Jan 11, 2017. Best aggregator themes wordpress. WP-Drudge may be a Drudge Report-style WordPress site templete that produces it simple to post external articles, your own diary posts, and links to alternative sites. Add images, show featured content, and insert ads simply. With many alternative. WP-Drudge is a Drudge Report style (no affiliation) WordPress website template that makes it easy to post external articles, your own blog posts, and links to other sites. Add images, display featured content, and insert ads easily. With many different configuration options, you can make your website look just how you want.

's animated GIF image comparing a memo purportedly typewritten in 1973 with a proportional-spaced document made in Microsoft Word with default settings in 2004 The Killian documents controversy (also referred to as Memogate or Rathergate) involved six purported documents critical of 's service in the in 1972–73. Four of these documents were presented as authentic in a broadcast aired by on September 8, 2004, less than two months before the, but it was later found that CBS had failed to authenticate the documents. Subsequently, several and experts concluded the documents were forgeries. No or typography experts have authenticated the documents, and this may not be technically possible without the original documents. The purveyor of the documents, Lt. Col., claims to have burned the originals after faxing copies to CBS.

Producer obtained the copied documents from Burkett, a former officer in the, while pursuing a story about the George W. Bush military service controversy. The papers, purportedly made by Bush's commander, the late Lieutenant Colonel Jerry B. Killian, included criticisms of Bush's service in the Guard during the 1970s. In the 60 Minutes segment, anchor stated: 'We are told [the documents] were taken from Lieutenant Colonel Killian’s personal files' and incorrectly asserted that 'the material' had been authenticated by experts retained by CBS. The was challenged within hours on forums and, with questions initially focused on alleged in the documents'.

Content soon spread to the. Although CBS and Rather defended the authenticity and usage of the documents for a two-week period, continued scrutiny from other news organizations and independent analysis of the documents obtained by and CBS raised questions about their validity and led to a public repudiation on September 20, 2004. Rather stated, 'if I knew then what I know now – I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question,' and CBS News President said, 'Based on what we now know, CBS News cannot prove that the documents are authentic, which is the only acceptable journalistic standard to justify using them in the report. We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret.' Several months later, a CBS-appointed panel led by and criticized both the initial CBS news segment and CBS' 'strident defense' during the aftermath.

CBS fired producer Mary Mapes, several senior news executives were asked to resign, and CBS apologized to viewers. The panel did not specifically consider whether the documents were forgeries but concluded that the producers had failed to authenticate them and cited 'substantial questions regarding the authenticity of the Killian documents.'

The story of the controversy was dramatized in the 2015 film, starring as Dan Rather and as Mary Mapes and directed. It is based on Mapes' memoir Truth and Duty: The Press, the President, and the Privilege of Power. The film was, however, not approved by current CBS President and CEO. [ ] CBS refused to air advertisements for the film and a longtime CBS spokesman stated that 'there are (.) too many distortions, evasions and baseless conspiracy theories' [in the movie]. Investigations into his military service led to the Killian documents controversy. The memos, allegedly written in 1972 and 1973, were obtained by CBS News producer and freelance journalist Michael Smith, from Lt.

Bill Burkett, a former officer. Mapes and Dan Rather, among many other journalists, had been investigating for several years the story of Bush's. Burkett had received publicity in 2000, after making and then retracting a claim that he had been transferred to for refusing 'to falsify personnel records of [then-]Governor Bush', and in February 2004, when he claimed to have knowledge of 'scrubbing' of Bush's records. Mapes was 'by her own account [aware that] many in the press considered Burkett an 'anti-Bush zealot,' his credibility in question.' Mapes and Smith made contact with Burkett in late August, and on August 24 Burkett offered to meet with them to share the documents he possessed, and later told reporters from 'that he had agreed to turn over the documents to CBS if the network would arrange a conversation with the campaign,' a claim substantiated by emails between Smith and Mapes detailing Burkett's additional requests for help with negotiating a book deal, security, and financial compensation. During the last week of August, Mapes asked Josh Howard, her immediate superior at CBS, for permission to facilitate contact between Burkett and the Kerry campaign; Howard and Mapes subsequently disputed whether such permission had been given. Two documents were provided by Burkett to Mapes on September 2 and four others on September 5, 2004.

