Rathergate

[DealMonkey]

The story of the man who first questioned the authenticity of the CBS memos, Atlanta lawyer and GOP activist Harry W. MacDougald, is shaping up to be an interesting sidebar to this whole fiasco:

Report: GOP activist first to question Bush National Guard docs

Associated Press

LOS ANGELES - An Internet writer considered the first to accuse CBS of using fake documents in its report on President Bush's National Guard service is an Atlanta lawyer with strong ties to Republican causes, a newspaper said Saturday.

Harry W. MacDougald, 46, is affiliated with two prominent conservative legal groups and helped draft a petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar President Clinton for giving misleading testimony in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case, the Los Angeles Times said.

He confirmed his identify as the writer behind the posting but declined to answer questions about his political background or explain how he knew so much about the documents so quickly, the newspaper said. His posting, published on the conservative Web site www.freerepublic.com hours after CBS' broadcast on Sept. 8, concluded the records were forged based on a technical analysis of spacing and font styles.

Since then, the documents have been questioned by experts and relatives of the late Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, who allegedly wrote them as one of Bush's commanders in 1972 and 1973. The memos indicated that Killian had been pressured to sugarcoat Bush's performance and that the future president had ignored an order to take a physical.

The network has stood by its reporting. CBS News President Andrew Heyward, however, said the network would redouble its efforts to determine the authenticity of the documents.

The revelation could fuel speculation among Democrats that Republicans have orchestrated efforts to debunk the CBS story. Republican officials have denied any involvement.

According to the newspaper, MacDougald works in the Atlanta office of the Winston-Salem, N.C.-based firm Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice and is connected to the conservative Federalist Society and Southeastern Legal Foundation, where he serves on its legal advisory board.

In 1998, he helped draft the foundation's petition that led to the five-year suspension of Clinton's Arkansas law license. He also assisted in the group's legal challenge to a federal campaign finance law funded in conjunction with a Republican senator and handled by former Clinton investigator Kenneth W. Starr.

As an attorney, MacDougald has represented government waste whistle-blowers and has challenged affirmative action laws that give racial and ethnic minorities preferences in higher education. He has not been a big financial contributor to political causes, the Times reported.

MacDougald's associates believe he acted alone when he wrote his criticism of the documents.

"Harry is a very strong conservative and a very passionate conservative so if he sees something that looks fishy, he's going to say something about it," said Lynn Hogue, former executive director of the Southeastern Legal Foundation.

MercuryNews.com

How did MacDougald know the documents were forged mere hours after CBS aired the story? Moreover, how could anyone know for sure the authenticity of the documents -- I mean, even NOW there's no way to reach a conclusion without the originals.

Conspiracy theorists are of course running with this story and/or accusing the conservative bloggers who picked up MacDougald's theories and ran with it, of typical FUD tactics: Throw enough garbage at the messenger and suddenly the discussion is about the veracity of the evidence and not about the content of the memos.

Kinda like what the dems did with the stolen memos off their computers concerning strategies to block certain (hispanic) judges ... anyone remember that?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Either the documents are forged or they are not. Who brought up the issue is neither here nor there, particularly because it's highly doubtful a Kerry supporter is going to stand up and be the first to say "Hey, you know what? Those docs look like forgeries!"

Of course a Republican is going to bring up the issue. He's a friggin' Freeper for goodness sake. It's not like that kind of observation is going to happen at the Democratic Underground.

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

How did MacDougald know the documents were forged mere hours after CBS aired the story? Moreover, how could anyone know for sure the authenticity of the documents -- I mean, even NOW there's no way to reach a conclusion without the originals.

Conspiracy theorists are of course running with this story and/or accusing the conservative bloggers who picked up MacDougald's theories and ran with it, of typical FUD tactics: Throw enough garbage at the messenger and suddenly the discussion is about the veracity of the evidence and not about the content of the memos.

Kinda like what the dems did with the stolen memos off their computers concerning strategies to block certain (hispanic) judges ... anyone remember that?

Holy Impossibilities, Batman! A Republican familiar with MS Word? The barbarians are truly at the gates.

So a Republican posting on a conservative site is now considered some kind of breakthrough discovery? Discounting this desparately long-winded grasp at straws, "See BS" nevertheless receives the negative coverage it deserves.

Oh, and on a related note, even Google thinks memo-defender Markos "Screw Them" Zuniga (Daily Kos) is a joke.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I mean, even NOW there's no way to reach a conclusion without the originals.

Quit trying to confuse them with the facts. Rather broke their rules and must be punished. :laugh:

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I mean, even NOW there's no way to reach a conclusion without the originals.

Quit trying to confuse them with the facts. Rather broke their rules and must be punished. :laugh:

LOL. It's hilarious hearing anyone from the opposition talk about about facts concerning this issue. Facts are the one thing they seem to be ignoring wholesale.

"Sure ANG documents weren't produced with proportional fonts.

Of course the centered headers were impossible even on IBM Selectric Composers.

Yeah it matches up to a Word document with Times New Roman perfectly.

Oh, but without the originals it just can't be proven for sure."


Holy jumpin' apologisms Batman!

 

[her209]

Wasn't CBS the first to break the Abu Jirab (sp) story?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: burnedout

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

How did MacDougald know the documents were forged mere hours after CBS aired the story? Moreover, how could anyone know for sure the authenticity of the documents -- I mean, even NOW there's no way to reach a conclusion without the originals.

Conspiracy theorists are of course running with this story and/or accusing the conservative bloggers who picked up MacDougald's theories and ran with it, of typical FUD tactics: Throw enough garbage at the messenger and suddenly the discussion is about the veracity of the evidence and not about the content of the memos.

Kinda like what the dems did with the stolen memos off their computers concerning strategies to block certain (hispanic) judges ... anyone remember that?

Holy Impossibilities, Batman! A Republican familiar with MS Word? The barbarians are truly at the gates.

So a Republican posting on a conservative site is now considered some kind of breakthrough discovery? Discounting this desparately long-winded grasp at straws, "See BS" nevertheless receives the negative coverage it deserves.

Oh, and on a related note, even Google thinks memo-defender Markos "Screw Them" Zuniga (Daily Kos) is a joke.

Shhhh......

Anyway, it's time for blather to pony up the documents. He used them and presented them as fact when they are questionable at best as they are only copies.

Bush "bumps" the story for the news outlets. Good call Rove - the story was on it's way to the rug...but this'll keep it out there over the weekend.

CsG

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

The L.A. Slime recently printed this as well:

While bloggers and some conservative activists have hailed Buckhead as a hero in their longtime effort to paint the mainstream media as politically biased, some Democrats and even some conservative bloggers have marveled at Buckhead?s detailed knowledge of the memos and wondered whether that suggested White House involvement.

After reading such garbage, people still wonder why the L.A. Slime recently laid off 375 workers?

Here's "Buckhead's" original post, courtesy of Powerline:

Every single one of the memos to file regarding Bush?s failure to attend a physical and meet other requirements is in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatine or Times New Roman. In 1972 people used typewriters for this sort of thing (especially in the military), and typewriters used mono-spaced fonts.

The use of proportionally spaced fonts did not come into common use for office memos until the introduction high-end word processing systems from Xerox and Wang, and later of laser printers, word processing software, and personal computers. They were not widespread until the mid to late 90?s.

Before then, you needed typesetting equipment, and that wasn?t used for personal memos to file. Even the Wang and other systems that were dominant in the mid 80?s used mono-spaced fonts. I doubt the TANG had typesetting or high-end 1st generation word processing systems.

I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old. This should be pursued aggressively.

So a recap to see if I understand you, the AP, and the L.A. Slime correctly.

