Burkett said: "...I knew I'd been guided here and I knew why at that point." So ... God made him do it?

Jim Moore offers a Dan Rather-like "preponderance of the evidence" defense of Burkett's credibility...

This is soooo much seeBS. One lie destroys a person's credibility.

Tempting thought, but if Burkett is a former Guardsman, wouldn't he do a better job of it as regards the military jargon, style, and abbreviations in the documents?

(Also, how old is Burkett? Is he old enough to remember what pre-desktop-publishing office memos looked like? My guess is that the forger is most likely under 30 because of this factor.)

Dear Ace,

What a scoop on Bill Burkett!

Also see what I just found - a post by Bill Burkett on August 14, 2004 04:27 PM at steveverdon.com/archives/politics/001110.html : "Of the files that I saw within the 15 gallon waste can were numerous documents which detailed why 1LT George Bush was grounded from flying including a two-page counseling statement signed by LTC Jerry Killian."

They were scoffing at bloggers being pajama wearers. I think the main stream media journalists have shown themselves to be utterly naked. And what I see don't look pretty.

Stop Kerry. Read 4 chapters of Unfit For Command online for free

Great job with this, Ace. It's all necessarily speculatory, but I think you've nailed the source.

I think you're about to earn a second Instapundit link in four days.

Interesting. To Dan Rather's other crimes, we can add his exploitation of an obviously mentally-disturbed man.

Re: Burkett's age: Here's an excerpt from veteransforpeace.org/what_do_you_say_032203.htm :

"Lt. Col. Bill Burkett completed 28 years of decorated service and was medically retired from the US Army National Guard in 1998..."

I've been up all night reading about Kerrygate, so my math abilities may be blooey, but this would be from 1970 to 1998. So he'd be about 52 now? I also assumed the forgerer would be someone in their 40s or younger. Or else the unknown forgerer had gotten so used to computers that he/she forgot about the typewriter days of the 70s? Somewhere in all my reading overnight, I also read that Dan Rather's daughter work(s)/(ed) for Ben Barnes.

So Is this Burkett guy a wingnut???

Interesting article I located. It appears the Boston Globe mistakenly said Staudt retired in 1975 during a story about the 1988 presidential race, in which Lloyd Bentsen's son was accused of using his connections to get into the TANG.

Copyright Boston Globe Newspaper Aug 20, 1988

NEW ORLEANS - The only son of Sen. Lloyd Bentsen Jr., the Democratic vice presidential candidate, was accepted into the Texas Air National Guard in 1968 as a financial officer after being told of a rare opening by the unit's top officer, the Dukakis campaign said yesterday.

Responding to a reporter's inquiry, Marilyn Yaeger, communications director for Bentsen's campaign, said Lloyd Bentsen 3d was told of the opening by Lt. Col. Walter Staudt, commander of the Texas Air National Guard at the time.

The two men met at a party in 1968 at about the time Bentsen was graduating from Stanford University with a master's degree in business administration.

Bentsen, who had been turned down previously for a pilot's position in the Guard because of colorblindness, told Staudt that he was still interested in joining the Guard in some other capacity, Yaeger said.

"Staudt told Bentsen that he just happened to have an opening in his accounting division and suggested he apply," Yaeger said.

Bentsen served as a financial analyst at the unit's base in Houston from June 14, 1968, to Nov. 2, 1974, when he was honorably discharged with the rank of captain, according to records at the Texas National Guard headquarters in Austin.

Lt. Col. Edmond S. Komandosky, public affairs officer for the Guard, said his records do not show when Bentsen applied for enlistment. Yaeger said her information came from Bentsen and other members of the family.

Staudt retired from the Guard in 1975. Bentsen was campaigning for his father yesterday in Texas. Neither he nor Staudt could be reached for comment.

Earlier this week, it was learned that Sen. Dan Quayle, the Republican nominee for vice president, may have gained his position in the Indiana National Guard through the intercession of a family friend.

When questioned after those revelations by reporters in Texas about whether he had exercised any influence in his son's admission to the Guard, Sen. Bentsen said, "absolutely not."

In 1968, Bentsen's father was a successful Texas businessman, having retired in 1955 after two terms in the House of Representatives. He returned to politics in 1970, winning a Senate seat in a race against George Bush.

At the time of the younger Bentsen's enlistment, there was a waiting list to join, said Gen. Thomas S. Bishop, adjutant general for the Texas National Guard.

But Bishop, now retired and living in Austin, said no special favors would have been needed for Bentsen to have been accepted.

"There were lists all over the state of people waiting to get into one Guard unit or another, to be sure," Bishop said. "But some of the lists were much shorter than others.

"If the unit involved a particular specialty, and I'd say accounting would be one, then it's likely we didn't have many eligible applicants and a person wouldn't have had to wait very long at all," Bishop said.

The oldest son of Vice President George Bush, George Jr., was a pilot in the same Guard unit as Bentsen, serving from May 1968 through September 1973.

The younger Bush, who came to Quayle's defense this week during the controversy at the Republican National Convention, could not be reached yesterday to determine the circumstances of his enlistment.

Burkett probably just relied upon news stories and never actually checked to find out when Staudt retired.

Msg to Mr. Bill Burkett:

Can you tell us how old you are? And do you have any ideas on who the forgerer is? Why not join in the hunt? Did you show any of the papers in the trash can to someone who could have used them to make the forgeries? Someone, perhaps, who pumped you for info on who the players were in 72, 73. Someone to whom you may have mentioned Staudt's name? You, of couse, would know, being there at the time, that he had already retired in 1972. So who did you tell, without mentioning the retirement? Best regards to you and your family.

"This report was not based solely on recovered documents, but rather on a preponderance of evidence, including documents that were provided by unimpeachable sources...."
SAID DAN RATHER ON FRIDAY.

Question: Should this statement be reported to Dan's local mental health services? Try a parallel construction with a more visual action: "I did not get wet solely because I fell in the pond, but rather due to a preponderance of gravity, including the water."

If Mr. Burkitt sued concerning his medical claims, he would have done so in the US Court of Federal Claims, which is the venue for that type of civil action. That court file, and any opinion(s) issued by the Court might make interesting reading.

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1077146/posts
Date: 8/8/02

Case Style: Bill L. Burkett v. William W. Goodwin, Jackie L. Taliaferro and Archie M. Meador

Case Number: 03-01-00302-CV

Court: Texas County of Appeals, Third Appellate District

Description: Bill Burkett, a retired Lieutenant Colonel in the Texas Army National Guard, brought a personal injury action against appellees, William Goodwin, Jackie Taliaferro, and Archie Meador, all of whom were his superior officers. (1) Burkett appeals from the trial court's order dismissing his lawsuit. While Burkett sets out his appellate issue as "whether the court below erred in granting summary judgment to the defendants-appellees," he raises the following contention in the argument portion of his brief: Because he commenced his claims against the appellees in their individual capacities only, (1) his claims were justiciable in a civilian court and (2) the appellees were not entitled to statutory immunity under Texas Government Code section 431.085; therefore, the court erred in dismissing his lawsuit. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 431.085(a) (West 1998). We will liberally construe Burkett's brief and will focus our review on this contention. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.9. We will affirm the trial court's order of dismissal.

Background

Burkett alleged that on January 17, 1998, he collapsed at the Abilene airport on his return home from an active duty assignment in Panama with the United States Army. He alleged that his collapse was caused by a tropical disease he contracted while on active duty in Panama. After several days of illness, Burkett went to Dyess Air Force Base in Abilene seeking medical care. Individuals at the medical facility's admissions office told Burkett that they needed clearance or confirmation of Burkett's active duty status from the Texas Army National Guard before he could be admitted for medical care. Burkett alleged that pursuant to Texas Army National Guard regulation 7-3, had any of the appellees, who were in command positions with the Texas Army National Guard, provided the admissions office at Dyess with clearance or confirmation, he could have received prompt medical attention at Dyess. He asserted that based on Guard regulations, it was Goodwin's, Taliaferro's and Meador's ministerial duty to provide clearance or confirmation of his active duty status to Dyess and that they were without discretion or authority to refuse to provide the clearance or confirmation of his status to Dyess.

Burkett alleged that over the next four months Goodwin, Taliaferro and Meador willfully and maliciously refused to provide Dyess with clearance or confirmation of his duty status thereby denying him access to military medical care. Burkett alleged that these three individuals' conduct was "so completely beyond and outside any military authority or discretion as to have been outside the scope of military duty, outside any military duty, outside any military capacity, and not incident to military duty." Burkett alleged that they "acted purely as individuals, not as military officers, albeit pretending to have military authority and abusing their offices through such pretense in order to willfully and maliciously wreak havoc upon [Burkett's] life." As a result of their refusal to provide clearance and confirmation of Burkett's active duty status, he was unable to obtain a medical diagnosis or military medical care for his debilitating illness. Burkett finally received access to military health care due to the intervention of a United States Congressman. By the time he received military health care, the disease had ravaged his body, and left him disabled and unable to return to either military duty or gainful civilian employment. Burkett alleged that as a direct and proximate result of Goodwin's, Taliaferro's and Meador's tortious conduct, he suffered various personal injuries. Further, he alleged that because their actions were willful and malicious, he was entitled to exemplary damages.

Goodwin, Taliaferro and Meador moved to dismiss the case for want of jurisdiction and moved for summary judgment. They contended that the trial court was without subject matter jurisdiction over the case because the military personnel matter at issue was not justiciable in civilian courts. See Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135, 146 (1950); Newth v. Adjutant Gen.'s Dep't, 883 S.W.2d 356, 358 (Tex. App.--Austin 1994, writ denied). Additionally, they moved for summary judgment on the grounds that they were statutorily immune for their alleged actions. Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 431.085 (West 1998). Burkett responded to the appellees' motions contending that indeed the court had subject matter jurisdiction because he was suing Goodwin, Taliaferro and Meador in their individual capacities and not as military personnel. Burkett contended that due to the appellees' intentional failure to discharge a mandatory, non-discretionary duty under Texas Army National Guard regulation procedure 7-3 to confirm Burkett's duty status to the medical facility at Dyess, he suffered damages for which he could recover at common law. The trial court dismissed Burkett's case.
4 posted on 02/12/2004 8:25:56 PM PST by ambrose ("John Kerry has blood of American soldiers on his hands" - Lt. Col. Oliver North)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

BR:

FYI, there is no such word as "forgerer." The word is "forger" i.e. "one who forges, one who commits forgery."

Thank you Ace of Spades for covering this forgery story! Dan Rather is as unreliable and seemingly as unstable as Bill Burkett.

FV

Hee hee, FV, you're right - as I said some hours ago, I've been up all night having fun with Kerrygate and I'm getting blooey and blooier! But guess what, the Oxford Dictionary actually has both forms of the noun. Never mind. We're both right.

Is everyone aware of the early reports from, I think, a site called "Spectator" - that the line of progression of the forged docs were: (1) "received" (I don't know how - by hand, fax, mail?) at DNC, top DNC people saw it, then (2) passed on to Kerry's group, then somehow (3) to CBS. Now I see DNC/Kerry's people denying that. So, although this is a mediagate and CBSgate, I think it's going to turn out to be Kerrygate!

Good night for now.

DOB for Billy Loyd Burkett of Baird, TX is 16 NOV 49

I believe this is the right guy -- making him 54 years old at the moment.

Great stuff! I do think it possible that the actual forger was a younger, motivated, hanger on of Burkett's, and not Burkett himself. OTOH, Burkett, in his presumably irrational, rage filled state, may well have decided to not bother with finding a 1972 era typewriter, or refresh his memory on the correct terminology of the era, and simply whip out his Word default program in a moment of anger.

In the end, of course, Rather looks horrible. OTOH, if Burkett is indeed the direct or indirect source of forgery, the Kerry campaign may have dodged the fatal bullet here. Regardless, he's toast.

The Spectator article you're looking for was on the American Spectator web site (spectator.org) on Friday, 09-10, and was by-lined "The Prowler."

Rush Limbaugh quoted from the article on his program on Friday.

Oh gosh, I couldn't decide if I'm now supposed to get INTO my pyjamas or OUT OF my non-existent pyjamas, so I haven't gone to bed yet! This stuff is so much fun, it's like eating cheese cake, and addictive too!

Thanks, Chuck, for the DOB on Burkett.

Re: Finding the forger - We musn't forget Ace's brilliant opening this morning - it could even be Jim Moore. And what about Dan Rather's daughter having worked for or still works (?) for the guy who can't remember when he became a TX Lieutenant Governor, Ben Barnes? (Kudos to "Kathleen" who posted that on the more recent thread.) I picked up Pat Caddell was hinting in that direction. I'm now keeping two windows open at the same time, since these 2 threads are running simultaneously, it seems.

Okay, now I'm going to bed, I promise!

Quick question or two for the experts here...

1. Why isn't the "th" in the memo header "111th squadron" also in superscript?

2. I've heard mentioned that there are confirmed pro-Bush guard memos from that era that also have the superscript "th", the implication being that it was not that rare a typewriter. Is that confirmed?

Oh no, you guys, let me go to beeeeeed! How can I leave now that we have a DEEP FONT in our midst! Next we'll have to check the alibis of Hunt, McCord, the Cubans, the Mullen Co., Hughes, and just for good measure the investigators on the other side, Michael Hershman, Terry Lenzner, Hillary and Charles Ruff! And then there's that prostitute ring attorney who was committed before he could blab about the Columbia Plaza/Watergate connection. Maybe the Deepthroat moniker signified more.

So, Deep Font, are you up to it?

This doesn't matter!!! I know the story is true!!!! True I tell you!!!!

Dan Rather

"I've heard mentioned that there are confirmed pro-Bush guard memos from that era that also have the superscript "th", the implication being that it was not that rare a typewriter. Is that confirmed? "

I believe, but am not totally sure, that those documents had superscripts, meaning above the line, but they were in the same font size as the rest of the type, not a smaller size as is obvious in some of the forged documents.
Superscripts above the line in the same font size are easy to make with a typewriter, but switching font sizes with typewriters capable of it involved taking the whole type ball off, replacing it with a smaller ball (not a very simple procedure), then switching back to continue typing.

Killian Letters – The Perfect “Sting”

In honor of the real author of the Killian Letters, I am composing these thoughts on Microsoft Word using Times New Roman (TNR) and 12 point font.

Remember the movie “The Sting?”

Paul Newman and Robert Redford team up in this 1973 movie to rob a mob boss who had a friend killed. .

Ever since it became obvious that the Killian letters were forgeries, the question was asked: who did it? Was it the usual suspect: someone in the Kerry dirty tricks department? Others have been named: Dan Rather himself, Carl Rove, Bill Burkett (a disgruntled former National Guard officer), CBS News producer Mary Mapes?

Here’s my theory: the Killian Letters were a sting operation originating somewhere in the military designed to kill at least four birds with one stone. And I think it’s going to work.

Back to “The Sting.” In the modern version, the mob boss is Dan Rather. As an added bonus we see the destruction of accessories Mary Mapes and Bill Burkett and an indelible stain on CBS. And as icing on the cake: collateral damage to the Kerry campaign.

The motive is Abu Ghraib.

It was Mary Mapes, Dan Rather and CBS News that made Abu Ghraib a household name and smeared the military’s name. They decided to run the story despite Pentagon requests to wait until their internal investigation was complete and despite that damage that the story did to the American cause in the Arab world.

So, here’s the payback. And it’s not over yet because the Pentagon and the Bush administration has been mum so far. My belief is that they will carry the story forward.

Why do I believe the memos were composed by a military man? No ordinary civilian would be sufficiently conversant with military memos to provide both a reasonable forgery (to the civilian eye) of a military document, but one that uses unauthentic nomenclature so that it can be discredited on that basis.

Second, it was typed using a computer to provide another way of destroying its authenticity.

Of course, like any good forgery, it has to be gotten into the right hands. Enter Bill Burkett and Mary Mapes. Bill Burkett has a grudge against the National Guard and George Bush ever since he became ill in 1998 while on duty with the Texan ANG and blames Bush, who was governor of Texas at the time, for failure to provide him with medical care.

Someone (we’ll call him “X”) finds a way of getting the Killian Memos to Burkett. While Burkett is a military man, he is not the sharpest tool in the shed (for a sample of his writing click HERE and scroll to the end). He's had several nervous breakdowns so he overlooks the problems with the memos and gets hold of Mary Mapes, a fellow Texan.

Mapes has no way of knowing a fake memo from the real one, but believes that, thanks to Burkett’s familiarity with the Texas ANG, she’s got a real scoop.

The memos pass up the food chain reaching Rather. Rather, a devout Liberal, wants to believe these are real. He is also a technophobe without a clue about computers, Microsoft Word, fonts, superscripts or any of the other wonders of modern computer technology being able to do what 1973 typewriters could not. Furthermore he doesn’t care. He decides that this is the time to counteract some of the Swift Boat controversy by attacking Bush’s National Guard record (again). As the 700 pound gorilla at CBS news, what Dan wants, Dan gets. So that’s how we get to “60 Minutes” and the Killian Memos.

Enter the blogosphere. CBS News obligingly puts the memos up on their web site, a major mistake because it gives literally thousands of people with arcane knowledge of computers the opportunity to examine them. Within a few hours, the fraud is exposed. But here’s where the hook is set: CBS and Captain Dan ‘stand by their story.” They have to! That’s the way the Mainstream Media (MSM) has always done business.

The fraud is so obvious, so blatant, and so widely discussed via the Internet that the MSM has to take notice. At this point, most of the MSM articles are referring to the Killian Memos as “disputed” rather than hopelessly discredited. In solidarity with CBS and Captain Dan, they hope the controversy will just go away.

If I’m right, however, there are several more legs to his story. The Bush campaign has not been heard from and neither has the Pentagon. I predict that there will be a reaction from those quarters until there is general public acceptance that CBS and Rather are exposed as having peddled forgeries.

My other prediction: the original forgeries will never be found. They are no longer in existence and Burkett was fed a photocopy. That way the fraud would be less likely to be discovered until it was too late.

Moneyrunner, your conpsiracy-fable is nonsense. Quit ascribing to a conspiracy what is better ascribed to incompetence.

The fraud is not "obvious" if you dont look for it, and the left dont expect the neanderthal right to rub 2 neurons together. If it was so 'obvious' how stupid and incompetent is CBS News and the whole MSM for not 'getting it' immediately?? Besides, for the left, lying WORKS, else why would 'obvious' frauds like Joe Wilson survive for over a year before being exposed? Why is the obvious fraudulent nature of Kerry's 4 months in Vietnam and his silence about his anti-war comments and protests. The MSM successfully kept quiet about that for an entire 12 months campaign.

It's simple: Some source, Burkett or some other anti-Bush nutcase, fed fake docs to organizations, Kerry campaign, CBS News, etc. that let their agenda supercede their commitment to truth.

No conspiracy .. Just a CONFEDERACY OF DUNCES who are hoisted on their own petard.

I can't keep up with you supersleuths. Great job. One quick note for the record, on MS Word and superscripting: the program inserts the text as superscript as you type, but the user can force the text back to normal. It doesn't involve changing any program settings, you just have to go back to the occurrence and re-type it (I just did it by typing the "th" part first, then appending a date immediately in front of it.)

Because these forgeries are SO inept, my personal working theory is that they were created as a prank, almost certainly by someone under age 30 or so (for the reasons indicated above). Then the prankster - or someone who had been shown the bogus memos, appended the signatures (copies of genunine signatures of Killian, probably taken from genuine documents that have been previously released under FOIA). CBS admits what they had were NOT originals but photocopies. How hard is it to append a signature to a document using a photocopier? or Photoshop?

Then, probably on a lark, the bogus memos were shown to someone else who, much the the amazement of the prankster, took them for genuine. The rest is history - people who WANTED them to be true simply failed to use good judgment.

My suspicion is that the original author is quaking in his/her boots, scared to death of being charged with forgery or conspiracy to illegaly influence an election.

I believe if someone had intended they be considered genuine, they would have found an old Selectric - they are available in junk stores even now.

What is the relationship between Bill Burkett and Marty Heldt?

When all of this crap began back in 1999, I was a political consultant for several Democratic candidates, as well as later being a senior consultant for Janet Reno in her run for Governor. I bought the document package from Marty Heldt and we subjected them to the most thorough investigation one could imagine. Why? Because if there was anything there, we damn sure wanted to use it. But guess what? Only two of those documents proved to be authentic and they were not even related to the charge being levelled. Many of them are so blatant in their alterations it is almost funny. Several purport to be signed by real live military personnel, yet they don't even know the proper format for a military date. -- Brooks Gregory 2004-01-28 08:27:57 PST

Is he referring to these very same documents? If Burkett obtained the documents from Heldt, or conspired with him, that might explain the clumsy memo format errors.

(Sorry, the comment filter won't allow me to post a link to the Google Newsgroup where the quote was obtained: talk.politics.misc)

Beldar: "Update (Sun Sep 12 @ 4:25pm): My commenters are coming up with extremely intriguing new facts! At a minimum, it looks as if the .pdf on the Fox News website was created last February (or someone's system clock is very badly off, by months!), and that it's been "adjusted" within the last few days. Plus there's interesting speculation (occurring in parallel with some going on over at LGF and among the Freepers, I understand) re how this stuff ties back to possible CBS News source(s). Keep scrolling, gentle readers! And go-go blogosphere!"

February? Shortly after the date of the posted quote by Annie R

Should be "posted quote by Spiny Norman". Sorry.

Having looked at the six-document batch of documents supposedly obtained by USA Today, I noted an additional memo dated 24 June 1973. It looks like and abortive forgery attempt. The "To" line is missing, the address is incomplete in the heading, and of course it's in the wrong format. I'm no expert, but it also looks like the signature was an early attempt to duplicate Killian's signature. Has anyone checked these additional documents against Word? I tried, and think I got the same identical spacing, etc. (especially the centering).

Heard on a report today that the superscript Rather showed, from "actual" docoments released earlier, were 1.- larger than in disputed memos
2.- not higher than preceding type line
3.- Had an "underline" feature
Another words, proved nothing.
Anyone have something on this?

Yes, the document cited by Rather as confirmation of the superscripting capability appears to be merely a common 1950's/1960's - era feature of many manual typewriters, which were sometimes equipped with superscript keys for common fractions and of course th, st, and rd. I think I first learned to type on a manual Remington tht had some of these features. The resulting 'superscript' is nothing similar to the MS Word version.

Annie R, yer theory seems most likely of all, to me. I mind the time I mentioned to the neighbor's kid that the streetlight in front of our house interfered with my seeing the stars at night, and made what I thought was an arch, facetious, sarcastic subjunctive and hypothetical remark about slingshots or pellet guns or something. Next thing I knew, I was having to explain to him that no, I didn't really mean that, and that it would be a crime to shoot the light out. Maybe some of those DNC guys are like little kids.

On Selectrics: Yep, I have one in this very room, not 8 feet from me as I type. Just looked. It has a 12 pt. Courier ball in it. Doesn't work, though.

One phrase that struck me as odd in the "CYA" memo had "Killian" saying "I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job".

I've found two instances on the web where Burkett himself uses the phrase "run/ran interference" in two separate contexts:

"At the same time, Chief Harvey Gough, who had helped Colonel Goodwin get his job as Chief of Staff, and had helped Bartlett and all of these other people, was trying to run interference and trying to get me access to medical care."

http://www.calpundit.com/archives/003249.html

and

James further shielded official public files from the press and otherwise ran interference for Bush, Hughes, Bartlett and Rove during the campaign --"obstructing" the judicial and public review of this record.

http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/2002/05/28_Scrubbed.html

Of course, this doesn't, in itself, prove that Burkett is the forger of the CBS memos, but it certainly is eyebrow raising. But if these memos are, indeed forgeries, I think Newsweek's found our guy.

Oh my! It just dawned on me that there is likely to be (for a little while) a run on old Selectrics and their balls on places like Ebay, and also a run of very bad Selectric ball jokes.

Here's mine: "Dan Rather, the man with Times Roman balls!"

Well, once he's exposed, this ought to end Bill Burkett's career as a Bush-hater and CBS as a reputable news organization.

Rathers' mendacity on this one is simply unforgivable.

Roger Williams is to be commended for bringing up a good thing for other bloggers to look at.

Telltales.

With the documents proven fake (outside Dan Rather's locked bathroom door - and He Ain't even taking calls from his wife!!) - the next phase is to find the forger.

In law enforcement, you can learn a lot from crime documents not ID'd (like threatening notes) - then looking at your suspect's writings. This does not require an "expert" to tie it all into a sweet case - that's for when it goes to court - but in initial investigation, anyone with common sense can do it - though you have to be careful not to fixate on one or two commonalities as "proof positive" you've got the culprit, or fail to recognize it might have been written by more than one person - blending the distinct traits. And my guess is this set of forged documents involved several conspirators.

I would say again, to not conclude Burkett is the one - remember the "white van", but to look at these document telltales between the other writings of someone you would love to sick the Blogosphere on and CBS's stuff:

(1) words, phrases that are not common, but appear in both Burkett's Internet writing and the CBS documents. "Run interference" is a good example.
(2) associative inferences of logic and experience. If someone wrote elsewhere mistaking Staude being on active duty vs. retired in 1972, they could have introduced that particular error of theirs into the CBS forgeries.
(3) a person in possession of bona-fide Bush ANG files, which could be tied into the CBS papers in the form of extracted non-current addresses or use of a specialized term from the legitimate files, but in a patois not used by Killian.
(4) Look for people on the Internet that charged specific things about Bush's service, like how Killian - told to them from a friend of a friend at the 111th - was livid about Bush's escape to Alabama with pithy "insider" hearsay details provided - but never offered proof in past Internet posts.
(5) Look for links with DNC/Kerry agents-provacateurs or Kerry/DNC websites.
(6) Look for money being a motive - person saying he knows damning details of Bush's Guard service he hopes to sell, an insider book he is now writing about "Bush's desertion", etc.

The obvious question; where are the originals?

Chuck: Thank you for writing out the DOB as "16 NOV 49" which is the way, I believe, all branches of military write it. I could be wrong, of course, and this may be of little or no consequence; however, I note that the memos have a 4-digit year. I thought the YYYY format came about only recently with Y2K. Again, I could be wrong, but I am wondering about this. Anyone have a thought about this?

Brilliant, brilliant, Cedarford! Thank you. Reminds me of the old movie "Z" where the prosecutor's investigator discovers those in the criminal conspiracy all have the same set of pre-arranged phrases like "he jumped off the van LIKE A TIGER", etc. The difference in this case is it would be unintended tell-tale word trails and oh, how easy it is to find that with Google's Advanced Search, using the 2nd choice "with all the words." Hee hee!

P.S. Just woke up, still a little sleepy. I meant the 2nd choice in Google's Advanced Search: "with the exact phrase."

When I was in the military there things called burn bags. Any paper trash that was generated ended up in there, just because it might have some information on it that shouldn't be in the normal trash. I am sure the TANG officers had similar bags.
So what trash would confidential papers be in?

Cedarford--

Great post!

I noted in another thread that the Boston Globe did a story on Lloyd Bentsen's son being accused of benefiting from his father's influence to get into TANG in 1988. Staudt was referred to back then, too. The Globe erroneously (natch) said Staudt had retired in 1975. I didn't find any other early stories on Staudt. Chances are the forger didn't have access to the military records. Once again implicating someone other than Burkett as the author. Although I do think Burkett was the messenger boy.

BR--

I think this character Marty Heldt is possibly involved. See LGF for a thread on him. Real weirdo who supposedly tried to sell a trove of "authentic" Bush military records that turned out to be garbage.

ooman: "1. Why isn't the "th" in the memo header "111th squadron" also in superscript?"

This was asked pretty far up the thread, but I don't think anyone answered it..?

I believe that MSWord, by default, will automatically superscript a 'th' when you type something like "111th", so the inference would be that the, ah, "author" of these memos was deliberately backspacing over the superscript, then retyping a 'th', forcing it to be "normal", and simply forgot in some of the later and/or non copy&pasted ones. Presumably the header was copy/pasted, since it occurrs more than once and is kinda obvious thing to do...

Also, I think there is at least one place where there is an internal space, "111 th", which kinda supports the theory of making a half-arsed attempt to suppress the auto-superscripting.

Oh, yeah, forgot:

I wanted to comment on the 'gotta be a twenty-something MoveOn.org type of kid' theory. Sure, alot of kids are probably clueless, but let's not forget that *older* people can *also* be ignorant in regards typewriters versus word processors. You know-- "Ah don't wanna use them new-fangled computers anymore than I absolutely have to!"

Now, what do we know of 54 year old Burkett's competence? He certainly spends alot of time posting on leftie sites, I hear... does that discount him? Or do we rely on the simple fact that he's a fruitcake?

"Running Interference": This might be a stupid question, but is he a football fan?

"CYA" may have been in the military for a long time, but it's also somewhat modern in the mainstream-- is it one of Burkett's pet acronyms?

PS: Dernit, I spelled "occurs" wrong in the last post.

Cedarford:

There is a field called "stylometrics" that attempts to determine authorship of writings of disputed origins. The classic example of application of stylometrics is whether Madison or Hamilton were responsible for authoring 12 disputed papers in The Federalist.

Basically, stylometrics looks at things such as word frequency, sentence length and so forth. I don't have the expertise to perform such an analysis myself, but it would certainly be intersting if it can be shown that these memos are written in a style closer to that of Burkett than Killian.

Ace, I know we don't always agree but you need to watch it with this shit man. It could seriously bite you on the ass. You may be pretty sure but you don't know and you could be fucking with an innocent man's life.

Dean, I understand your concerns, but at the very least Burkett was a "principle source" for the story (according to Newsweek).

I don't know if he provided the false documents and I say I don't know. I do think, however, that it is fair to note that he is both a "principle source" for the story as well as the only person we know of to claim to have been in a position to come by documents of this source.

Does that mean he's the source? No, it doesn't. But it does mean that that question can and should be asked.

Here's an article from the Boston Globe that raises doubts over Burkett's claims:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/02/13/doubts_raised_on_bush_accuser/

Okay, okay, maybe I'm being a big handwringing pussy and making too big a deal of this. But please guys, consider the possibility that maybe he's just another guy who loathes Bush, not an outright criminal fraud.

I'm also sensitive since I've gotten death threats for shit I've written on my own blog, and I've also had people openly speculate that I am a secret Nazi sympathizer for a cartoon I published--and then called on me to "prove" that I wasn't one!

I can think of two cases in my memory of completely innocent individuals who get caught up in a media shitstorm of speculation.

Don't do something that's going to make you lose sleep. What if some fuckwad actually physically asaults this guy?

Yeah I know, you're trying to do the right thing, you're honorable people. Please though, stop and at least think about what I'm saying.

I mean, you're a "public figure" too, right? You're out there on the Internet, you're offering your opinions: would YOU want to be the target of this kind of widespread speculation about an outright criminal act?

I feel like I'm being a real asshole and I don't want to be, but...

Well, I've said my piece. I'm sure you guys will do the right thing.

I find it uterly amazing that all of these news organizations were on the "talking points" so quickly after the 60 minutes broadcast. It appears that The Times, Globe, USA Today etc had prior knowledge of the documents beforehand. Almost as if there was a conspiracy to bring down this President. Does anyone have more or am I an Itellectual Moron.

Here is some news I recently rec'd that might go with this discussion....now being that Im new to this I don't know how to post a link the fancy shmancy way...unless this blog converts it automatically but here it is

http://www.gopusa.com/news/2004/september/0913_mapes_documents.shtml

It says that CBS has confirmed that Mapes is the source of the documents...you can read further.

To: Ace, Cedarford, Fresh Air, Zeppenwolf, Roger W, and the rest of our pajama gang sleuths
Re: Stylometrics investigation method:

FORGED DOCS MATCH MICHAEL MOORE'S 11 FEB 04 CHECKLIST

The thought came to me that if you want to understand a forger, you have to think like one.

So, what would you do? One would write a checklist. Then one would create or have some flunky create the matching documents.

On 11 Feb 04 Michael Moore posted a 7-point checklist with "questions" attacking Bush at http://www.calpundit.com/archives/003240.html#102131.

Here's a full match of his 7 points with the 6 documents on USA Today's site (which includes the 4 CBS docs) as well as the CBS 60 Minutes" show itself, with the Barnes interview:

MM's #1: "How were you able to jump ahead of 500 other applicants... to Texas Air National Guard... What calls did your father... make on your behalf...".

So the CBS show of 8 Sept 04 answers that by bringing on Barnes, who claims as Lt. Gov. he made those calls. Except it's now been proven, Barnes only became Lt. Gov. many months later.

MM's #2: "Why were you grounded..."

This is then answered in the forgery dated 1 Aug 72, ordering "suspension". Not shown on CBS's show, but on USA Today's site. Part of the same series of forgeries.

MM's #2 cont'd: "...after you either failed your physical or failed to take it in July 1972?"

This is answered in forgery dated 4 May 72 and followed up by forgery dated 1 Aug 72.

MM's #2 cont'd: "The records show that, after the Guard spent years and lots of money training you..."

This is answered in forgery dated 19 May 72 with the line "I advised him of our investment in him..." in paragraph 2.

MM's #2, 3, 4, 5 and 6: These are all accusations of being AWOL and not being in Alabama or Houston during a certain time frame in mid 72 to mid 73.

This is answered in forgeries dated 19 May 72, 1 Aug 72, 24 June 73 and 18 Aug 73.

MM's #7: "How did you get an honorable discharge? What strings were pulled? Who called who?"

This is answered in forgery dated 18 Aug 73 which mentions Staudt (who had already retired the previous year), Hodges, Harris, thus falsely implicating these military personnel, including Lt. Colonel Killian as the alleged author, in falsifying Bush's records.

Is there anything in the forged docs NOT discussed in Michael Moore's checklist? They seem tailor-made.

As a humorous postscript: Moore's next paragraph after the 7-point checklist says: ..."wanting to see a debate between the general and the deserter." Earlier on that chat site, it was mentioned that Moore was a Gen. Clarke supporter (who was in turn supported by the Clintons). The weirdest quirk is that just two posts above Michael Moore's appears one from someone calling himself "Terry Lenzer" !!! (Probably not the Clinton TL, but so strange how all these old Watergate ghosts are coming back.)

Dean -

What would you have us do instead? Sit around and wring our hands waiting for CBS to own up to their *source*, if they ever do? They'll try and pull what they think is a "Swiftie", letting the issue of Bush's service percolate long enough to cause doubt in the voter's minds while avoiding accountability over its authenticity.

I understand your concern about the average citizen positing a "personal opinion", but Burkett's apparently had an axe to grind against Bush for quite some time and not been shy about doing it. If you choose to make yourself a public figure, you get what comes along with that sort of noteriety. Richard Jewell didn't have that choice - he did get screwed by the accusations that played out in the media. Due process? Don't think so.

As for potential harassment or even bodily harm, take a look at what happened to the main funder of the Swifties - they quickly found out where he lived and picketed his house. Yum - just what I want for breakfast: coffee, croissants, and smelly protesters in my front yard. And what was the point? You think they wanted a "constructive dialogue"? How about fear and intimidation.

Talking of which, I read an article the other day on how conservatives were reluctant to put bumper stickers on their cars or signs in their front yards because of the reaction they might get. You might get a tire punctured, your car keyed, all in the name of righteous (or lefteous, for that matter) anger. Sorry - this election is going to be nasty regardless of which side you're on, and no amount of handwringing, however well intentioned, is going to keep people from venting their spleen. Liberals have the same deep, abiding hatred of Dubya that conservatives had (and still have for Hillary, et al) for Clinton when he was in office. And when you come right down to it, both sides view this election as a jihad against the other for control over the country.

Come to think of it, its the same loathing the radical Muslims have for the US - - there's no rationality to it - they plain old hate. And there's no reasoning with people like that - you just have to do your thing and take care of business when you choose to (or have to) cross their path.

    In the USA Today story, they say "USA TODAY obtained copies of the documents independently soon after the 60 Minutes segment aired Wednesday, from a person with knowledge of Texas Air National Guard operations."

    That sounds to me to likely be either Burkett or Moore.  Burkett would have firsthand knowledge of the TANG ops, and
Moore would have second hand knowledge.

SAUDIA ARABIA MUST BE DESTROYED!

Looks like someone is trying to get us off target. Oh, for a bottle of old-fashioned white out!

To Fresh Air:

Re Marty Heldt and the docs for sale on E-Bay - do you know when this occurred? Would it have been after Michael Moore's 7-point wishlist posted on 11 Feb 04?

I wonder if there is any connection (familial or otherwise) between Michael Moore (Hollywood attacker) and Jim Moore (Texas attack author).

Regarding the use of terms mentioned above:

The Oxford English dictionary cites the first use of the word 'feedback' in a non-scientific context in 1971, in a rock magazine.

Does Burkett use that term? Can Killian's widow or son comment on his use of that term before he died in the early 80s?

My recollection is that "feedback" did gain popular usage until the advent of the technological era...the late 80s at the earliest. It seem that this would be an innocent "tell" that the author of the forgeries was under 40 and, as well as being ignorant of the typeset issues, they were also ignorant of the use of jargon during that period.

Hi Jag,

Hm, I see it there in the 18 Aug 73 forgery, the word "feedback." Are there any military commenters who would know if that was a regular service term then? I recall it in the context of Jimmy Hendrix's amplified guitar feedback, but not in the context of office administration. Wow, we could have a joint army of millions of us searching "the stylometrics way" - putting a new twist on an old method, using the internet.

Roger Williams

Thanks for the update on stylometrics. A few years back, I read a fascinating story on how academics were using statistical analysis & computing power to try and resolve the classic Shakespeare vs. Christopher Marlowe authorship debate. The papers published pointed to Marlowe as the author of some sonnets attributed to Shakespeare, and will no doubt be milked out for decades of PhD dissertations and tenure claims. The CBS documents are less material to work with, obviously, and are written in "miltary-ese", obscuring the "style" of the author(s) to some extent. The FBI uses a variant to probe documents, as do other law enforcement branches. Sometimes their conclusions are laughable - as with the "behavior experts" retained by the FBI who showed up on TV for some quick bucks claiming the DC snipers were clearly "angry white men". But sometimes on mark, in screening, then properly steering LEO efforts and limited resources into a smaller suspect pool.

I have no doubt that right now some very powerful campaign operatives, plus retained "expert" retired FBI, Secret Service, Postal investigators are now interviewing the key parties involved, if they are cooperative. Looking, looking, looking for the hoaxers. And retained professors are at this minute feeding all the CBS documents and all the written stuff of possible suspects into a computer crunching extravaganza and already analyzing the "hits" coming out on the printer, and applying statistical probabilities. And, in addition to that, you have the unfocused, but powerful Blogosphere applying hundreds of thousands of thoughts, ideas into the process. Call it the parallel processing of many thousands of idependent minds sometimes triumphing and getting to the truth faster than the linear processing of the hundreds of aforementioned experts. The Blogosphere has "beaten" those experts already in several instances with the CBS hoax. Yet, remember they are not necessarily in opposition. Both these powerful forces are at work to get to the bottom of this.

I think in many ways you already have a smaller pool - those people with some knowledge of the TANG, some familiarity, abeit not perfect, with the ANG personalities and the released Bush documents. But the best news any "detective" has is that you already KNOW you have 3-4 CBS people who know WHO was the party that gave them the bogus stuff. I see the WHODUNIT efforts in the Blogosphere and MSM as putting more heat on CBS to come clean as inquiries begin to paint a nexus between CBS in this and the LLL, or the DNC/Kerry campaign.

So this all may be moot, shortly.

I'll explain:

I don't think the ultimate resolution is with the Bush people fighting the DNC/Kerry people over this. This is a beautiful "twist in the wind" moment for the Bushies, and even Kerry's handlers are not stupid enough to spring to CBS's defense. Where this might go very, very soon is to the Viacom boardroom for resolution. This is a company run by a scary tough billionaire, Sumner Redstone, with battalions of shysters at his beck and call, totally focused on the greater glory & influence of Mr. Redstone, and, of course, the bottom line. Some people have already noted Viacom is seeing concern of damage to it's CBS subsidiary "brand value" now hitting Viacom's shareholders. The precedent in other hoaxes and forgeries - is not protecting the "journalistic source" - but in exposing the parties involved in the scam. Stern exposed the author of the "Hitler Diaries", BBC nailed Gilligan AND management over his fraud, CNN fired people in the "Tailwind" fraud. Rather is on extremely shaky ground stonewalling.

My guess is Sumner's people were busy this weekend examining the emerging conservative effort to contact CBS 60 minute, CBS news, advertising sponsors to boycott - and while the loss of a few million is trivial to Redstone - loss of Viacom-sponsor goodwill is most serious. The multi-billion dollar status of CBS as exempt from 527 designation is worth fighting for, at almost all short-term cost. There is also business concern in a situation like this that Viacom's other subsidiaries could lose credibility and clout in Washington DC - if this is left to fester by demurring to Rather's leftist politics and pride.

As you might know, corporations owning media outlets are normally exceptionally loathe to interfere with their independence. But in a scandal situation, corporate business ethics apply to ALL employees, and may trump the tendency to leave the journalists alone. (That, and the Big Players worry that their money piles may be diminished by Rather's incompetence) Sumner Redstone probably already has the CEO action scenario proposals on his desk, vetted by his lawyers. (1) Let it play out. (2) Defer to Les Mooves to handle it to keep the CBS subsidiary independence intact. (3) Order CBS management to reveal the hoaxers name(s)to clean up the scandal, take discipinary action for management failures, up to firing Rather and his cohorts. And politically "spin" this as favoring neither the Dems or Republicans - but an internal matter to "make CBS even better able to serve the public interest". (4) Given this is hugely sensitive - a possible fraud affecting the 2004 elections -drop the whole TANG story and announce a "comprehesive, independent investigation" Rather goes off air while it is investigated or (Sumner smiles in the hope - Rather resigns angrily) - but Redstone risks the Blogosphere and politicians overwhelming this strategy in the weeks it would take to play out properly.

I conclude the cleanest, least risky business strategy is - choice 3 - to clean up the scandal, ASAP. I predict this CBS scandal will be moving for a fast resolution, especially if the Internet detectives, Boycott CBS movement, and natural Bush v. Kerry partisans keep the heat on. Which they will.

BR Good points on the Michael Moore Wishlist. Is profanity allowed here? Well, if it isn't, sorry.....but even as a political moderate not too happy with many of Bush's domestic policies, I'd say this is one huge fucking wet dream for the Bushies - if Michael Moore, Rather's liberal media crowd, and the DNC are all involved and get discredited. It would be like finding out that Al Qaeda leadership, Iran's Ayatollahs, Kim Jung Il, and Michael Moore all together at one meeting, you know where and when, and you get to drop a big cluster bomb on their asses.

Cedarford - fantastic writeup! The big picture. Respect your insight very much.

(I'm apolitical, not for any party - just want minimal, sound government. But I do so love a good investigation. If the world were saner, I'd rather be reading and discussing Shakespeare with you.)

I think we are seeing some disinformation inflicted on CBS News. Remember W is the preemptive president.

Anybody looking at Bush's supposedly authentic documents? The ones released a couple years ago? Remember, the Alabama dental records etc. Same computer/typewriter as these today? What if they are fakes by GOP, that will be brought to light by this query? and the later forgers new it, and the WH new it so didn't refute the latest batch...

BR--

I believe the alleged sales took place in 2000. See Wizbang blog for more on that. The source is an obscure Usenet post by a Demo political operative in Texas who says Heldt's docs were B.S.

Chris Case--

What are you, some kind of Moby-troll from the sewers of the Democratic Underground? Beat it--before someone hurts you.

Avoiding the superscripting and curly quotation and apostrophes in Microsoft Word is not as difficult as most people seem to think. Had the forger been an knowledgeable user of Microscoft Word, he (she) could have easily turned off these features. From the 'Format" pull down menu, pick 'AutoFormat,' and then pick 'Options.' On both the tabs for 'AutoFormat as Your Type' and the 'Autoformat' turn off the curly quotes and the ordiinal superscript.

it is also quite easily to turn off the kerning feature and to use a fixed-spacing font. But one must know how to use the Style Sheet function. Basically, one must redefine the 'Normal' paragraph style to be a fixed space font with no kerning and exactly 12 points of space between lines.

Although I have not tried it, I have no doubt that a truly competent user of Microsoft Word could produce a pretty good imitation of a typewriter document, especially if the victim of the hoax is willing to accept a degraded photocopy.

Fresh Air: (What follows may seem like satire, but I'm serious)

That Boston Globe article of 20 Aug 88 gets more and more interesting every time I read your post again. Do you know who was its author at the Boston Globe? I can't find the ORIGINAL article on Google - help me pls?

The 2nd paragraph of the article only mentions "a reporter" who asked the Dem. Dukakis/Bentsen campaign(s) about Bentsen's son's TANG assignment. It's not clear if there were two separate campaign offices, one for Dukakis as Pres. and another one for his Vice Pres. Bentsen. Anyway, then Marilyn Yaeger of the Bentsen office obligingly tells the reporter that Staudt assisted. Then lower down in the article comes the "1975" blooper.

So, I wonder who was the source of the "1975" error and if that person is currently connected to the Kerry/Edwards campaign offices. The possibilities to cross-reference to find a common denominator name(s) would be:

1) The author(s) of the Boston Globe 20 Aug 88 article
2) Marilyn Yeager
3) Other personnel connected to the Dukakis/Bentsen offices
4) Kerry himself? Was he working in the Dukakis camp?
5) Any others the sleuths can name?

Now, in this current time warping scandal, looking at it from the other way: Surely, it couldn't be possible today, for someone to retroactively change the Boston Globe's old 1988 article from a correct 1972 to an incorrect 1975 retirement date for Staudt just to cover their ... in the forged CYA memo dated 18 Aug 73? Could it?

Someone might have to run down to the Boston Globe offices quickly and see if it even exists in their paper archives! Wouldn't that be funny - a fake 1988 Boston Globe article created on the internet as a "coverup for the CYA memo" !

Also, I can't figure out who they were really trying to attack with this article - the Democrats or the Republicans? It almost seems as if the lead-in about Dukakis/Bentsen was just an excuse to bring up Quayle and Bush, Jr.'s military issue.

Oops, it's spelled Yaeger, not Yeager in (2) above.

BR,

I sorta considered the Boston-Globe-Reporter-did-it angle. I was hoping that the author was Walter Robinson, but no such luck.

The author listed is "Stephen Kurkjian, Globe Staff"

Fresh Air & Spiny Norman:

I haven't had time to read up fully on the Marty Heldt scene yet. But it's been tugging at my sleeve. So far, I gather just from this thread:

1999 - Dem. consultant Brooks Gregory actually BUYS a package of documents from Marty Heldt. We don't know which docs, but Brooks may still have them by the sounds of it, or knows to whom he/she gave them. Brooks says he/she is a political consultant for "several Democratic candidates," but doesn't say who. Says all but 2 of the docs were easily seen as fakes, so implies the fakes were not used then. The 2 remaining ones were irrelevant to the Dems' needs. Brooks Gregory would know whether the Heldt docs are the same as the current forged docs.

28 Jan 04 - Brooks Gregory posts at Google newsgroup talk.politics.misc describing the above 1999 purchase of the Heldt docs. (Per Spiny Norman's post on our thread.)

Early 04 - it seems there was an attempted widespread attack on Bush's military matters then already. I wasn't paying attention at the time, but the lefty sites look hot and heavy on it then. Boston Globe also involved.

__ Feb 04 - FOX News receives and scans in copies of docs - the ones currently being exposed as forgeries. Possibly other media received them then too, but erased these Feb versions from their databases once the scandal broke. FOX may not have been on the alert-our-buddies list. Possible op done on FOX.

11 Feb 04 - Michael Moore posts his 7-point checklist on calpundit.com. Both he and Burkett are posters there. Also a "Terry Lenzner" - not sure if it's the Clintons' TL or not.

__ Sep 04 or earlier - DNC, Kerry Campaign, CBS, USA Today, etc. receive (or create?) copies of the forged docs.

8 Sep 04 - CBS "60 Minutes" shows 4 of the forged docs on tv.

12 Sep 04 - 6:33 PM - Thanks to Spiny Norman - he re-posts the Brooks Gregory 28 Jan 04 item on this site.

12 Sep 04 at 12:18 PM - a commenter called "Brooks" posts the interesting item on [ace.mu.nu] this thread steering us towards Burkett's lawsuit. (Brooks, are you Brooks Gregory? or just coincidence?) We still don't know what exhibits Burkett claims he attached to his pleadings having to do with Bush. Ha, that would be a lark if we found the forged docs already part of the court record!

Dear Ace - thank you! First article I found is this one:

" Bush's Guard papers leave service in doubt"

Stephen Kurkjian, Francie Latour, Sacha Pfeiffer, Michael Rezendes and Walter V. Robinson. The Boston Globe
Thursday, September 9, 2004

www.kniff.de/cgi-bin/cgiproxy/nph-proxy.cgi/010110A

Fill me in on the significance of Robinson?

So. Someone put Burkett in touch with Mapes. Carville? Exley?

BR, I thought this discussed him more, but it doesn't, actually. He was a co-author of the "Bush military records show he was a big weenie" Globe article(s).

Somewhere along the line someone said something derogatory about him, but since I can't remember the source, I can't repeat it.

BR--

The Feb date on the Fox PDF is correct. But I suspect the computer's clock was wrong since the docs bore a Sept. 10 date stamp and had no modification date. I would assume, per Occam's razor, that Fox got the docs about the same time as USA Today did, say Sept. 9 or 10.

Another question: Isn't there a freelance "journalist" pushing this story named Gregory Saltson or something--maybe Brooks Gregory is a pseudonym?

BR Walter Johnson..Walter Johnson...I will say this, this guy was on CBS and and CNN, looking like your classic bearded metrosexual liberal Democrat, smug as anything, describing how it fell to the Boston Globe to investigate the last 6 months of Bush's Guard service, since Harvard was right in their back yard.

Left unsaid was any explaination of the Boston Globes refusal over the years to look at the last year or so of Kerry's military committment - also all "in the Globe's back yard", and why it took until 1978 for Kerry's final discharge paperwork to be filed.

Kerry filling out a release form SF 180 would release all his military records so voters and Globe readers would know how he handled his military service in Mass, and why his discharge was delayed.

Think Walter boy or any other Globe reporter will run some agitation for Kerry's background to be revealed?

Yeah, sure. On the same day that they report openly on one of Barney Frank's harassment attempts of some scrumptious boy toy in P-Town, stops covering up the Fell's Acres scandal and protecting some "shining star Dem prosecutors", or on Teddy's drinking problem.

Guys--

Just located another moonbat/potential culprit. Paul Lukasiak, who runs a Bush AWOL site called glcq.com. He claims to be based in Philadelphia, though his ISP in Massachusetts.

See this Usenet thread (scroll down for his comments).

Hi Ace, Fresh Air, Cedarford and the rest of the p-gang!

Just woke up and saw all your great info! What a hot thread this is!

Re: The Feb 04 date on FOX's PDF - Fresh Air, you made the interesting discovery. Hope you have kept it on your computer or made a printout. Couldn't you quietly ask a techie at FOX what the explanation is for this oddity? Pulling strings on oddities sometimes are worth it. Either it's a faulty date mechanism on FOX's computer or the forged docs were already sent to media in Feb 04, or FOX has been set up for an embarrassment, or ....? What was the exact date in Feb of that FOX pdf doc? Is it dated before or after Michael Moore's 7-point checklist of 11 Feb 04? I'm beginning to think these forged docs have been in existence longer than Sept 04, possibly as early as Feb 04 or earlier (if they're the same as Marty Heldt's docs).

Gotta go put the non-existent pj's in the dryer now, so I'll have something to wear today. See ya!

P.S. If they only knew - all their so-called pajama people are actually nudists, just like the military. Free people only wear uniforms for the benefit of others.

Cedarford, Re: "shining star dem prosecutors"
Are we talking Watergate era or Starr/impeachment era? Many of the players seem to be the same ones. Just wondered which era you were referring to?

My non-existent pj's not dry yet, but who cares!

BR--

Sorry, I think the February thing I noted is a false alarm. The PDF was created February 6th, but NOT modified. However, it bears a fax mark and a second fax date of September 10. Ergo, you have to come up with some outlandish assumptions to believe it was stamped September 10 before it was sent to Fox, like some kind of time-capsule "open on" date. Occam's Razor says Fox's computer had a bad clock setting.

Unless you know of some way to "fax" a PDF, I think Sep. 10 is probably the date Fox received it. Also, Fox would not be on the early recipient list in any event, IMHO.

BR - The shining star Dem prosecutors are those associated with the Fell's Acres nursery school molestation witch hunt, that imprisoned 2 women and one man. Many were and are being groomed for higher office, inc. Scott Hirschberger, a well-connected DA. That the 3 were innocent and convicted on fantastic stories of kids being raped by chainsaws weilded by a robot under the 61-year old grandma's control didn't matter. The 3 served years. The Globe refused to cover an investigation into their innocence to protect the Democratic machine. It was left to the WSJ's Dorothy Rabinowitz and some lawyers convinced they were victims of a modern-day Salem witch trial to get them sprung after years behind bars.

Curiously enough, Janet Reno also was deeply involved in convicting two men in prominent "preschool" molestation cases.

Fresh Air - re Feb pdf creation date - can you explain to me? I'm not a techie, so I don't know how you are ascertaining the dates. What was the exact day in Feb? And what does the creation itself entail - i.e. would creation at Fox's computers just be the date it was scanned on if they received it by mail or fax? Or loading it into a database if received via e-mail? Can you tell these details from what you're looking at? Could they have received it on CD and thus the Feb 04 date is the CD's creation date?

Would it be possible for Fox techies to find out where it came from?

PS - sorry, I see you already said Feb 6. Thanks.
My other questions still stand.

Oh, another thing: ALTERED TIME seems to be the thread weaving throughout this developing scandal. So that's why I'm really interested in your findings so far.

Fresh Air - Maybe you're having dinner so I'll slip in another question before you come back (this is becoming a full time job almost):

Can you post a picture (I guess that's what you guys call pdf) here on this site in this thread to show us what you're looking at regarding Fox's pdf? A picture's worth a thousand words, as we've seen with the Smoking Gun overlay.

By the way, is it one of the forged docs, all 4 of CBS fame, or all 6 of USA Today fame?

BR--

When you open a PDF in Adobe Acrobat you can see what software was used to author it, the date of its creation and its modification date (if any) under Files>Document Properties.

I could get you a link to the PDF, but I have to run. Anyway, it's real simple. Go to the Fox site and click the document under the story. It's labeled as a PDF and as of yesterday it was on the front page on the Fox website.

Thanks, Fresh Air - see you when you get back.

TO Ace and everyone

I just went out for some fresh air myself for the first time in days! My young friends working at Starbucks have no clue of any of this! Haven't even heard of the scandal! And here I thought all the young ones were net devotees. So much for me taking a break: I found myself trying to say it ALL in a nutshell. So I referred them to the Smoking Gun picture and the "hot thread" here. (Wish Ace could somehow mark it "HOT THREAD".)

Someone needs to write a "CBSgate/Kerrygate for Beginners" or does it exist somewhere? Watergate had its own jargon and jokes which evolved over many years. This scandal has spawned a whole new language in less than a week! Soon we'll also need a "Dictionary of Terms for Kerrygate".

DRUDGE WAS OUR BOLD, LONE PATHFINDER with Monicagate... Now there's an army of truthfinders with him.

I love that quote from Henry Vth (see belmontclub.blogspot.com for "The Shot Heard Round the World" article and the posts thereafter with the quote).

"And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day."

Full text at http://the-tech.mit.edu/Shakespeare/henryv/henryv.4.3.html.

Cedarford - Hee hee, who would have thought I'd get my wish anyway - here I am discussing Shakespeare after all. But we're actually looking at a Shakespearean drama in real life.

This is the stuff legends are made of.

Fresh Air - still need your help. Can't find the docs anywhere on Fox site.

All right! I see you've posted the link on the new thread now. I've put a picture of this 2/6/04 entry page here:

http://imagehost.bizhat.com/host/2004/Picture.jpg

Can't get it to show up on this thread, but it can be viewed at the above host site.

I mean 6 Feb 04.

So, that seems to end the Fox pdf creation discussion on this thread. It is going like wildfire on the new 9/15/04 thread called "Why Does FoxNews' Bush-Doc PDF Show a Creation Date of February 6th?"

****************************************

Now back to the other business of finding the DNC/Kerry Campaign/CBS docs connection.

To tie up the loose ends and acknowledge the earlier unanswered posts from all the great sleuths:

Massachusetts:

Boston Globe
8/20/88 article - Stephen Kurkjian (with the Staudt 1975 blooper)
9/9/04 article - Stephen Kurkjian, Latour, Pfeiffer, Rezendes & Walter V. Robinson.
Article in same vein as CBS show and the forged docs. Entire article based on an August 36-pg article by "Col. Gerald Lechliter" aka longtime Bush attacker. I have yet to check his 36-pager with the "stylometrics method." Full description of him being behind the article is at http://www.redstate.org/story/2004/9/10/135321/013. Lechliter's 36-pger is at http://www.glechliter.glcq.com/critical_analysis.htm.

"Walter Johnson" - mentioned by Cedarford - I assume this is Walter Robinson, right? Ha, this guy must be slippery: in the above-quoted redstate site, he's referred to as "Edward Robinson." But I'm going with the Walter Robinson name as that's listed at the top of the actual article at iht.com/articles/537925.htm.

Paul Lukasiak - at glcq.com, another Bush attacker, who claims to be in Philadelphia, but Fresh Air 9/14/04 at 12:40 pm found his ISP to be in Massachusetts.

So, the target is still to find a concrete DNC/Kerry/CBS docs connection. (Actually, now that the docs have been proven as forgeries, we can even find a tie to USA Today docs or anywhere else they were sent by the Kerry campaign.) I go back to the American Spectator article on 9/10 at spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=7096.

Excerpt here:
"More than six weeks ago, an opposition research staffer for the Democratic National Committee received documents purportedly written by President George W. Bush's Texas Air National Guard squadron commander, the late Col. Jerry Killian.

"The oppo researcher claimed the source was "a retired military officer." According to a DNC staffer, the documents were seen by both senior staff members at the DNC, as well as the Kerry campaign.

" 'More than a couple people heard about the papers,' says the DNC staffer. 'I've heard that they ended up with the Kerry campaign, for them to decide to how to proceed, and presumably they were handed over to 60 Minutes, which used them the other night. But I know this much. When there was discussion here, there were doubts raised about their authenticity.'"

*********

So, that's really it - there are people who could speak up and end the mystery right now. But I suppose the American Spectator wouldn't want to blow their source yet. Also, from this, there's no proof (yet) of Kerry's campaign giving it to CBS. Then, as Cedarford said, there are those at CBS who know too.

What method can we use to get this nailed down? Where is the point of vulnerability in the material world of faxes, e-mails, regular mail, CDs. (I remember in the last campaign there was a Dem operative who got photographed at a post office delivering a so-called package containing blue jeans, but which was actually a stolen Bush campaign video or something on those lines.) Where and when did the clandestine handover occur? At a cocktail party? At the CBS offices? At a fundraiser? At a Starbucks for goodness sakes? Or was it faxed?

Questions, questions, questions.

Further re Lechliter - in his 36-page "dissertation" he acknowledges assistance from Martin Heldt, Lukasiak and two reporters at the Boston Globe, Latour and the slippery guy - eek, it's difficult to remember his name, oh yes, Walter Robinson. So they're all connected like chewing gum.

I was actually just joking when I mentioned a fundraiser as a possible place for the delivery, but hee hee - look at this from www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2001-03-30/pols_naked2.html:

Council Member Will Wynn and wife Anne Elizabeth Wynn opened their Tarrytown home last week to some 150 Democratic Party loyalists who paid good money to hear CBS news anchor Dan Rather and former Dell exec and big-time Dem donor Tom Meredith ponder the national political climate. Those with $125 or $500 (or more) to spare for the March 21 event included Vignette founder and former CEO Ross Garber, Austin Ventures big wheel John Thornton, musician/writer/pundit Kinky Friedman, and local politicos Mayor Kirk Watson, District Attorney Ronnie Earle, Council Member Beverly Griffith, and District Court Judge Darlene Byrne. Probable mayoral candidate Robin Rather, who brought father Dan and Meredith together for the bill, was also on hand. Political consultant Mark Yznaga, who headed up the Travis Co. Democratic Party's organizing and vote-getting efforts last November, was credited for pulling the event together and whipping up the finger foods to boot. The cash collected from the fundraiser will retire TCDP's election-year debt and help keep the office afloat next year…

I just want to know where I can get on of those shirts that say "Republican Operative"

I just posted this at ARMY CONNECTION II, but it is relevant in this Hot Thread too.

ARMY CONNECTION II

DAN RATHER PROFILES THE FORGER

Reference http://nyobserver.com/pages/frontpage1.asp September 15, 2004 2:36 pm (They seem to update the time every time I check there, so hopefully it will still contain this quote when you look.)

Here's an excerpt:

Mr. Rather said that it would require an exceptional amount of knowledge to craft a forgery—and not just the typographical kind. "You’d have to have an in-depth knowledge of Air Force manuals from 1971," he said. "You’d have to have Bush’s service record, you’d have to have the Air Force regulations from 1971, you’d have to know nearly all of the people involved directly at that time, including the squadron commander, who was Bush’s immediate superior, and his attitude at the time—you’d have to know all those things and weave all those things in."

********

Sounds like long time Bush attacker, COL. GERALD LECHLITER in his 36-page dissertation of August 2004 (possibly written earlier). It deals with the same subject matter as Michael Moore's 7-point checklist - internet posting of 2/11/04 and The Boston Globe 9/9/04 article is based on Lechliter's 36-pager (see redstate.org below).

In it, Lechliter shows his in-depth research of Air Force Manuals (if you search for "AFM" in that essay, it comes up 45 times) and he acknowledges assistance for his 36-pager from Martin Heldt, Lukasiak and two reporters at the Boston Globe, Latour and Walter Robinson (who wrote the 9/9/04 article).

....41, 42, 43, 44, 45 - I felt like the 60 Minutes clock counting down as I was counting the AFMs.

Links:
Lechliter's connection to the Globe: www.redstate.org/story/2004/9/10/135321/013. It also links to the 36-pager.
Lechliter's 36-page dissertation: www.glechliter.glcq.com/critical_analysis.htm
Michael Moore's 7-point checklist posted on 2/11/04: www.calpundit.com/archives/003240.html#102131
Info on Paul Lukasiak - at glcq.com, another Bush attacker, who claims to be in Philadelphia, but Fresh Air 9/14/04 at 12:40 pm found his ISP to be in Massachusetts. (Ace of Spades HQ site)
Info on Marty Heldt: see Spiny Norman's post at Ace of Spades HQ at September 12, 2004 06:33 PM - which quotes this post by "Brooks Gregory":

"When all of this crap began back in 1999, I was a political consultant for several Democratic candidates, as well as later being a senior consultant for Janet Reno in her run for Governor. I bought the document package from Marty Heldt and we subjected them to the most thorough investigation one could imagine. Why? Because if there was anything there, we damn sure wanted to use it. But guess what? Only two of those documents proved to be authentic and they were not even related to the charge being levelled. Many of them are so blatant in their alterations it is almost funny. Several purport to be signed by real live military personnel, yet they don't even know the proper format for a military date. -- Brooks Gregory 2004-01-28 08:27:57 PST" at Google Newsgroup: talk.politics.misc.

BR---

I don't think Lechliter is the man, nor Burkett. No colonel would misspell the abbreviation for Lieutenant Colonel. Any one of them could have had a hand in passing the docs along to make them look authentic. But I don't see them as the forgers. It was probably some squirelly little guy like Mr. Heldt.

RIght, that's exactly my point! The mastermind would write the "thesis" and the flunky - whoever that is, maybe Heldt, maybe Burkett, or some other illiterate, does the grunt work. It's still a criminal conspiracy as in RICO! Federal and civil.

UPDATE - re "OETR" and Lechliter.

OETR - it appears spelled out fully on page one of Lechliter's 36-pager:

" Bush’s Performance as Documented on AF Form  77, “Officer Effectiveness/Training Report” (F77)."

Someone with low IQ and unfamiliarity with AIR Guard (vs. ARMY Guard where Burkett was) might think it's "OETR" forgetting there's a slash in between.

So, bottom line: A "mastermind" writes the thesis, with the help of various anti-Bush researchers and journalists, then a flunky (Heldt, Burkett, whoever) does the grunt work to actually create the forgeries, then CBS completes the circle by publishing it.

THAT'S RICO ! (federal and civil - conspiracy to commit fraud).

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961-1968, passed by Congress in 1970, originally designed to get the mafia.

See http://www.ricoact.com:
"Today, RICO is almost never applied to the Mafia. Instead, it is applied to individuals, businesses, political protest groups, and terrorist organizations."

Now Wash. Post is pointing to Burkett with the Kinko's fax evidence.

I say: BURKETT - scapegoat - then CBS off the hook? Even if Burkett forged the docs, it's gone way beyond that now. The forger in the scene is the lowest rung and already I see Wash. Post preparing the way for his commitment.

Just like Watergate, quick, let's institutionalize him before he really spills the beans. Remember lawyer Phillip Mackin Bailley who knew too much about the Columbia Plaza call girl ring's connection to the DNC and Watergate bugging? Spencer Oliver's phone line was being used for the appointments, and McCord/Alfred Baldwin listening to THOSE calls. Dean's wife was friends with the madam. Judge Richey institutionalized Bailley BEFORE trial. See Jim Hougan's book "Secret Agenda."

I still say EU-RICO! It's a much larger conspiracy than just a "lone nut" from Texas.

Looks like this thread is now so far down on the page, it's ended.

I'm going to post my biggie again in our latest thread, the Shadowy Links. I've corrected some typos in the Globe article's date (shd be 9/8/04) and clarified some of the earlier wording.

1999 - Dem. consultant Brooks Gregory actually BUYS a package of documents from Marty Heldt. We don't know which docs, but Brooks may still have them by the sounds of it, or knows to whom he/she gave them. Brooks says he/she is a political consultant for "several Democratic candidates," but doesn't say who. Says all but 2 of the docs were easily seen as fakes, so implies the fakes were not used then. The 2 remaining ones were irrelevant to the Dems' needs. Brooks Gregory would know whether the Heldt docs are the same as the current forged docs.

1.) Brooks Gregory doesn’t exist. He didn't buy documents from me and he didn't work for as a "Dem consultant" (the usual version has him working for Janet Reno.) Brooks Gregory is a fictional character.

2.) I received my documents via the FOIA in the summer of 2000. I posted them to my website shortly after receiving them. They are still there ( www.cis.net/~coldfeet), freely available to all, displaying the same lousy scanning job.

One need only look at the documents released by the White House last February (available here: USA Today ) to discern the fraudulent nature of the "Gregory" claims. These are documents that can easily be seen at USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/news/2004-02-14-bush-docs.htm) as identical to the ones I have kept posted for the last four+ years.

There were very few documents I received in 2000 that were not released by the White House in February. Likewise, there were only a few that I had which were not released by the White House in February.

From this mornings news reports I understand that yesterday's release included the orders for May and June -- which I received in 2000 but were not included in the February release. I also note that the PR release which mentioned "gets high from flying" was included in last nights release. This, again, was a document I received in 2000 but which was not released by the White House in February.

These last releases provide complete validation for all of the documents I received.

i was surfing along and came across your website. i really enjoyed it. thanks! this site is very informative. i hope to see more in the near future, wishing you all the best!

advance loan