I read the Drudge Report story on CBS and the suspicious documents. But I see they are now claiming they vetted the documents for 6 weeks. Hmmmm. I wonder who these experts were? Maybe one of them was Teddy Kennedy? LOL.

Also, when is CBS going to investigate the relationship between the Rather Family and Ben Barnes? Barnes' own daughter says he's a liar. She was interviewed by Monica Crowley of WABC in New York when she was subbing for Mark Davis on the WBAP radio station in Dallas. This whole thing stinks from top to bottom.

BTW, if anyone is interested in contacting 60 Minutes, their e-mail address is: 60m@cbsnews.com.

So right Wiz

Remember those rumored "Brown Books" prepared and circulated to discredit the Swift Vet boys...surely the DNC would have included a lenthy chapter on Bush Service record to counter as well

Here is Just One Minutes's post on the "Brown Books"
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/1001284

wow this just gets more ugly as the day passes. i guess the kerry camp had a premonition of what an impact the swifties would have, and rightly so. thanks for the great coverage around here, i've been glued all day.

Forgery by Typewriter

I'd have a good laugh too if Dan Rather got punk'd, but the wingnuttery belief that the proportional fonts were Bill Gates's invention is hilarious.

But, in any case, CBS more than stands by their case.

-Atrios 10:59 PM

It's no big secret. The democratic party is grossly incompetent or every level. They can't run a campaign. They can't fight a war. They can't forge documents. It amatuer hour over at the DNC. They simply don't know what they are doing.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/Politics/Vote2004/bush_documents_040909-1.html

Looks like ABC News is picking up the story. The documents' authenticity is being questioned by Col. Killian's widow.

The article closes with:

The White House is declining to comment on the veracity of the documents. Many Democrats are worried that if they are found to be forgeries, it will be a setback for Sen. John Kerry's campaign to defeat Bush in November.

Special Report with Brit Hume on Fox News just did a report on this....

Summary

Kev, you may (or may not) want to update.

CBS claims they took 6 weeks but Hugh Hewitt had an expert on today who said it would take a few days to check these docs. Those CBS experts must have worked slow to wait until that Bush bounce.

Sorry my link to the DNC Brown Books didn't work

this one does

Paul, I saw that. The point is that CBS presumably got the documents right as the SwiftVets were heating up. I question that timing.

Coincidence...That McAuliffe was so prepared for this?

"...Speaking in a conference call Wednesday, McAuliffe told reporters to "stay tuned" to find out how Democrats would work on the angle of the issue. He also said it was Republicans' fault this issue was taking such center stage.

"George Bush's allies have made an issue of John Kerry's service. And we are going to make issue of the president's credibility. ... All of this is on the table. And it's going to be on the table between now and November 2nd," he said.

McAuliffe later added, "Let me make this crystal clear. ... They put it on the table when they went out and launched these Swift boat ads."

Note to Terry- Didn't you learn anything from Monica? Don't let the interns prepare your opposition smears, they don't know what a typewriter is!

I've been having fun taunting the lunatics on the Slate forums, and their responses have been revealing. Basically the response goes like this: however rare, however unlikely it was that he would have access to it, most of the technology required to prepare such a memo in 1973 was available, if only on hugely expensive typesetting machines. Therefore, since it was *possible*, we can't PROVE that they aren't authentic.

I just wonder if this wasn't how CBS vetted these documents. Not "are they authentic", but "can anyone PROVE that they aren't"?

Seems to me that the only question a left-leaning, anti-Bush news outlet would need to know the answer to before running such a story. It would also explain why they don't want anyone talking to their experts, who might simply say "I couldn't rule it out", rather than "I think they are authentic".

Fox News' coverage of this story this morning is very lackluster. I'm starting to wonder about Fox.

See my post above. A news outlet's allegation of fraud against another news outlet is serious business. As CBS has not yet admitted the documents are fake, and as it cannot be proven to a metaphysical degree of certainty that they are, it's wise for Fox to hold back. If they go full guns against CBS now, and some evidence is produced which indicates the memos are genuine, then Fox's cred will take a big hit.

Just give it a little time...

I declare yesterday National Blog Victory Day!

Jim Kouri:

The Editor of FOX -- Peter Chernin, if memory serves me correctly at this hour (might not, is my point, since I've been awake since yesterday...sorry) -- anyway, the main guy at FOX is a Kerry supporter and that is definitely making it's presence known at FOX this election.

FOX still is the only station that provides conservative opinions among the liberal and thus, a full picture of most information, but I agree that there's a definite and quite noticable "PASS" presence underway on FOX about Kerry...they've gone incredibly soft on him, even to the point of refusing to confront a number of very important issues recently.

Moore on O'Reilly comes to mind. I generally think O'Reilly does a very good job but I could not understand him nearly hand holding Moore when he appeared there...strange it was, very, very strange.

Anyway, yes, I agree that FOX is showing a certain bias about Kerry and it's disappointing, but, that's America! At least they're not silencing the Republicans who also appear on FOX, which no other networks do.

Actually, August 5th was only five weeks ago. :)

But, yes.

Remember when 60 Minutes had the
"Pentagon document" that was "evidence"
that Bush had divvied up Iraq's oil
long before the U.S. invaded?
Refresh your memory here:
http://frankwarner.typepad.com/free_frank_warner/2004/01/oneill_and_susk.html

Saw Hannity and Colmes last night 9/9/04 and they prattled on about Cheney saying "if Kerry wins ,we will be attacked..." (not exact quote).
Fox during the day repeated that (incomplete?)
quote which at least bloggers have said is not correct..

I just read the ABCNews.Com story on the phony Bush documents. You can read it here:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/Politics/Vote2004/bush_documents_040909-1.html

It says ABC News submitted the documents to a half dozen experts who all agreed they appeared phony. So, what do you suppose the difference is between CBS experts and ABC experts? Hmmmmmm...

During the TANG memos controversy, I ran into a mostly right wing blog where somebody alluded to a pdf file from Fox news that had six memos and a timestamp in February. Has anybody followed up on this obvious lead to who might be the hoaxer?