« Snippets From The CBS PDF (1 Update) | Main | If you've been missing your LGF fix... »

On The Trail Of The Forger - Part III

Reading through the report from Dick Thornburgh and Lou Boccardi on the origins of the Bush Texas Air National Guard story was like deja vu all over again.

Some of the principals involved in the February 2004 telling of the story, notably by Kevin Drum at Washington Monthly, appear in the Commission report. Paul Lukasiak was named explicitly, and of course Bill Burkett was the source.

The conduit to Burkett was Linda Starr, whose previous moonbat claim to fame was the Bush-hiding-a-DUI story. Here's everything Google knows about her, and it's also worth checking the Usenet archives.

Based on an earlier Wizbang post, here's a revised list of the top 10 suspects (in no particular order):

Linda Starr should probably be added to that list, since it's possible that she could be the mysterious Lucy Ramirez (this interview seems to indicate she lives in Texas).

My theory has been (since day one of the controversy) and continues to be that the answer to the identity of the forger lies not so much in the activities of August 2004, but rather the coverage of the the Bush ANG story in February 2004. The people who pushed the story forward then had to be extremely pissed that they had gotten the story into the front page of the daily press only to see it die as the Bush team released a mountain of previously unreleased records.

Based on the February 2004 telling of the story the forger(s) had to know exactly what the story was missing - a smoking gun that Bush violated a direct order or knowingly broke a law. The fact that none of the records contained an order to report for a physical was merely an inconvenience for the forger, as they would have been working from the assumption that surely such a piece of paper must have once existed. The forger must have figured that recreating it wouldn't be that tough since their were so many accessible document to look at for reference.

The Thornburgh/Boccardi report doesn't appear, at first glance, to get us much closer to the originator of the documents.

Update: I'll be checking my backstory report on the 60 Minutes Wednesday report with the commission's version as well.


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference On The Trail Of The Forger - Part III:

» La Shawn Barber's Corner linked with Four CBS Employees Fired Over Rathergate and "Myopic Zeal"

» Slant Point linked with WizBang! on Trail of Forger

» Rooftop Report linked with CBS Report Out - 4 Fired

Comments (13)

What kind of hush money did... (Below threshold)

What kind of hush money did the 4 lambs at CBS receive?

FYI Back when the controver... (Below threshold)

FYI Back when the controversy was raging, someone claiming to be Martin Heldt actually responded directly to the accusation on my website as follows:

>>"In January 2004, former Democratic political consultant Brooks Gregory identified Marty Heldt as peddling a bogus set of documents that Gregory had easily proved were forgeries."

This is quite untrue.

For starters, Brooks Gregory is a fictitional character created to attack me. The following is something that has floated around for awhile from the fictional "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.

1.) No Brooks Gregory. He doesn’t exist.

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, freely available to all, displayed in the same lousy scanning job I did at the time.( www.cis.net/~coldfeet )

One need only look at the documents released by the White House last February (available here: http://www.usatoday.com/news/2004-02-14-bush-docs.htm ) to discern the fraudulent nature of the "Gregory" claims and the validity of my documents.

There were very few documents I received in 2000 that were not again released by the White House in February.

From this mornings news reports I understand that yesterday's release included the order ( for May and June service in 1973) -- 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.

You are the first one to ra... (Below threshold)

You are the first one to raise the thread about the identity of the forger of the documents.

With more than one party involved (CBS, DNC, etc.), you have the makings of a pretty broadly based, posssilby loosely coordinated conspiracy.


They are not forgeries they... (Below threshold)

They are not forgeries they are FAKE documents. Forgery carries with it the idea that there are real documents out there from which these FAKES were created. One may make a forgery of a 100 dollar bill but when one makes documents up from scratch that never existed those documents are fake.

Here's a comment I posted o... (Below threshold)

Here's a comment I posted over on Roger Simon's site earlier today:


Do these folks actually get paid for all this smoozing and distorting the facts? Don't they realize the important significance of the Blogos here to independently fact check what in the past has been the MSM'S sole perogative as to what the news is?

Mapes and Rather were "outed" for running a story that was an attack piece on President Bush (doesn't mater who you were rooting). They wanted to believe this so badly, they ignored all the red flags along the way. This is what makes con games so successful. The marks want to believe and lose their common sense. The only thing is that they got caught with their hands "red handed" in cookie jar and exposed their true motives.


The important lesson is the emergence of a new medium of human thought that has the power to transcend political boundaries and filtering of editoral and congolomerate boardrooms. This medium is almost free and does not have to pander for readers and audiences by senstationalizing the news which inherently causes it to be out of proportion and perspective.


Now here's my challenge to the Blogos. Here's a much bigger story that needs to be reported to the American people and let them decide what the is the truth and/or fiction.

