by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright September 12, 2004
All Rights Reserved.

utting his reputation on the line, CBS news director and evening anchor Dan Rather established his left wing credentials running a “blockbuster” story on “60-minutes II,” questioning Bush's Texas Air National Guard service. Rather and CBS stand by the story, producing damaging memos from President Bush's superiors, attesting to his failure to meet flying standards. “I'm of the school, my name is on it. I'm responsible," Rather told the Los Angeles Times, responding to criticism that the documents were forgeries. CBS defends its story was accurate, despite the growing likelihood that the memos were faked. After the story broke, Internet bloggers promptly fingered the memos as forgeries, citing document experts who found a superscript [th]—the type automatically generated by Microsoft Word. Microsoft Word wasn't invented in 1972, when IBM typewriters ruled the day.

     Putting a Microsoft Word superscript on a 1972-1973-vintage memos was an amateurish mistake, a dead giveaway to any competent document expert. Rather went to great lengths explaining how CBS experts vetted the documents, critical of Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard. Rather claimed that retired Maj. Gen. Bobby W. Hodgdes coroborated CBS' story, yet when asked directly, Hodges said he believed the memos attributed to Bush's superior, the late Lt. Col. Jerry Killian were fakes. CBS claimed the story about Bush's military record was long overdue, yet it appeared closely tied to “Swift Boast Veterans's for Truth” relentless attacks on Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry's (D-Mass.) Vietnam record. CBS' story essentially confirmed that Bush was AWOL from the service, after transferring to the Alabama National Guard in 1972.

     Since Bush finished his acceptance speech Sept. 2 at Madison Square Garden, the Democrats have turned negative, attacking Bush at every opportunity. Kerry's strategists believe turnaround is fair play, after taking a GOP whooping for over a month. Dredging up past indiscretions worked for Bush, why not Kerry? “This is about character, and credibility of the president of the United States today,” said Democratic National Committed Chairman Terry McCauliffe, trying his utmost to discredit Bush. When confronted with the growing possibility that the documents were forged, McCauliffe pointed at Bush's chief strategist Karl Rove, hoping that McCauliffe's finger prints weren't found on the CBS story. More likely than Rove, McCauliffe coordinated DNC efforts with “Texans for Truth,” a new IRS 527 nonprofit group that plans to run attack adds against Bush in battleground states.

     Because Rather indicated that CBS carefully vetted the memos, it's more likely that left wing infiltration into the network resulted in the news story. In a memo dated Aug. 18, 2003, Killian, Bush's commanding officer, wrote that he was pressured to “sugarcoat” Bush performance evaluation, after Lt. Bush failed to meet performance standards and take a physical. Though Killian died in 1984, his son Gary warned CBS that the memos were fakes, telling nationally syndicated radio talk show host Sean Hannity that it was inconceivable his father would have written such a memo. Suggesting hanky-panky, Rather said document expert Marcel B. Matley corroborated the memos when, in fact, Matley indicated he only examined one May 4, 1972 memo, shedding further doubt on CBS' story. It's worth noting that CBS sticks by the “story,” not necessarily the documents.

     If the memos contained computer-generated superscripts, it should be obvious to almost anyone that they couldn't be originals. CBS has made much ado over the fact that they didn't review originals but first or second-generation photocopies. With the computer-generated superscripts, it wouldn't matter how many copies were used. The smaller computer-generated superscript would be visually obvious. An unnamed official from CBS said the network used two document experts before running the “60 Minutes II” story Sept. 8. No document expert could miss the miniature “th” superscript found on the memos identifying Bush's 111th Fighter Interceptor Sqaudron. Howard Rile of Long Beach, for president of the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners, cautioned against jumping to conclusions without inspecting the originals, defying common sense.

     Getting the bird's eye view, it's likely that Democratic dirty tricksters fabricated damaging evidence against President Bush. Judging by the results, it's likely that a very lean budget produced the amateurish results now dogging Kerry's campaign. It's one thing to accuse Bush of bad planning or miscalculation, it's still another to get busted engaging in dirty campaign tricks. Just as Kerry was hitting his stride, Democrats tripped on their own shoelaces. With Kerry already losing ground, another blunder practically guarantees Bush's reelection. Calling the phony memos “an orchestrated effort by Democrats and the Kerry campaign to tear down the president,” White House spokesman Scott McClellan dismissed attempts to demean Bush's military service. Telling the whole story, no one from CBS or anyone from the Kerry campaign seems interested in pursuing the story.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2002 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.