Four hours after the release of documents, an attorney presents a generic argument that the, ahem, journalists at the L.A. Slime call "detailed knowledge"?

Would you like to read a real explanation from a distinguished scientist and computer typographic pioneer? Then read this.

EDIT: Edited for context.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: her209
Wasn't CBS the first to break the Abu Jirab (sp) story?

Not quite. CBS did an expose well after it was exposed by Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker. They werent the first to report it on the mainstream news either. They were the first to cover it in detail with pictures.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: burnedout

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

How did MacDougald know the documents were forged mere hours after CBS aired the story? Moreover, how could anyone know for sure the authenticity of the documents -- I mean, even NOW there's no way to reach a conclusion without the originals.

Conspiracy theorists are of course running with this story and/or accusing the conservative bloggers who picked up MacDougald's theories and ran with it, of typical FUD tactics: Throw enough garbage at the messenger and suddenly the discussion is about the veracity of the evidence and not about the content of the memos.

Kinda like what the dems did with the stolen memos off their computers concerning strategies to block certain (hispanic) judges ... anyone remember that?

Holy Impossibilities, Batman! A Republican familiar with MS Word? The barbarians are truly at the gates.

So a Republican posting on a conservative site is now considered some kind of breakthrough discovery? Discounting this desparately long-winded grasp at straws, "See BS" nevertheless receives the negative coverage it deserves.

Oh, and on a related note, even Google thinks memo-defender Markos "Screw Them" Zuniga (Daily Kos) is a joke.

Shhhh......

Anyway, it's time for blather to pony up the documents. He used them and presented them as fact when they are questionable at best as they are only copies.

Bush "bumps" the story for the news outlets. Good call Rove - the story was on it's way to the rug...but this'll keep it out there over the weekend.

CsG

No its time for Rather and CBS to recant.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: burnedout

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

How did MacDougald know the documents were forged mere hours after CBS aired the story? Moreover, how could anyone know for sure the authenticity of the documents -- I mean, even NOW there's no way to reach a conclusion without the originals.

Conspiracy theorists are of course running with this story and/or accusing the conservative bloggers who picked up MacDougald's theories and ran with it, of typical FUD tactics: Throw enough garbage at the messenger and suddenly the discussion is about the veracity of the evidence and not about the content of the memos.

Kinda like what the dems did with the stolen memos off their computers concerning strategies to block certain (hispanic) judges ... anyone remember that?

Holy Impossibilities, Batman! A Republican familiar with MS Word? The barbarians are truly at the gates.

So a Republican posting on a conservative site is now considered some kind of breakthrough discovery? Discounting this desparately long-winded grasp at straws, "See BS" nevertheless receives the negative coverage it deserves.

Oh, and on a related note, even Google thinks memo-defender Markos "Screw Them" Zuniga (Daily Kos) is a joke.

Shhhh......

Anyway, it's time for blather to pony up the documents. He used them and presented them as fact when they are questionable at best as they are only copies.

Bush "bumps" the story for the news outlets. Good call Rove - the story was on it's way to the rug...but this'll keep it out there over the weekend.

CsG

No its time for Rather and CBS to recant.

I'm an optimist at heart but that defies the realm of realistic outcomes.

CsG

 

[DealMonkey]

The problem is, "Buckethead" (as I like to call him ) just floated the theory -- he has no way of knowing definitively and neither do any of you, and neither do any of the "document experts" who have weighed in thus far. So as Cad so expertly parrots in every single post, time to ante up the original docs or STFU.

I'm not saying there's any "conspiracy" surrounding Buckethead and/or his proclamations as a freeper, it only serves to bring up more questions.

For example, how would anyone be able to make a detailed examination of the memos when the story just aired on TV? The story aired Sep 8th and the documents were posted online Sep 9th. Buckethead's Sept. 8 late-night posting ? written less than four hours after the CBS report - would come before the documents were available online. Did he record the show and then freeze the frame in which the memos were shown? I'm sure that's a credible method for verifying the authenticity of a document. Oh brother.

Interesting ... very interesting ...

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
The problem is, "Buckethead" (as I like to call him ) just floated the theory -- he has no way of knowing definitively and neither do any of you, and neither do any of the "document experts" who have weighed in thus far. So as Cad so expertly parrots in every single post, time to ante up the original docs or STFU.

I'm not saying there's any "conspiracy" surrounding Buckethead and/or his proclamations as a freeper, it only serves to bring up more questions.

For example, how would anyone be able to make a detailed examination of the memos when the story just aired on TV? The story aired Sep 8th and the documents were posted online Sep 9th. Buckethead's Sept. 8 late-night posting ? written less than four hours after the CBS report - would come before the documents were available online. Did he record the show and then freeze the frame in which the memos were shown? I'm sure that's a credible method for verifying the authenticity of a document. Oh brother.

Interesting ... very interesting ...

CBS originally aired the story on 9/8/04 between 6:00 PM and 6:20 PM PDT.

Two hours after the report aired, a link to the documents was posted on Free Republic in this thread, found in post #11 at 8:17 PDT

Buckhead comments at 8:59 PDT in post #47. So much for that conspiracy theory.

 

[DealMonkey]

You're right. I was looking at the properties for the PDFs on CBS's site yesterday and I SWEAR they said 9/9/04. However, following the link from your thread over to CBS I find PDFs with the date 9/8/04. Hmmmm, I must have gone to the Dan Rather school of research. Heh.

Unlike some, I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong.

 

[1EZduzit]

Bush "bumps" the story for the news outlets. Good call Rove - the story was on it's way to the rug...but this'll keep it out there over the weekend.

By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer

KENNEBUNKPORT, Maine - President Bush (news - web sites) has reviewed disputed documents that purport to show he refused orders to take a physical examination in 1972 and did not recall having seen them previously, a White House official said Saturday.

Why didn't Bush comment on the content of the documents?

The officer in charge of the unit where Bush took his basic training wrote to then-Rep. George H.W. Bush in 1968. The officer's letter was not released Friday, but the elder Bush's reply was: "That a major general in the Air Force would take interest in a brand new Air Force trainee made a big impression on me."

Looks to me like there was some major brown-nosing going on there, LOL.

The White House has said repeatedly that all Bush's Guard records have been disclosed, only to be embarrassed when new documents have turned up. Friday's disclosures were in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by The Associated Press.

And the Pentagon has been sitting on these documents for some time. Amazing how they keep finding things. What's really amazing is how the righties think that the documents themselves and CBS/Rather are what's/who's on trial rather then the contents of the documents and Bushes ANG service. The only thing Bush can say is he has "no recollection" of seeing them? He sure missed an opportunity to qwell the controversey.


L='Let the truth come out']http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=44164[/L]

Asked about a controversial CBS report that he received preferential treatment while in the Air National Guard 30 years ago, President George W. Bush said, ?Let the truth come out.?

I think the judge made that decision, not Bush. Nice spin attempt though.

?That is an invitation to talk about the wrong thing,? said Card. ?That?s talking about the past and this election should not be about the past and what happened 30 years ago.?

Apparently Rove didn't get that memo, LOL.

 

[klah]

Originally posted by: burnedout
The L.A. Slime recently printed this as well:

While bloggers and some conservative activists have hailed Buckhead as a hero in their longtime effort to paint the mainstream media as politically biased, some Democrats and even some conservative bloggers have marveled at Buckhead?s detailed knowledge of the memos and wondered whether that suggested White House involvement.

After reading such garbage, people still wonder why the L.A. Slime recently laid off 375 workers?

Guess who wrote that; the new editorial page editor Mike Kinsley. The same clown that got OWNED when he was the editor of Slate for defending the fake monkeyfishing story and trashing the WSJ for questioning him: http://slate.com/id/110230

Kinsley's own words about monkeyfishing "there is no evidence that he made this stuff up and lots of evidence that he didn't."

 

[burnedout]

Great info, klah. Thanks.

 

[burnedout]

Well, well, what have we here?

Ex-Guardsman: I Contacted Kerry Campaign:

By KELLEY SHANNON, Associated Press Writer

AUSTIN, Texas - A retired Texas National Guard official mentioned as a possible source for disputed documents about President Bush (news - web sites)'s service in the Guard said he passed along information to a former senator working with John Kerry (news - web sites)'s campaign.

In an Aug. 21 e-mail to a list of Texas Democrats, Bill Burkett said after getting through "seven layers of bureaucratic kids" in the Democrat's campaign, he talked with former Georgia senator Max Cleland about information that would counter criticism of Kerry's Vietnam War service. The Associated Press obtained a copy of the e-mail Saturday.

"I asked if they wanted to counterattack or ride this to ground and outlast it, not spending any money. (Cleland) said counterattack. So I gave them the information to do it with," Burkett wrote.

Burkett, who lives just outside of Abilene, wrote that no one at the Kerry campaign called him back.

The e-mail was distributed to a Yahoo list of Texas Democrats. The site, which had about 570 members Saturday, is not affiliated with the state party.

Republican National Committee (news - web sites) spokesman Jim *** suggested collaboration between Burkett and the Kerry campaign. "The trail of connections is becoming increasingly clear," he said.

Shades of Charles Foster Kane, Batman!

 

[1EZduzit]

More recycled news

 

[burnedout]

How gullible are "See BS" and Dan Rather? Take a look here at this side-by-side comparison of an authentic Killian document and one that Dan Rather fell for.

[Hat tip: The Sage of Knoxville]

 

[klah]

Award for the reproduction of these memos on a ca. 1972 typewriter is up to $17,600.

 

[1EZduzit]

Timeline of Bush's ANG Service

_Oct. 1, 1973: Bush receives honorable discharge.

What discharge date is is one supposed to go by?
Oct. 1, 1973

or

Nov. 21, 1974


His commitment should have been over in June of 74, not Novemeber of 74, when he was actually discharged? An extra 6 months? Maybe we better get Rather to check that out?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: burnedout
How gullible are "See BS" and Dan Rather? Take a look here at this side-by-side comparison of an authentic Killian document and one that Dan Rather fell for.

[Hat tip: The Sage of Knoxville]

So can you prove the CBS doc's false???

CAN YOU?

Let's see it then. LOL. If it could be done, it would have been done by now.

I have top go now, have fun with your circle jerk. :laugh:

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: digitalsm
Rather nor CBS has come out with evidence supporting the documents. Thats why they are in the mess they are in. Good ole Andy Rooney has apparently jumped ship because he feels they are false and Rather & CBS need to own up to their mistake.

Ask yourself this: Are the memos the ENTIRE story here? Or was there an ongoing investigation wherein CBS conducted interviews and research? Are the memos just ONE element of the story? I'm not trying to say anything definitive (yet), I'm merely raising questions.

I have concluded that Rather is trying to make a point here. Maybe he will play the card, too.

What about the Wmd issue, with the lack of Wmd? How could Rather use that argument to his advantage?


Just a thought....

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: digitalsm
Rather nor CBS has come out with evidence supporting the documents. Thats why they are in the mess they are in. Good ole Andy Rooney has apparently jumped ship because he feels they are false and Rather & CBS need to own up to their mistake.

Ask yourself this: Are the memos the ENTIRE story here? Or was there an ongoing investigation wherein CBS conducted interviews and research? Are the memos just ONE element of the story? I'm not trying to say anything definitive (yet), I'm merely raising questions.

I have concluded that Rather is trying to make a point here. Maybe he will play the card, too.

What about the Wmd issue, with the lack of Wmd? How could Rather use that argument to his advantage?


Just a thought....

Will we find out Wednesday?