Oops. Another of the forger's screw-ups caught.
From the Wash. Post:
The Dallas Morning News cast fresh doubt on the documents by reporting last night that the officer named in one memo as exerting pressure to "sugarcoat" Bush's military record was discharged a year and a half before the memo was written. The paper cited a military record showing that Col. Walter "Buck" Staudt was honorably discharged on March 1, 1972, while the memo cited by CBS as showing that Staudt was interfering with evaluations of Bush was dated Aug. 18, 1973."
Ooh, and it looks like there's some internal dissension in the ranks at CBS:
Asked if he was troubled by the handwriting and document analysts who say some of the typography and spacing did not exist in the early 1970s, Rather said he could not rule out the possibility of a hoax but sees no need for an internal inquiry.
Some CBS employees, who asked not to be identified while questioning their bosses' actions, expressed concern that the network had issued only a terse statement Thursday, when the authenticity of the documents was first questioned and until yesterday had refused to name any of the experts it had consulted or provide an on-the-record spokesman. One staff member, who has examined the documents but did not work on the "60 Minutes" piece, saw potential problems with them: "There's a lot of sentiment that we should do an internal investigation."
washingtonpost.com
BTW, if CBS is "absolutely certain" the docs are genuine, why won't they hand them over to an independent examiner? If they have the originals as they imply, then dating them and determining how they were produced would be a relatively easy task. Instead, they are hiding behind their own "vetting" and their own "expert", who only wants to save his own reputation and can't admit a mistake, saying that's enough for them. Sorry, but it's NOT enough for anyone who cares about the truth. Do you care about the truth? |