At that time, Burkett told Mapes that they were copies of originals that had been obtained from Killian's personal files via Chief George Conn, another former member of the TexANG. Mapes informed Rather of the progress of the story, which was being targeted to air on September 8 along with footage of an interview with former, who would publicly state for the first time his opinion that Bush had received preferential treatment to get into the National Guard. Mapes had also been in contact with the Kerry campaign several times between late August and September 6, when she spoke with senior Kerry advisor regarding the progressing story. Lockhart subsequently stated he was 'wary' of contact with Mapes at this stage, because if the story were true, his involvement might undermine its credibility, and if it were false, 'he did not want to be associated with it.'

Lockhart called Burkett on September 6 at the number provided by Mapes, and both men stated they discussed Burkett's view of Kerry's Presidential campaign strategy, not the existence of the documents or the related story. Content of the memos [ ] The documents claimed that Bush had disobeyed orders while in the Guard, and that undue influence had been exerted on Bush's behalf to improve his record. The documents included the following: • An order directing Bush to submit to a physical examination. • A note that Killian had grounded Bush from flying due to 'failure to perform to /TexANG standards,' and for failure to submit to the physical examination as ordered. Killian also requested that a flight inquiry board be convened, as required by regulations, to examine the reasons for Bush's loss of flight status. • A note of a telephone conversation with Bush in which Bush sought to be excused from 'drill.'

The note records that Bush said he did not have the time to attend to his National Guard duties because he had a campaign to do (the Senate campaign of in Alabama). • A note (labeled 'CYA' for ') claiming that Killian was being pressured from above to give Bush better marks in his yearly evaluation than he had earned.

The note attributed to Killian says that he was being asked to 'sugarcoat' Bush's performance. 'I'm having trouble running interference [for Bush] and doing my job.' Also received copies of the four documents used by CBS, reporting this and publishing them the morning after the CBS segment, along with two additional memos. Burkett was assured by USA Today that they would keep the source confidential. CBS investigations prior to airing the segment [ ] Mapes and her colleagues began interviewing people who might be able to corroborate the information in the documents, while also retaining four, Marcel J. Matley, James J.

Pierce, Emily Will, and Linda James, to determine the validity of the memos. On September 5, CBS interviewed Killian's friend Robert Strong, who ran the Texas Air National Guard administrative office. Among other issues covered in his interview with Rather and Mapes, Strong was asked if he thought the documents were genuine. Strong stated, 'they are compatible with the way business was done at the time.

They are compatible with the man that I remember Jerry Killian being.' Strong had first seen the documents twenty minutes earlier and also said he had no personal knowledge of their content; he later claimed he had been told to assume the content of the documents was accurate. On September 6, CBS interviewed General Robert 'Bobby' Hodges, a former officer at the Texas Air National Guard and Killian's immediate superior at the time. Hodges declined CBS' request for an on-camera interview, and Mapes read the documents to him over the telephone. According to Mapes, Hodges agreed with CBS's assessment that the documents were real, and CBS reported that Hodges stated that these were 'the things that Killian had expressed to me at the time.'

However, according to Hodges, when Mapes read portions of the memos to him he simply stated, 'well if he wrote them, that's what he felt,' and he claims he never confirmed the validity of the content of the documents. General Hodges later asserted to the investigatory panel that he told Mapes that Killian had never, to his knowledge, ordered anyone to take a physical and that he had never been pressured regarding Lieutenant Bush, as the documents alleged. Hodges also claims that when CBS interviewed him, he thought the memos were handwritten, not typed, and following the September 8 broadcast, when Hodges had seen the documents and heard of claims of forgery by Killian's wife and son, he was 'convinced they were not authentic' and told Rather and Mapes on September 10. