So now we see evidence that Bush not only failed to take his flight physical, thereby throwing away $1million (in 1970 dollars) that had been invested in his training; he disobeyed a direct order to show up for it, and was suspended from flying not just for failing to take the physical, but for failing to perform up to USAF/TexANG standards. Also, more evidence that he just didn’t show up for months on end, and that someone was putting serious pressure on his superiors to cover it up.
Watching all this, I can’t help agreeing with Matthew Yglseias:
“In a rational universe, like the one I thought I lived in before these books were released, the following things would be true. When the man the president of the United States appointed to be his chief economic policy advisor resigned from the administration and wrote a book about how the president’s economic policy was terrible, this would be terribly damaging to the president. It also would be the case that when the man the president of the United States appointed to be his chief counterterrorism advisor resigned from the administration and wrote a book about how the president’s counterterrorism policy was terrible, this would be terribly damaging to the president. It also would be the case that when the president of the United States unveiled a second term economic policy agenda that his administration’s economists think is a bad idea that that would be terribly damaging to the president. It also would be the case that, when the president’s deputy counterterrorism advisor decided his counterterrorism policy was so bad that he needed to resign and become his opponent’s chief national security advisor that this would reflect poorly on the president. Last but by no means least, it would be the case that if the man the president appointed to be his chief envoy to the Middle East resigned in disgust and started wandering around town talking about how, in fact, “the fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth” (CORRECTION: That was Bush-supporter Tommy Franks, Bush’s former envoy was General Tony Zinni who, without using profanity, said the whole gang in the Pentagon “ought to be gone and replaced”. Apologies for the error, thanks to P.D. for noting it.) was making policy, well, that would damage the president.
Sadly, though, we don’t live in that world. Instead we live in the world where no one cares about expertise, the capital’s premiere newspaper is edited by a man who doesn’t believe in judging the credibility of his paper’s sources, and small inconvenient realities like the disgust felt for Bush’s policies by all the top Republican experts goes almost unnoticed.
In this strange, strange universe I’ve come to recognize as the real world, Kitty Kelly becomes the Great White Hope of liberalism”.
Kitty Kelley and 60 Minutes, that is. I’m torn between thinking: but none of this is anywhere near as important as, oh, the Constitution and all that other stuff I keep writing about; who cares?, and thinking: well, apparently some people do decide who to vote for for President by asking such questions as: would I like to have a beer with this guy? and, can I trust him not to react if some stupid intern flashes a thong at him? To those people, this might be important, and hey, if they feel that way, why not examine the fascinating (to someone else) question of George W. Bush’s indiscretions?
And by the way, speaking of Kitty Kelley, there’s an advance list of her revelations here.
P. S.: If anyone feels like mentioning the SwiftVets, please remember the distinction between criticisms that are supported by the available documentary evidence and criticisms that are contradicted by it. The only reason I have two thoughts above is because I think that in the case of Bush’s service, there is evidence to suggest that he did, e.g., fail to take his physical. Though I still don’t see why this should be more than a blip on anyone’s radar screen, right up there with Bush’s position on alpaca subsidies.
hilzoy, didn’t Bush campaign against alpaca subsidies then while in office change his position before and after the 2002 elections, courting then jilting the alpaca, uhh, harvester vote?
Yes, rilkefan, your memory is correct, This is yet another example of Bush proceeding in a resolute and determined manner which happens, on occasions, actually rather frequently, to involve 180 degree turns. Most people would never dare to confront the hairraising turns that Bush glides through with such panache, but that just goes to show that they don’t have the forcefulness to stay the course, even when it changes.
hilzoy, may I assume you didn’t take a lot of math beyond calculating geodesics in simple metric spaces?
Actually, it’s because of my dazzling grasp of mathematics that I can now inform the world that despite such apparent changes of course as promising a “humbler” foreign policy and giving us Iraq, opposing and then supporting the establishment of the Dept. of Homeland Security, opposing and then supporting federalizing airport screening, promising and then not delivering the Marshall plan for Afghanistan, opposing and then supporting the establishment of the 9/11 Commission, opposing and then supporting budget and hiring authority for the new Director of Central Intelligence, and on and on, Bush’s course has been entirely straight if calculated in a world with 28 dimensions instead of the usual four. Not the world we live in, of course, but them’s the breaks.
Josh was not impressed with the 60min reportage.
Minor correction: Bush has difficulties keeping counter-terrorism advisors. IIRC, 4 or more have departed this appointed administration because of ‘differences.’
hilzoy, maybe you didn’t get the talking points, but all those people who wrote all those mean books were:
A) Crazy
B) Disgruntled
C) Contradicting themselves
D) Trying to drive up book sales
E) Some combination of A, B, C & D
As opposed to, you know, the Swift Boat Veterans.