The MSM is sitting on this story and not reporting it because they are too scared to put their foot in the water. Go figure you'd think they would be all over this like flies on poop!



In my book this is nothing more than premeditated murder. Oh well what do I know?

OK bloggors[sic] go and prove me wrong. This could affect everyone of us in that the vaccines we depend upon to protect against real pathogens like "smallpox" will be compromise


RLS Link

Read HSPIG - Commentary on vaccine issue

Ron Wright

Kev - it would be great to ... (Below threshold)

Kev - it would be great to have that sidebar with links to all Wizbang Rathergate matters again, so that regulars and newcomers can easily access the highlights from 9/8/04 onwards. (The Search function doesn't include Comments content anymore like it used to.)

I remember reading somewher... (Below threshold)

I remember reading somewhere here or at another site, a comment by a wise person - that we'll probably find the forger/faker making comments with the rest of us, just like one finds an arsonist in the crowd looking at a fire, discussing the whys and wherefors of the fire.

I recall both Martin Heldt and Paul Lukasiak in the chorus of commenters here at wizbang and ace.mu.nu.

LUKASIAK (possibly with Lec... (Below threshold)

LUKASIAK (possibly with Lechliter and Heldt's help)

USA Today's 6 doc-pdf inadvertently showed me how the forgeries/fabrications were created:

USA Today's set of the fake docs are here.
Scroll down below the picture to: "(Related items: Text of the four new memos - See the memos in PDF)" Click on PDF. There are actually 6 memos all in one pdf. (CBS received all 6, but only published 4 of them.)

Per USA Today, these 6 were PERSONALLY obtained by a USA Today reporter from Burkett who was visiting friends in Montana on the night CBS aired the "AWOL/Fortunate Son" story.

This is important because it means that set of 6 was not faxed. USA Today got copies closer to the first "draft". If you have a laptop (i.e. plasma screen), you can easily see the cut-and-paste crop markings around the text, the signatures and the various square "dots" all over the pages. Move your screen angle a little back and forth to get darker and lighter versions and you'll see it.

You can also see these same markings on a 7th document at Paul Lukasiak's glcq.com AWOL Project site: here. (First referenced here at wizbang on 9/18/04 and later.) Paul Lukasiak's site also has the mis-acronym "OETR" seven times on one page and elsewhere at glcq.com.

So, the new data from the Thornburgh Report is that Lukasiak contacted Mapes. One question is whether Lukasiak was a DNC or Kerry campaign worker or volunteer.

I see Lukasiak has been a researcher, writing pro-DNC, anti-Bush articles at least as early as 2001 regarding Florida 2000 recounts at www.failureisimpossible.com/topicindex.htm . The articles hew to the Soros line: racism claims, voting rights for felons.

I'd like to know who signs Lukasiak's paychecks.

"Cut-and-paste crop marking... (Below threshold)

"Cut-and-paste crop markings" - my theory is that text sentences were typed on computer, then overlaid on a page where the square "dots" had already been created digitally. Then the signatures were lifted from real military docs and overlaid on the same doc. The sequence of overlaying may be different, but that's the basic process I see when looking at the USA Today set of 6 fake docs.

Talk of the d.... - see his... (Below threshold)

Talk of the d.... - see his loooong posting at http://dailykos.com/story/2005/1/10/183312/357 refuting the Thornburgh Report.

I'm off to bed now, so if a... (Below threshold)

I'm off to bed now, so if anyone tries to impersonate me, as in the recent rash of impersonations here at wizbang, we'll know!

Just heard Buchanan make a ... (Below threshold)

Just heard Buchanan make a good point. If cbs was set up, where is the outrage? Why aren't they hunting down the person?

Is it because it would make them appear more dumb and foolish than they already are? They have to be protecting somebody. Why? Don't give me this crap that they are protecting their sources. People should demand that cbs start turning over names. Frankly, I think the forger was Mrs. Burkett.

Also heard Howie Fineman make some dumb comment about Rather/Mapes having this Texas populist politics view vs. the big bad Bush corporate view. I don't remember things being so great political-wise under Johnson. Couldn't get any dirty back than him.

Yeah, Julie - Buchanan spok... (Below threshold)

Yeah, Julie - Buchanan spoke with passion on Scarborough Country, MSNBC, last night. It's such a glaring omitted outrage on Dan Rather and CBS's part. If they had been "set up", why don't they find out who did it? They had no qualms leaving their Afghanistan source, Jack Idema, in the lurch; so it's not loyalty to sources that's keeping them mute. Burkett was someone's CYA conduit. That someone is either too close to home or otherwise too fearsome to confront. I wonder if the forger/faker is connected to Hillary/Soros. Hillary would not want a Democrat president in 2004-2008 if she intends to run in 2008. Perhaps Lockhart and McAuliffe were also used as patsies in a greater game.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy