you and me both know it will never come to that. Plus for SOME reason CBS is trying to HIDE who gave them said information.

Now if it was legit, why would they be trying to do that?

Did you read in USA Today were Rather was trying to paint himself as non-partisan?

[PacHead]

I bet there's a ton of charges they could press against the person.

Treason, forging govt. documents, etc. etc.

Probably 123 charges

[thunderous_funker]

So why does the fact that the were faxed from Kinko's automatically mean they were forgeries?

The documents very well may be forgeries (seems to be good evidence against them), but I fail to understand how having been faxed from Kinko's makes any difference?

If they had been faxed from Western Union would that make them more or less credible?

[PacHead]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
So why does the fact that the were faxed from Kinko's automatically mean they were forgeries?

The documents very well may be forgeries (seems to be good evidence against them), but I fail to understand how having been faxed from Kinko's makes any difference?

If they had been faxed from Western Union would that make them more or less credible?

One of the potential suspects is in Texas apparently. Being from kinko's doesn't mean they're forgeries. They might help find out who sent them.

[AKcrab]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
So why does the fact that the were faxed from Kinko's automatically mean they were forgeries?

What if someone took their documents to kinkos, retyped them at kinkos with MS word, then faxed em off to CBS? Maybe they thought it would be "anonymous" or less of a personal risk?

Until CBS decides to reveal actual original documents or the source, we'll never really know.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by PacHead:
One of the potential suspects is in Texas apparently. Being from kinko's doesn't mean they're forgeries. They might help find out who sent them.

So finding out they're from Kinkos might actually provide the final proof that they are real just as easily as proving them forgeries.

People in this thread are talking like the Kinko's thing is evidence for the defence (Bush). It isn't.

Whether or not the Kinko's clue lead them down the trail to eventually finding the source of the documents or not, one thing it will do is actually the opposite of what people here seem to believe--It will exonerate Dan Rather more than villify him because the blame for the subterfuge will fall on whomever sent the documents.

In other words, it will prove CBS didn't make up the story. They just got duped by whomever created the forgeries.

And there still is the chance that the trail will end at proving the story true. Already it seems that even those who can offer credible proof that the documents are false seem to be corroborating the story that Bush's service record is not as he portrayed it.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by AKcrab:
What if someone took their documents to kinkos, retyped them at kinkos with MS word, then faxed em off to CBS? Maybe they thought it would be "anonymous" or less of a personal risk?

Cept the families and those who were close to said person said he never kept no such records.

I think some people believed certain things about Bush were true. They couldn't find any PROOF to back up their accusations so they made up some themselves.

Now, I am not saying said accusations about Bush are false. I don't know.

But said documents are 99% faked.

[AKcrab]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Now, I am not saying said accusations about Bush are false. I don't know.

But said documents are 99% faked.

I agree completely. I just wanted to try and offer an example of why someone might go to kinkos instead of using their personal PC.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by AKcrab:
I agree completely. I just wanted to try and offer an example of why someone might go to kinkos instead of using their personal PC.

Not really. If they sat at a PC in Kinkos and made the documents there would be just as much evidence to catch them than if they did it from home. In fact, perhaps even MORE evidence since they had to pay to use the PC and there would be witnesses.

I doubt the files were manipulated on a Kinko's PC--too easy to track. I think they just wanted to fax them anonymously.

Does Kinko's make you sign anything or document who uses the fax machine? If not, there's your reason.

Of course, my suppositions assume the person isn't stupid. That may or may not prove to be the case.

[PacHead]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:


Of course, my suppositions assume the person isn't stupid. That may or may not prove to be the case.

The person apparently is stupid, since it took no more than a few hours for serious doubts to be raised about the documents. Whoever C-BS hired to "authenticate" is apparently stupid also, if they are indeed a fraud.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by PacHead:
The person apparently is stupid, since it took no more than a few hours for serious doubts to be raised about the documents. Whoever C-BS hired to "authenticate" is apparently stupid also, if they are indeed a fraud.

Most of their authenticators said it was a fraud too. CBS however stuck with the one person that said it wasn't for some reason.

At least that is what i heard. ..