'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake

[Toad]

Originally posted by Nash

 there's a truckload of other sources that basically confirm what the document says.

Elucidate if you please.

Exactly what do these documents purport to prove?

What other documentation confirms this?

From CBS:

Did then-Lt. Bush fulfill all of his military obligations? And just how did he land that spot in the National Guard in the first place?

Question one has been answered. It's reported that Bush fulfilled the "point" requirements in every year in question. He received an Honorable Discharge. QED, I'm afraid. The Honorable Discharge alone defeats any "awol" arguments.

Question two really has no bearing. Did he get preferential treatment? Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. It's quite clear however that throughout the VN period the sons of the rich, famous and well-connected DID get preferential treatment in many ways.

How many Senator's sons died in VN? Anyone know? I'm betting ZERO. So, what if he did? He'd be no different than probably thousands (ten thousands? hundreds of thousands?) of kids whose parents "knew somebody who knew somebody". It wasn't illegal or even rare.

So, bottom line.......... when are we going to actually discuss the issues? Because VN isn't one of them. They BOTH served honorably.

Some of you guys need a reality check.

[NUKE]

Nash, you're funny...the story is not going away. The reason it's not going away is that there is a very reasonable chance that they ( the documents) are fake.

[Mini D]

This is a pretty amazing thread.  People are here defending 60 minutes and this memo for what reason?  It might be true?

Sorry Nash and RPM, this one is making you two look like blind idiots with your hands over your ears singing lalalalala.

Even if you discount all of the "proof" that they're forgeries, you cannot overlook these two simple facts:

1) CBS does not know where they got the documents

2) CBS could solve this whole thing by getting a typewriter and retyping the memos.  They have not.  Nobody has.

"We don't have to prove what we are saying, we can just say it.  But... You'll need hard evidence to prove that what we say is wrong."

The funny thing is, you two think it's the republicans with the tin-foil hats on right now.

[GRUNHERZ]

Nash will provide evidence that the docs are legitimate five minutes after he tells us one memorable leadership moment or significant accompolishment of John Kerry's 20 year Senate carrer that Nash recalls in all those years that he has been aware of the guy...

[Toad]

Originally posted by Mini D
1) CBS does not know where they got the documents

Don't you think that's just a bit unfair? A respected national news source being asked to define the source of their evidence?

I can see the news getting a lot more interesting if CBS doesn't have to produce on this issue.  

Headline: Memos document Brittany Spears has Michael Jackson's love child and Bill Clinton delivered the baby!

After all, why should CBS be held to a higher standard than say....... the National Enquirer?

[Nash]

This is a pretty amazing thread.  People are here defending 60 minutes and this memo for what reason?  It might be true?

Sorry Nash and RPM, this one is making you two look like blind idiots with your hands over your ears singing lalalalala.

I like how you always swoop in with some sweeping general statement on the affairs of threads. "This is an amazing thread". Then go on to kindly point out how some of us are wrong. And it's amazing -  you always have it right. Funny how that works.

Blind idiots, huh? As opposed to the supporters of the forgery claims being tools or parrots? Whatever you say Deja - you know best.

Even if you discount all of the "proof" that they're forgeries, you cannot overlook these two simple facts:

1) CBS does not know where they got the documents

2) CBS could solve this whole thing by getting a typewriter and retyping the memos.  They have not.  Nobody has.

1) They just fell into somebody's in-box? But, who cares?

2) Nobody has because nobody can. It's impossible. The same way it's impossible to draw conclusions from people nonetheless trying anyways to duplicate this impossible feat. "Wow! I can't duplicate it! Forgery!"

The funny thing is, you two think it's the republicans with the tin-foil hats on right now.

Hey - you guys are claiming fraud and conspiracy - without proof. But that doesn't count does it?

[Mini D]

All I've seen is talk from you nash... and a link with CBS insisting they're right.

That's why I jumped on you, because you are being more obtuse is this thread than I've seen from you in a while.

I'd asky why you can't see it for what it is, but that would require you going against your overall tone in this thread.

I didn't post in the first portion of this because I was going to wait and do something silly... see what came of the whole thing.  As I'm reading I actually stopped and read the posted links.  This became a little more clear.  

"This proves it was fake."
"No it doesn't."
"This proves it was fake too."
"No it doesn't."
"This also proves it was fake."
"You're paranoid!"

Notice the absence of something in that argument?  Such as: "This proves it was real."

This is another one of those "your rules" threads isn't it?  People have to support what THEY say.  People can't enter the thread late and criticize YOU.  Nonono.... that just won't do.

Sorry Nash, but your desire to prove that everyone is over-reacting by over-reacting to everything they over-react to is getting old.  Especially when it's not them that are over-reacting.

[Toad]

Now Nash, CBS/Rather are making the accusation that Bush didn't fulfill all of his military obligations and used "influence" to land the National Guard job.

As I said, I could not care less about the "influence" charge. I think most Americans realize that "influence" is used in our society all the time and always has been. It's just not going to resonate, I'm afraid.

On the other charge, failure to fulfill his obligations, the burden of proof is on CBS/Rather. The documents as displayed so far are not any sort of proof that would stand up in court.

They're going to have to detail where they got them and they're going to have to let the Defense examine them and bring in it's own experts.

This is a serious charge and should be treated as such. Making the claim, waving the documents around and then clamming up is making CBS/Rather look like they are hiding something.

Again, it's CBS/Rather's obligation to "prove this case". So far, they haven't do so at all.

Turn it around. Suppose some "previously unreleased memos" fromone of  Kerry's commanders surfaced in the hands of Fox News and Fox took the same approach CBS is taking now. Assume the memos say the medals were not really deserved and that Kerry was the victim of 2 self-inflicted wounds in non-combat situations.

What would you be saying then?

Won't wash, will it? You'd be demanding better documentation and an evidence trail.

And you know it.

[Nash]

I'd asky why you can't see it for what it is, but that would require you going against your overall tone in this thread.

Oh - do enlighten me. Please.

[rpm]

Nash, what you don't understand is the Republicans have managed to become the "truth" party. Anything coming from their side is the "truth". Anything coming from the Democrats is lie, slander and forgery and is held to a different burden of proof.

No matter that numerous legitimate independant experts have said the docs are legitimate. No matter that documents previously released by The White House have superscript in them. No matter that there are people coming forward saying they did pull strings to ensure Bush got preferential treatment, they have a website that can't duplicate a typed memo perfectly with MS Word. There you have it the "truth".

[Nash]

Toad, they have made the document public.

That's why you are able to see it. That's what the "forgery" claimers are basing their experiments on.

As for the source - you mentioned standards. Journalists do not name their sources if the sources don't want to be named. It has been like that since roughly forever. Journalists have gone to jail over it.

You want them to change their tune because of the imagination of a PR firm?

It's funny hearing people demand this. It's not gonna happen. And most of the poeple asking for that know it already.... but they also know that the implication sounds bad for CBS. So they say it anyways, and it works regardless...

[ra]

No matter that numerous legitimate independant experts have said the docs are legitimate.

Name one.

[Toad]

Same for you RPM.

Turn it around. Suppose some "previously unreleased memos" from one of Kerry's commanders surfaced in the hands of Fox News and Fox took the same approach CBS is taking now.

Assume the memos say the medals were not really deserved and that Kerry was the victim of 2 self-inflicted wounds in non-combat situations.

What would you be saying then?

Won't wash, will it? You'd be demanding better documentation and an evidence trail.

And you know it too.

You perhaps best exemplify the folks on this board that have a "double standard".

In fact, you are probably the poster child for what you continually decry.

[Toad]

Again, Nash........ what would you be saying if this was a similar Kerry slam by Fox?

You'd be crying a river.

Just be honest about that and let's let this thing run it's course.

 I'm guessing at least another 5-6 days before any real details/explanation comes out.

[SirLoin]

What..Did you find WMD again?..