Don't Fall for the Forgery Decoy. And Here's Why.

[indyjones1938]

I was just reading Joshua Marshall's Talking Points Memo, and he brought up some good points that kinda reconfirmed my thoughts on the Bush documents/forgery charges.

(1) The essence of these documents - Bush's failure to take a physical, failure to enlist in a Massachusetts National Guard unit as required, pressure from "higher-ups" for Killian to let Bush off the hook, and so forth, are all 100% true. I don't think anyone here, or even in the news media, questions this.

(2) It seems likely, however, that some of the documents, part of a document or even just a few lines on one document have been forged.

But the question is, who would forge a document and why?

I think it's likely that this is the scenario we are looking at here:

(1) The bulk of the memos are 100% authentic. Realizing this, Karl Rove decided to plant a forged document. He knew that this would take the heat off of Ben Barnes and Bush's failure to fulfill TANG requirements, and instead shift the discussion to typewriter fonts, superscripts, typeballs, letter spacing and all the other minutaie that we find ourselves debating back and forth.

(2) Rove realized that embroiling the media in a debate over the authenticity of the documents would cast doubt (and least in some peoples' minds) about the Bush AWOL charges. Furthermore, and most importantly, it would humiliate the media and discourage them from covering Bush's TANG service (or lack thereof) in the future.

You have to understand that this is one of Rove's oldest and most successful tricks. He used in it 1973-74 during Watergate, 1994 during the Bush gubernatorial run and of course 2000 during Bush vs. Gore. The essence of the tactic is: Plant a forged document that seems to be the nail in Bush's coffin. Let the Democrats and media go wild with it. Then, reveal that the document is a fake and attribute the plant to the Democrats. And thus, he wins a 3-for-1 victory: The news media is humiliated and discouraged from airing any such "exposes" of Bush in the future; the Democrats are left holding a smoking gun that they never fired; and Bush comes out looking like the innocent victim of some grand conspiracy.

Of course, we all realize that the AWOL charges and such are true. And most of these memos are likely 100% authentic. And that's why Rove had the motivation (and the opportunity) to plant a fake into the mix. Remember, after all, that these documents were "vetted" and "released" by the White House itself.

[Guaranteed]

1. CBS has witnesses saying that the memos are REAL,

INCLUDING Hodges himself.

[BigBigBear]

2. This is what they did to Hatfield

They spilled the beans about Bush's cocaine story to a troubled guy with a criminal background, to discredit the story.

[The_Casual_Observer]

3. This is bullshit

None of these are fake. This guy is a nut.

[Must_B_Free]

4. That's the only problem

It seems like none of them are fake. They certainly can't be proven to be fake, at any rate.

I like this Rove attribution, I had the same thought.

Did the whitehouse say that more documents may surface? I thought I heard that.

What Rove could do now is plant conclusive fakes and cast retrospective doubt on these memos... And still acheive the triple play.

[indyjones1938]

7. Did you read my entire post?

I don't think you did, because your reply makes no sense in its context

I said that, in all likelihood, the bulk of these memos are 100% authentic. And I am well aware of Bobby Hodges backing up Killian's 1973 statements about Bush. I don't think anyone doubts the content in the memos.

At this point, it seems likely that Rove planted a fake memo, or perhaps simply altered and recopied a part of one of the originals, as a way to distract us from the AWOL charges and cast doubts upon the other memos.

Do you remember Hatfield four years ago? I don't think you do, "Casual_Observer."

The fact that so many DUers believe all these memos are fakes really shocks me. They might as well be posting on FR.

But the fact that so many DUers think Rove is above this sort of "dirty work" also shocks me. You'd think the Dems would've learned with Hatfield.

[HFishbine]

9. "it seems likely that Rove planted a fake memo"

Based on what?

[The_Casual_Observer]

12. This kind of half assed columbo shit needs to stop

This armchair shitspinner speculates that one of these is a fake?

This was a left field baseless castout without any merit. Where did this come from? off the top of his stupid head, that's where it came from.

I don't think you do, "Casual_Observer." What the fuck do you know?

That's right, I'm the fucking TCO, and a rude one too, don't you forget it.

[necso]

5. I think that

the worst possible case is that the content of the documents is true and that the "packaging" has been altered. (Because then the content is also called into question -- at least implicitly.) This would have many pluses for the administration and few minuses. (But I don't wish to discuss the sum -- as it bores me.)

Of course, CBS and 60 minutes would never make such "forgeries", so if the documents are suspicious, then they must be some sort of "plant" or fraud. Now, we can easily believe that Rove and company would go there, so this must considered at least as a possibility. And there are many people who will do anything for a buck. But, (and again) of course, our side would never do anything so stupid or low.

But even if the documents are real, some damage has been done, at least in the form of shifting the story. And I hope that CBS does a real thorough investigation, and does not take the "easy" way out, that of an unseemly retreat. For while executives might think that this is really the easy way out, the harm done to their network in dollar and cents terms will be great. And certainly the bottom line should outweigh their fears -- it outweighs everything else!

Now if I were to guess, then I would suspect that the worst case is true -- both because I am just built that way, and because I think that someone may have let that drop.

But I don't know, and determining authenticity is difficult, even on originals, and on copies it is much harder. So I suspect that we will be left in some doubt -- just the way the neos like it.

(And I am abandoning the 5/25 thing right now !)

[indyjones1938]

13. nt

There are two sides to the Rove theory, which I will try to examine here.


The Washington Monthly is claiming that The White House did not, in fact, have access to the Killian Memos before CBS faxed them copies on Tuesday.

"The real question now is: what other documents does the White House have? Obviously they've had these sitting around for a while, and just as obviously they've held them back even though they claimed in February that they had made available every known document related to Bush's National Guard record.

So what else are they hiding? And when are they going to approve AP's FOIA request to view all relevant microfilm records directly?

UPDATE: I now have copies of the memos the White House released, and they are just versions that CBS faxed to the White House the day before the 60 Minutes segment aired. There's no indication that the White House had its own copies of these memos and had been sitting on them."

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

That would seem to rule out the possibility that Rove or other White House officials altered the documents.

BUT...

We still have the conundrum of how CBS got the documents in the first place. Who was their "anonymous source" that they refuse to identify? The possibility exists that their "source" was somehow connected to Rove or The White House. We would assume that CBS would be smart enough to consider the possbility of planted documents, but on the flip side they may have considered their source to have additional credibility because of a White House connection.

[necso]

18. Yea,

but the documents need never have been anywhere near Rove to bear his "fingerprints", so the first part part is weak.

Who knows what the history of these documents is, and putting forward altered documents (no matter how accurate) would make anyone who did so look bad (this they know from experience).

Stinks of the neos.

But, again, I don't know.

Still, I have had one other indicator that really makes me want to go there, because it confirms something else that I have come to believe.

And this is the sort of game that analysts play, looking for indicators that match other things.

Add to this the silence from the White House (that I am hearing about but can't vouch for) which confirms my suspicions -- they would feel safe letting things take their course if these are "frauds"!

[Skip Intro]

6. These docs are just part of the story, #1, #2, Ivan is about to dominate

media attention for the next week. Imho, this "news cycle" is jsut about over.

And, we are no longer talking about what Kerry did or didn't do in Nam. Now we're talking about bush.

And, its pretty damned clear to anyone with an eye half open that bush didn't do a damned thing in Nam because, docs or no docs, he didn't go - and doubts about why he didn't go are stronger today than they were last week - much.

Whether this TANG issue survives Ivan is left to be seen. But the way I see it, at the very least, the swift boat liars are now impotent, and the subjects at hand, after the media re-focuses on the campaign, may well be (hopefully), bush's vision for America, versus Kerry's vision for America.

This week saw us turn a corner, and the bush gang has lost control of "the ball." That much is already done.

[TheWebHead]

8. CBS radio news just reported on talk that the memos are fake

at the top of the hour...

the apostrophes and the superscript that is on a higher plane that the rest of the typed font make it pretty clear to me that these were forged. You really have to wonder why someone would take all this time and have enough knowledge to know the players and be close to a story that could be true, yet ignorant enough to not use an old typewriter to create these documents.

[Guaranteed]

10. Really, now?

And CBS also tells us that they have witnesses who say they saw the documents in person, at the time.

Funny!

[amandabeech]

16. I thought that the witnesses said that the documents reflected

how Col. Killian felt about Bush and his preferential treatment. If these are forged, I think that the forger knew all about what Killian was saying and writing, and tried to paraphrase.

The Post said that Gen. Hodges was one of witnesses. I want to see him get up in front of the camera and say that these documents DO NOT reflect Col. Killians statements at the time.

Over in Freeperville (yes, I showered before coming back here), someone mentioned that the wife talking on ABC was Col. Killian's ex-wife, not his widow. If there is a second wife/widow, perhaps these things came from her.

[a new day]

11. There is no reason why they couldn't be typed on and IBM Selectric

See:
http://community.democrats.com/forums/discussions.cfm?forumid=170&topicid=135152

[amandabeech]

17. It also could have been an IBM Executive, which was capable

of proportionate spacing, and may have had the superscript "th" available as a key variation. It did not have the "golf ball" typing element, but instead the regular keys. Someone on one of the other threads stated that he/she sold these things back in the '60s and '70s and was familiar with them.

The regular Selectrics, I, II and Correcting, didn't have the proportionate spacing, but their was a special Selectric which could. They were not that common. The IBM Executive was far more common in that era, apparently.

[kestrel91316]

14. What is important and no one is asking..................

is WHERE did CBS get these documents? If they came from some "anonymous source" then forgery is a possibility. But if they came directly from government sources (TANG, Federal Personnel Records Center, etc) then I am going to stick my neck out and say it is patently absurd to call them planted fakes. HOW IS KARL ROVE GOING TO PLANT FAKES WITH GOVERNMENT SOURCES?? I hate the man and he is an evil conniver but this is beyond his capabilities.

[wiggs]

15. Look at it another way

If one or more documents prove to be fake, the perception will be that someone either 1) falsified documents and leaked them to make the media and democrats look bad, or 2) falsified documents to make Bush look bad.

But there is a third alternative. These documents could have been part of the 90's effort to scrub Shrub's record. His official records could have been much worse, and these released Killian memos could have been placed somewhere so that the record would show some measure of reality (Shrub's performance not stellar) but the worst of it would have been disappeared. There do appear to be many missing documents.

It is not unreasonable to think that someone messed with George's records a while ago, destroying some, placing others that are forged.

Interesting, interesting mystery.

I am glad that the media is giving it some airtime, but I would prefer that K/E get more airtime talking about how dishonest and incompetent the administration is. If the AWOL stuff doesn't pan out, this is wasted time.