Hard to imagine that one can claim that Bush “threw away” all the money spent on his training, any more than any other pilot threw away money spent on getting trained on the F-102 at the time. Given that it was pretty much pulled out of the war theater by 1970, and was entirely out of service by 1975. By 1972 or 1973, the USAF had converted its Delta Daggers to drones for target practice. Which I’m sure some of you might think Bush could have helped them out with.
You know, Phil, I did get the Talking Points, but I never used them, since I kept wondering: if Bush keeps appointing all these crazy mean people who are willing to tell not just one lie but whole books full, what does that say about him as a manager and a judge of character? And do we want to reelect someone who keeps appointing such easily disgruntleable (I like that word) crazy people to be, in particular, his counterterrorism advisor? I knew there must be an answer, since Bush, as we know, is the guy we can trust to keep us safe, but since I couldn’t figure out what it was, I thought I’d just keep quiet.
Hard to imagine that one can claim that Bush “threw away” all the money spent on his training, any more than any other pilot threw away money spent on getting trained on the F-102 at the time.
Hopefully, you’re not suggesting pilot training is aircraft-specific and such training might render them useless for other aircraft type/model/series.
Slarti — if the government decides to pull the plane I’m trained to fly out of circulation, my training has been wasted. The possibility that that might happen doesn’t, I think, give me the right to waste it preemptively, especially when I am given a direct order not to.
Hilzoy: You’re correct about not obeying orders for flight physicals. But you’re very much mistaken that pilot training is aircraft-specific. Typically, pilots can rapidly qualify in other type/model/series of aircraft.
That’s why there aren’t en masse retirements when an aircraft such as the F-14 is phased out and other aircraft take its place.
Hopefully, you’re not suggesting pilot training is aircraft-specific and such training might render them useless for other aircraft type/model/series.
Not useless. I didn’t say you couldn’t fly another type. You just have to retrain to fight in another type.
You just have to retrain to fight in another type.
Nope. You have to requalify in another T/M/S, but you’re not starting from square one and your past experience is counted. Of course, every other pilot’s in the same boat.
JadeGold — you are of course right, luckily for the Air Force.
I never said anything at all about starting from square one. Straw everywhere.
Nice weather we’re having … (actually not: where I am, the remnants of Frances are drizzling on us.)
Generally, when a new aircraft T/M/S comes on line–it goes through a series of testing by the specific armed services’ most experienced pilots. In the case of the Navy, that means the aircraft goes through the Navy’s Test Pilot School. At TPS, the new a/c is put through its paces and any subtleties or eccentricities are noted and ironed out. Concurrently, info about the new a/c is passed down the training pipeline in order to train/familiarize existing pilots about the a/c.
Now I’m confused. First we were talking about old aircraft, and now you’re talking about new aircraft. Why do you think this is relevant?
Um, OK, the weather didn’t work.
Want to hear two lovely quotes, one right, one left?
Right: When Robert Conquest’s history of Stalin’s purges, The Great Terror, was republished after the fall of communism, his American publisher asked him to suggest a new title. He came up with “I told you so, you f***ing fools”.
Left (only if applied to current events): Benjamin Disraeli, about John Russell: “If a traveller were informed that such a man was leader of the House of Commons,” Disraeli once remarked of his colleague, “he may well begin to comprehend how the Egyptians worshipped an insect.”
Sorry, the weather’s a bit of a sore point with me these days.
Now I’m confused. First we were talking about old aircraft, and now you’re talking about new aircraft. Why do you think this is relevant?
Why do you think it’s not?
After all, you suggested quite strongly it wasn’t a waste of taxpayer money for Bush to unilaterally quit flying because his particular a/c would be retired several years after his obligation to the NG ended.
You know, I thought of that just after I hit ‘post’, and wanted to take it back. I hope Ivan isn’t too bad, and all the other storms just decide to stay in the middle of the Atlantic and socialize with one another.
“several”, in this case, meaning something less than two? Is this what you mean by “several”?
Of course, the fact that the Delta Dagger had been withdrawn from service in theater probably isn’t worth considering, either.
Oh you silly non-believers, Bush has been “born-again” and his past has no meaning on his present occupation as God’s Divine Soldier. Until you recognize this, you are searching for “truths” you have no business questioning.
“several”, in this case, meaning something less than two? Is this what you mean by “several”?
Again, I’m not the one suggesting Bush could unilaterally decide to quit flying despite his particular a/c being in service.
Of course, the fact that the Delta Dagger had been withdrawn from service in theater probably isn’t worth considering, either.
The F-102 had limited use in VN even before Bush joined up. It was used briefly as a recon a/c–but it was never really suited for that task. It was also well on its way to be phased out in Europe, at the time Barnes put a good word in the right ear, as the Soviets had begun to deploy bombers that rendered the F-102 somewhat obsolete.
I’m not sure what you mean by “in theater,” but I’m afraid you’re confusing the theater in which Mr. Bush served with the theater in Mr. Kerry served. In the Texas theater, Bush’s unit was called to alert on October 6, 1972, after Bush was relieved from flight status for failing to take his required physical and for “failing to perform to U.S. Air Force/Texas Air National Guard standards.”
The memos referred to on 60 Minutes are here,, here, here, and here. Today’s Boston Globe piece on it is here; it contains links to independent evaluations of Bush’s records. For what it’s worth.
Yglesias is right on and forgot to mention all the resignations at the EPA.
The 60 Minutes thing was pretty lackluster, I thought, except for Dan Bartlett, once again, giving me deep creeps with that smile of his.
60 Minutes:
Piece? Lackluster.
Documents? Devastating.
The White House story has blown completely up. KABOOM! It’s gone.
FWIW, there’s some buzz in the left blogosphere about the release by the White House of their copies of two of the memos – suggesting the possibility that a) they had broken the FOIA by withholding requested info and b) might have more unreleased memos. Still just conspiracy-thinking so far, afaict – it may well be that they had their own access to the microfiche but only learned where to look when the recent stories broke.
If they’ve violated the Freedom of Information Act, this is an important (though utterly unsurprising) story.
I think we’ll get some parsing over whether FOIA laws are “real” ones, using as precedent the fact that Cheney’s secret energy meetings ignored them without penalty.
Pretty devastating, I agree. Why haven’t these documents gotten exposure before? I think we’re all owed an explanation for this.
Kevin Drum’s thread is interesting this morning. Trolls fighting amongst themselves the relevancy of the Guard rehash. Like Hyenas! How do you spell backlash?
But wait a minute the president is the victim here.
He should only be judged on:
his actions since he became born again because he’s a different man now
his actions since he became president because he has proven he can be CiC and Kerry put his service out there to be judged. All prior time should not be questioned.
his vision because the congressional democrats could potentially fillibuster thus keeping the president from being able to accomplish his legislative agenda in his first term
his actions in a vaccuum because 9/11 changed everything and all comparisons to any event in the past, all potential metrics for his decision making are no longer valid because the world is a different place now
his answers to questions from supporters and not potential hard-to-answer questions from people who may not support him. Partisan questions are from partisans and the president doesn’t play that partisan game the democrats like to play. The democrats want to divide our country.
That’s pretty much it. OTOH, what was Kerry doing when his swift boat went up the river leaving the other boats behind him for TWO to FIVE minutes? I’m not saying he did, but it is conceivable that he would have had enough time to pass off military secrets to the enemy without being observed.
That’s rich. Blogbudsman labeling anyone a troll: there’s a classic case of the crow calling the raven black.
I’m not particularly interested in whether Bush pulled family strings to get into the NG. If I’d been in his generation and had his connections, I’d have done it too, and felt no shame at finding a way to serve my country without risking my life in a war I didn’t believe in. As for what it displays about his character… nothing, really, that his supporters won’t explain away and that his detractors don’t already believe. It won’t change anyone else’s mind and it shouldn’t.
Nor was he AWOL. The evidence that he pissed off his commitment and pulled strings to have his record massaged is solid, and I think that’s pretty scummy… but AWOL is a legal designation and he wasn’t declared AWOL, nor is the TANG likely to inspect the evidence and retroactively revoke his honorable discharge. Sorry.
To be honest, we need to stop re-fighting the Vietnam war. It’s annoying swing voters, independents, and thoughtful people everywhere, and it’s completely fscking irrelevant to boot.
Now, that said, there’s some damning material here. For one, the ever-shifting White House tissue of lies surrounding Bush’s NG service has no substance left to it. None. I don’t really care what Bush did in the 70s, but I do care that he seems pathologically incapable of being honest about it. I also have a serious beef with the culture of secrecy that this administration promotes, and their blatant obstructionism and hostility towards any attempts at transparency, including FOIA requests, stomps on my hot buttons.
So color me guardedly optimistic about this story. It’d be real nice if people would quit with the obnoxious (and often hypocritical) pontifications about Bush pulling strings to get into the NG, or the equally obnoxious AWOL ravings… but it’d be even nicer if Bush would shut them all up with an unexpected dose of plain-spoken truth and transparency. Because the lack of either only serves to feed the moonbats and give them ammunition.
