CBS

Let's recap some of the key point thus far. Dan Rather (who put the BS in CBS) was so excited at his recent scoop that he triumphantly paraded four documents that seemed to prove that Bush disobeyed a direct order to take a flight physical (even though he was no longer going to be flying) and that Bush received preferential treatment because of his dad's position (which, of course, was a relatively unknown congressmen from rural texas). These documents appeared to be authentic to Rather, who constantly brags about once being in the Marines. I guess he should know with all his military experience. Of course, like every other democrat that was in the military (see e.g., tom harkin and john "fuckin" kerry) he grossly exaggerates his record at every opportunity. You see, Rather was discharged from the Marines 4 months after he was sworn in. He never completed boot camp due to physical reasons (it's unclear whether he failed the physical requirements or whether he has an ailment of some sort). He later served in the Army guard for a very brief stint. (as an aside, graduating boot camp was one of the greatest days of my life - because that is the first time that you EARN the title "Marine").

Anyway, it turns out that, due to the power of the internet, these documents were easily pegged as forgeries within hours of Rather's broadcast. You see, the type font was times new roman, which was virtually non-existent on typewriters (that use courier). Rather's response to this is that it was possible in 1972, even though experts said the machine that could've done this would've cost $15,000 in 1972. Also, the spacing was inconsistent with any typewriter even today - typewriters have even spacing because they don't know what letter comes before or after a typed letter. The spacing on the documents was consistent with a modern computer. Further, the superscripts would have required LtCol Killian take the typewriter apart with a screwdriver and insert different keys in order to achieve the smaller font. Rather said that other documents has superscripts - although the other superscripts were still the same font size. Again, a clear indication of a modern computer.

Additionally, the paper was on 8.5 x 11 - while the Air Force used 8.5 x 10.5 at the time. Further, the documents exhibited "kerning", which is when a letter curves around a preceding or proceeding letter - impossible on any typewriters. Oh and by the way, LtCol Killian didn't know how to type and it is against Air Force regulations to keep such personal files. This is of course in addition to the sheer absurdity of the documents on their face. One was entitled "CYA" for christ's sake. One document said that a certain General was pressuring Killian to sugarcoat Bush's reports. Of course this General retired from the Guard 18 months before the letter was written and had no power whatsoever to influence anybody.
Keep in mind, of course, that the author of these memos has been dead for 20 years, his widow and son, who was also in the squadron, state that he never kept any personal files and that he greatly admired Bush, which is consistent to all the official documents that Killian filled out on Bush.
Furthermore, Bush's address on the documents was wrong, and one of the documents had a PO box for the squadron, which was bogus. Indeed, the PO box was 34567 for christ's sake. Also, Lt Col Killian's signature was not consistent with other documents and Army terminology was used instead of Air Force terminology (the reason for this will become clear later).
Rather put forth an expert that was a handwriting expert, not a document expert. This guy wrote a Law Review article in 2002 that stated that it was IMPOSSIBLE to authenticate a signature based on a copy. Of course, CBS only had copies. The expert, who CBS instructed to not talk to anyone else, couldn't take it anymore and is telling anyone that will listen that he absolutely did not and could not authenticate the documents. CBS also put forth 2 more experts, who not only are telling anyone who will listen that they didn't authenticate the documents, but are saying that they warned CBS of all the inconsistencies and told them not to run the story. CBS also put forth a retired Col. to say that although he couldn't authenticate the documents, they were consistent with the facts at the time. This Col has now said that he never saw the documents, and was misled by CBS for, among other things, telling him the documents were hand written!!
So what does CBS do? They bring out a 86 year-old lady who was not in the military but was a civilian contractor. They state that she was Killian's secretary - even though she was NOT his personal secretary but a secretary for the entire group! She is an admitted bush-hater, calling bush "unfit for command," she has never had any personal contact with Bush, she thinks that the documents are forgeries BUT she "feels" that the contents of the documents are true based on what Killian said 30 years ago - like LtCol Killian is going to confide his deep secrets about a fellow officer with the group civilian secretary.

It now appears that Rather's "unimpeachable" source is LtCol Burkett, a retired ARMY (hence the army terminology) guardsman. The NY times was able to trace the document to a kinko's near his home - also, other guardsmen have speculated that he was the source of the documents. Burkett is on record as comparing bush to hitler, has had 2 nervous breakdowns, has been hospitalized for depression and once tried to sue his superior officers in their INDIVIDUAL capacities for an illness he received when he was in Panama. He thinks he was activated for a few months to go to Panama because then-governor Bush was punishing him for making noise about having to erase some files damaging to the bush - like they would ask an admitted bush-hating army guardsman to destroy some air force documents about bush.

To top it off, Rather is now DEMANDING that Bush answer the questions raised by these forged documents!!! I swear to God i couldn't make this stuff up if I tried.

UPDATE: I stupidly relied on the NY Times for my assertion that Bush's dad was a congressman at the time. They just posted a correction stating that he was the ambassador to China in 1972. My apologies. I think Jayson Blair wrote that piece.