Dan Rather chooses scorched earth

CBS and Dan Rather stand by their crumbling story, while Captain’s Quarters recaps the latest developments in the CBS forged memos scandal, and includes a handy 9-point list of discrepancies in the documents. It ain’t all in the superscript, folks.
Meanwhile Power Line gathers several mainstream media stories to paint a picture of Gunga Dan under seige. The three lawyers running Power Line have given Rather a length of rope and they seem content today to watch him tie his own noose. When they pull the lever on the trap door this coming week, it’ll be a quick end for CBS. Power Line has new questions about the paper used for CBS‘ “original” copies, and about incorrect zip codes on the purported memos.
INDC Journal exposes how the Boston Globe misquoted a document analysis expert, and relays the expert’s outrage.
In the “put up or shut up department”, Defeat JohnJohn is offering at least $17,600 to the first person to $17,600 in cash to the first person who can find a typewriter available in 1972 that reasonably could have produced the documents in question.
For the big picture, rely on The Belmont Club … as always.

UPDATE: Dan Rather would have you believe that the whole forgery story is overblown because a few old typewriters could manage superscript text. Well, look at this flash animation. If that’s not proof of forgery, nothing is. No doubt Dan Rather’s next statement will be: “Who’re ya gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?”
Hat tip: Power Line

  1. I don’t know if anyone has suggested this yet. But all Dan Rather has to do is find the original and let an independent examiner check to see if the document was produced by an inkjet or LASER type printer. If the memos are really written using a typewriter, the hammer would leave an easily provable indent in the paper for each character. In addition the type ribbon would produce an outward going stress pattern from the middle of the character. And one more point. It would be quite easy to test the ink to see it’s composition. Typewriter ink is quite different then today’s automatic pirinters.

  2. Good point. I seem to recall somebody making that point on another blog somewhere. I’ll have to go dig it out.

Comments are closed.