Posting rules preclude calling people posting here trolls.
Slarti
I’m confused by a few of your posts.
In the “Thorley” thread you posted:
“… while Bush’s unit in Texas had a waiting list for many spots, he was accepted because he was one of a handful of applicants willing and qualified to spend more than a year in active training flying F-102 jets.”
Yet now you write:
“Given that it was pretty much pulled out of the war theater by 1970, and was entirely out of service by 1975. By 1972 or 1973, the USAF had converted its Delta Daggers to drones for target practice.”
If people joined the Guard to avoid going overseas it would seem the longest line to join would be for gaining expertise on obsolete equipment thus slowing your chance of being called up.
Yet you seem to be claiming Bush moved to the front of the line because he was willing to be trained on the F102.
Please enlighten me on your theory.
If you look again, carsick, you’ll notice that what you’re seeing in the Thorley thread is not a theory. It’s a quote. Hence the blockquote and link back to the article it came from.
Besides, when Bush entered the Guard, the F-102 was in service in Vietnam. It came out of service around 1970 or so. Now, it is possible that people knew in 1968 that the F-102 was going to be phased out in the early ’70s, and that people were piling into the Guard for that reason. You’d have to show me, though.
Yet you seem to be claiming Bush moved to the front of the line because he was willing to be trained on the F102.
I’m not claiming that. I would claim that, if there was any material evidence at all that pointed to a dearth of pilot applicants to the Guard. So far I haven’t seen any data at all that might move any claims like that from the realm of speculation, though.
I’m missing the point then of why you cut and pasted that article into your post if you aren’t claiming it in any way backs up your thoughts or opinions.
Just reporting on what others are saying, carsick. I’ve got no basis for having any opinion at all, without fact to support it.
I thought this was how everyone formed opinion. Am I wrong?
hilzoy, apparently inappropriate on my part. For some semblence of balance, I read about a dozen bloggers off and on throughout the week. In some, being a troll is a badge of honor. I’ve both been called a troll and gratuitously attacked by them. I did not refer to anyone in your blog a troll, no, no. I wouldn’t do that. I also try to avoid ‘liar’, ‘unpatriotic’ and ‘Rather’. And crows and ravens prefer ‘avianAmericans’.
By the way, Novak has an interesting article published in Townhall today…
“The irrational loathing expressed daily on the Internet by passionate, though poorly informed, bloggers was transferred into the streets.” – Robert Novak
I think Robert believes in trolls. MSM retaliates!
Now, this looks interesting. I’d want to see how this develops, but it appears they have raised some questions about the authenticity of those memos. I’d be completely convinced, if it weren’t for the fact that no one would be stupid enough to make such a glaring error.
Summary, though: isn’t it a little odd that notes to file written in 1972 use a proportional font, while all other communications use fixed fonts?
Again, not saying I’m completely persuaded, but I’d want to see the originals, from the original military records.
Slart, the WH released the same memos (or some of the same memos) themselves – is the claim that the documents were forged and placed into the record well in the past but just now were “discovered”? I don’t know what the WH source was, but presumably not identical to the 60 Min source…
Again, I’m not making a claim. I’m pointing to a claim that others have made, and that I’m thinking merits some attention.
I hadn’t seen those memos before CBS put them on their website, so I can’t say anything at all about the WH releases.
Slart, I wrote “the claim”, not “your claim”.
I’m reminded of the issue of the picture of the soldier in Iraq beside a kid holding up a derogatory sign. There were expert claims and counterclaims about Photoshopping and forgery. As best I recall, it turned out to be authentic.
If I were a forger, I would have at the very least put in a comment saying Lt Bush has a reputation of drug use and we should consider taking some action…
Anyway, will keep an open mind for the moment.
Also note that I might have written, “the WH reportedly released” – I’ve now read that the AP may have withdrawn the assertion, though I still see it the CBS page I found.
Slarti
I read your link.
Reads like a bunch of wanna-be Hardy Boys.
Why would the White House also have copies of at least two of the documents which they retrieved from military records? That’s some forger who got their fakes onto microfilm in Denver or where? Austin?.
“After the broadcast, the White House, without comment, released to the news media two of the memos, one ordering Bush to report for his physical exam and the other suspending him from flight status.”
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/08/bush.national.ap/index.html
The post on Powerline raises some very good points. I’m no expert on typesetting or forensic analysis, but the arguments advanced there are prima facie reasonable.
The one which strikes me is the small superset “th” used on two of the memos. That, combined with the proportionally-spaced font, suggests strongly that this was not casually typewritten material. I’m leaning towards “forgery” at this point myself, but I’m willing to wait and see how this plays out under professional investigation and analysis.
I’ve said what I think about this assuming they were legit. Now, if they are forgeries…
Kerry needs to come down on them, hard. Don’t ignore this. Don’t sit around cynically hoping that the allegations, even if untrue, will damage Bush–it will blow up in your face. Take the high road and hit the liars hard. It’s one of those rare occasions in politics where the politically smart thing to do is also the right thing to do.
CBS needs to take a credibility hit for not doing their due diligence in investigative reporting, and the yahoo peddling these forgeries needs to be completely removed from the realm of being taken seriously.
The White House has some explaining to do. Shortly after CBS came out with these memos, the White House also produced them. If they are forgeries, then why is the White House “releasing” them? It suggests that they (understandably, if they were forgeries) didn’t know these documents existed, and they seemed credible enough to the WH to justify “releasing” them as if the WH had just now “found” them. To put it another way, if the events and situations described in these memos have no basis in fact, then why would the WH dignify them by “releasing” them in an attempt at damage control, rather than looking at them askance and pointing out that they /must/ be forgeries because they bear no resemblance to the truth?
Cut and paste fun
“During the 2000 election season, the Bush campaign claimed that Bush had released all of his military records. That was false. Early this year, under pressure, the White House released another batch of records, claiming that it had now released all of Mr. Bush’s military records. That, too, was false. Two days ago, under lawsuit from the AP, the White House released another batch of documents, claiming once again that all documents had now been released.
Yesterday, for reasons not publicly explained, the White House centralized authority over all responses to requests for Mr. Bush’s military records. This seemed strange if all the records had already been released.
Tonight, after the 60 Minutes report, the White House released two of the documents 60 Minutes had just presented. Were they just copying CBS, or did they have those documents already? And what other documents do they have, or know about, that they’re trying to prevent other parts of the government from releasing by centralizing authority to respond to FOIA requests?”
Liberal support for the forgery possibility can be found at Kevin Drum’s thread.
carsick, still not sure about the WH release, and the claim would be that they found them in Killian’s file not Bush’s…
Q: Is your suggestion that these documents, at least a couple of them, could have been fabricated?
DAN BARTLETTT: I’m not saying that at all. I’m just saying that the fact that documents like this are being raised when, in fact, all they do is reaffirm what we’ve said all along, is questionable.
Being born-again is like turning into Nietzsche’s Superman!!!
That is so cool.
Does Clinton know about this?
Hmmm…I’d thought that CBS had FOIA’ed them from archives, and not the WH. Again, I’m coming to no conclusion, other than it looks a little off. I’d thought they looked a bit off on first viewing, but didn’t have a specific reason for the feeling.
Nor was he AWOL. The evidence that he pissed off his commitment and pulled strings to have his record massaged is solid, and I think that’s pretty scummy… but AWOL is a legal designation and he wasn’t declared AWOL, nor is the TANG likely to inspect the evidence and retroactively revoke his honorable discharge. Sorry.
To paraphrase Lawrence Korb (a Reagan-era Asst. Sec of Def.): If I cheat on my taxes and don’t get caught–I still cheated on my taxes.
And I don’t know of too many people who don’t believe OJ Simpson is a murderer.
As you say, AWOL is a legal designation. But could we agree Bush has satified the requirements to meet that designation?
See Kevin Drum, Josh for updates – apparently the WH passed on copies CBS sent them, and the debate re the fonts continues – so far it seems still plausible to me that the docs are genuine.
JadeGold – “As you say, AWOL is a legal designation. But could we agree Bush has satified the requirements to meet that designation?”
No, JadeGold, not at all. Not even in the same universe. Keep reading, the cool thing about this is the grass roots support George Bush is gaining from your silly accusations. The designation the requirements have satisfied is clear – backlash!
The White House is not in the habit of passing on documents CBS has given them. Why would they start now?
I’m always curious with this political bs, who is giving the benefit of the doubt to potentially damning evidence in one case but gives the benefit of the doubt to the potential defendent in the other.
Usually no surprises though despite my hope for one.
As you say, AWOL is a legal designation. But could we agree Bush has satified the requirements to meet that designation?
Heck, even I’m not willing to say that. Let’s just say there are still some pertinent unanswered questions — that there is still a possibility that Bush was AWOL — and leave it at that for now.
[As with most everything nowadays, what remains is for someone to do the hard work of investigative, i.e. nonsensationalist, journalism to determine the truth of the allegation. And then to find someone with the balls to ask the real “hard questions”, and to stand up for the truth without relenting. Oh for the idyllic days of yore…]
As you say, AWOL is a legal designation. But could we agree Bush has satified the requirements to meet that designation?
Even assuming that he was absent without leave from his duties–which I do believe he was, but for which there is as yet insufficient evidence to convict–no. If I murder someone, I have committed a felony, but I am not a felon unless I am tried and convicted of said felony.
Color me pedantic for insisting on precision in language.
blogbudsman — in re posting rules, I wasn’t commenting about you; sorry not to have been clearer about this.
Re: forgeries–treat it like WMD finds, wait 48 hours and see what comes up. At this point we are all deep in speculationville.
Can I just chip in and say that I’m reasonably sure that these are forgeries? Having used IBM Selectrics in the early seventies (that makes me feel really really old…), some of the balls used fonts that weren’t monospace, but they didn’t do proportional spacing, as appears in these copies of the memos. Typesetters and several clumsy-to-use typewriters could do proportional spacing, but they were used in high-end offices for publication-quality work, not for memos.
Most damning though is this – if you type the text of the memos into Microsoft Word, using the default 12 point Times-Roman typeface with the default margin settings, you get an identical document, line breaks and all. Typewriters in the sixties were just simply not capable of doing that.
Also, did the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron really have an address of “P. O. Box 34567”?
This seems to me an incedibly clumsy forgery.
Even the centered headings are bogus. On typewriters, you would have to tab over to the position to start typing, so most people would left-justify stuff like that. Even if the author was a complete typewriter freak and had memorized the numbers of tabs and spaces to center-align text, the location of the starting letter would always fall directly under another letter. In these memos, starting character positions fall between letters of the previous line, a sure sign of proportional spacing. And again, reproducing the text in Word results in identical character placement.
d-p-u – I can’t pretend to rival your knowledge of typewriters, but I’ve seen it asserted that word processors were (at least originally) designed to produce typewriter-like results,
that there’s a simple procedure to (get the tabs/spaces needed to) center text, and that proportional typewriters were available at the time (not common though); and seen speculation that the memos may actually be later transcriptions of hand-written notes.
Kevin Drum has reported that the White House just made copies of the 60 Minuts documents available. Which means:
1) please disregard my earlier questions about FOIA violations.
2) the White House copies are not evidence that these documents are legit.
As a giant non-fan of Bush and, frankly, Powerline: that document looks very fishy. Word processors usually had lousy dot matrix printers, didn’t they? And typewriters could do superscript but: a) it’s a huge pain and not worth it, and b) different font sizes? And the resemblance to Times New Roman is definitely troubling.
If it’s a forgery it’s a seriously incompetent one and those crackerjack researchers at CBS need to take a serious look at their fact checking operation. But remember–“never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity”–or more accurately “never attribute to bias that which can be explained by laziness” applies to the press too.
Agreed. Waiting and seeing, though…
The issue of the signature not being comparable has also been brought up; Powerline has a side-by-side, if you can bring yourself to go there.
On the other hand, it does look like some letters–and often the same letters–are printed too high or too low on the line, which does indicate a typewriter.
Does this make anyone else feel like Encyclopedia Brown?
that doesn’t bother me so much, my sig changes all the time.
The numbers look especially typewriter-y to me, but the superscript really doesn’t make sense. I give up.
I braved PowerLine. The signatures are nothing alike. My signature has morphed over time as I got more lazy and assertive, but it’s recognizably from the same hand. These aren’t.
These are definitely not original documents. Where did these come from, precisely? Is there a new practice of re-typing old documents in a word processor these days? If so, I’ve never seen it before. Good lord, this is damn odd.
Good lord, this is damn odd.
The weirdest part is that the White House apparently provided these documents, right? So seriously… wtf?
Those sigs look okay to me. Mine has changed that much.
Also, I’ve done some harmless forging of bosses’ and family members’ signatures, etc., and I’m terrible at it–it comes out either hopelessly cramped and written too slow, or bearing no resemblance AT ALL to the original signature. This looks like neither.
It is possible that I never got the hang of that fancy cursive writing, of course, or am just plain weird….but the signatures look okay to me.
The weirdest part is that the White House apparently provided these documents, right? So seriously… wtf?
I heard they got them from CBS, actually, and just passed them along. And I bet they damn well know these are not real memos from the 1970s.
Yep, Karl Rove, evil genius all right.
No, Anarch. Look again. The docs the White House released were obtained from CBS.
Is there a new practice of re-typing old documents in a word processor these days?
I thought of that, but they’re signed, and signed over some of the text.
I thought of that, but they’re signed, and signed over some of the text.
Yeah, you’re right, that wouldn’t make sense.
For the record, so people don’t go off like they are at Kos making fools of themselves – there were some proportional space typewriters, but none that had kerning – that is to say the intelligent spacing of letters based on every possible combination of letter pairs.
The numbers look especially typewriter-y to me, but the superscript really doesn’t make sense. I give up.
It’s a lot more than just superscript in a smaller font. There is actual kerning in the placement of the fonts. That is flat-out impossible with typewriters, and even typesetting machines in the 60’s had to be fiddled with a lot in order to do it. Most couldn’t, even with fiddling.
I’m really confused by this one. The evidence all points to a forgery (“P.O. Box 34567???” Does a fighter group get mail at a post office box, for crying out loud? And with that number, which just screams that someone lazy made it up?), yet I have a hard time believing that CBS wouldn’t pick up on it. Surely one of the authenticity people who saw it must have said “hey, wait a minute…”
Oops, stepped on your post, Jonas. And yes, there were proportional spaced typewriters, but they were very expensive, very difficult to use (you had to type each line twice), and were generally used for offices that wanted near-typeset quality for company newsletters, etc. National Guard officers were unlikely to have them, nor to use them for writing memos to themselves.
Plus, the exact same output from Word? Extremely fishy.
And with that number, which just screams that someone lazy made it up?), yet I have a hard time believing that CBS wouldn’t pick up on it. Surely one of the authenticity people who saw it must have said “hey, wait a minute…”
Hey, that forger was smart enough to remember that on a typewriter, you put two spaces after a period. Mind you, the double spaces are kerned, but hey, they did put in some effort!
One other thing I noticed…one of the memos has Bush’s address redacted, and you can read it anyway. Are there ANY other of Bush’s records that that’s true for?
Hey, that forger was smart enough to remember that on a typewriter, you put two spaces after a period.
Yeah, I noticed that. But a lot of people (including my spouse) do that in Word anyway (I have a macro to remove them when editing her stuff).
You know, if I were forging something like this, I’d at least do it on my old #5 Underwood, and not on a word processor. Plus I’d slip something in about Bush murdering Hoffa for drug money or something.
Are there ANY other of Bush’s records that that’s true for?
No clue. Were we ever able to actually see the other Bush records, or just notes or transcripts?
In any case, it’s my understanding that someone redacting a document makes a photocopy of the original, blacks out the copy, then makes a copy of the redacted copy to prevent this from happening. Which generally results in the documents looking far worse from photocopier artifacts than these do.
Here’s a page of Bush related Texas ANG documents, for the sake of comparison. All unkerned monospace, and not in Times New Roman.
LCOL Killian could return from the dead and vouch for the authenticity of the memos. It wouldn’t stop the rightwing from crying, “forgery!”
What I’ve seen at PowerLine is classic brute force spin. IOW, you throw up mass volumes of crap and hope some of it gains traction. You have people claiming “times new roman” font hadn’t been invented and folks claiming they never saw IBM Selectrics in their reserve units.
I’d think that if the WH had any doubts as to the authenticity of the Killian memos–they’d be counter-attacking fast and hard. They’re not; instead, falling back on the “OJ Simpson” defensive tactic of claiming Bush’s honorable discharge means he fulfilled his commitment.
Hell, I doublespace after full stops on blogs, where I know the html renderer will eat up consecutive whitespace.
It’s just the right thing to do.
JadeGold, I’m pretty far on the left, and personally believe that Bush rode a gravytrain to avoid military service, and that he probably skipped the physical to avoid a drug test. All IMHO, of course.
However, these documents, as presented, are most probably forgeries, for the reasons presented above. I don’t know why, or why they haven’t been caught as such by CBC, but to write off a lot of questionable stuff about them just because the right-wing pro-Bush crowd has pointed them out smells of partisanship.
It would certainly be helpful for Killian to return from the dead to vouch for them. Then we can ask him how he came to use a modern version of MS Word when he died twenty years ago.
I’d think that if the WH had any doubts as to the authenticity of the Killian memos–they’d be counter-attacking fast and hard. They’re not; instead, falling back on the “OJ Simpson” defensive tactic of claiming Bush’s honorable discharge means he fulfilled his commitment.
I dunno, it might make more sense for them to let people hang themselves by falling all over these first. It’s painful reading Kos on this one. Or it may be that they haven’t identified them as forgeries. They don’t strike me as the sharpest knives in the drawer.
Jadegold,
You have people claiming “times new roman” font hadn’t been invented and folks claiming they never saw IBM Selectrics in their reserve units.
There is a lot of amateur-hour analysis going on. But I’m a graphic designer, trained in typography, and just old enough to remember typewriters. A variable spacing, kerning, Times New Roman typewriter would be quite the eccentric and remarkable artifact in 1972. Never mind that there is no letterhead, that one signature is cropped in a perfectly straight line, that it’s 8 1/2 x 11 instead of the wierd government size paper, etc.
I’d think that if the WH had any doubts as to the authenticity of the Killian memos–they’d be counter-attacking fast and hard. They’re not; instead, falling back on the “OJ Simpson” defensive tactic of claiming Bush’s honorable discharge means he fulfilled his commitment.
I had heard rumors this summer that Karl Rove was going to spend the fall playing “discredit the media” ploys. Forgive my foray into tinfoil, but that would seem to be the case now.
It’s not a bad issue to pick, if you were going to play briar patch. Most of the country probably doesn’t really care about it, so letting it be a headline item for a few days won’t hurt, but it fires up the Democrat partisans so they’re likely to carry it too far and suffer all the more when the forgery turns up.
More importantly, kickoff is in 15 minutes. If anyone is still talking about politics, the terrorists will have already won.
But I’m a graphic designer, trained in typography, and just old enough to remember typewriters.
I don’t doubt your credentials, JC; just your motivations. I’ve seen some of my fellow vets try to defend the idea orders to a flight physical are somehow optional events. IOW, they know better but don’t want to.
While I regard the media as lazy in many respects, I really don’t think CBS is going to run a major story on the basis of some ‘funny’ documents they found slipped under the door. They’re going to have some pretty good evidence as to their bona fides.
I don’t doubt your credentials, JC; just your motivations.
Oh, good lord. I stood in the goddamn rain as a kid campaigning for Dukakis; watched a drunk Joe Lieberman dance like a freak on that glorious November night in ’92. And no, not voting for Bush either. I rolled my eyes when I heard the “forgery!” cries earlier today; but when I downloaded the documents I had no choice but to conclude that these are forgeries.
While I regard the media as lazy in many respects, I really don’t think CBS is going to run a major story on the basis of some ‘funny’ documents they found slipped under the door. They’re going to have some pretty good evidence as to their bona fides.
CBS making a major mistake is the only possible explanation I can figure at this point. Meanwhile, over at Tacitus, BD cites this email from CBS News:
CBS verified the authenticity of the documents by talking to individuals who had seen the documents at the time they were written. These individuals were close associates of [Bush commander] Colonel Jerry Killian and confirm that the documents reflect his opinions at the time the documents were written.
That’s a whole lot different than having the documents authenticated by experts.
Jonas et al., could you please comment on an old document from Bush’s service purportedly in the suspect font?
No, Anarch. Look again. The docs the White House released were obtained from CBS.
So they were.
OK, I officially give up. Somebody let me know when we’ve figured out what the hell is going on here.
Rilkefan,
See, this is why the argument is getting confusing. The document at Kos is most certainly not the same font – it is a monospace font that looks like most typewritten documents do; the Killian docuements are definitely not monospace, and definitely in a font at least closely resembling Times New Roman.
If people don’t believe me, I guess maybe I should do a side by side comparison of various characters or something in Photoshop.
And because I can’t resist:
Hell, I doublespace after full stops on blogs, where I know the html renderer will eat up consecutive whitespace.
sidereal, either your name had better be Tyler Durden or I’m going to have get a restraining order. This is starting to get serious eerie…
The easiest way to tell the difference between to the two fonts in question is to look at the numbers. Numbers on the authentic DU document have descenders which hang below the baseline of the sentence – like 3,5,7,9. The sixes rise above the height of the characters as well. This all looks normal to me for a typewriter of the time – yet they do not appear on the CBS documents.
Go ahead, Jonas. It’s something I’ve only seen about a dozen times tonight.
It’s certainly not Times New Roman. Just look at the numeral 1’s.
It’s certainly not Times New Roman. Just look at the numeral 1’s.
Yeah, futzing around in Photoshop, the 1’s and the lowercase “i” doesn’t match either. They do match that old Macintosh standard serif font – “New York.”
They do match that old Macintosh standard serif font – “New York.”
Scratch that – close, but no cigar. Hmm…
They do match that old Macintosh standard serif font – “New York.”
Scratch that – close, but no cigar. Hmm…
More than anything, they look to me like they’ve been through a fax machine instead of a regular copier. I’m not sure this says anything at all about their authenticity, but I don’t think it could say anything good.
Catsy wrote about Bush ” and felt no shame at finding a way to serve my country without risking my life in a war I didn’t believe in.”
I thought it was a war Bush DID believe in and he strongly supported, which makes ducking it more shamefull. However, I wish the discussion about candidates would focus more on current important issues and less on things that happened 30 years ago.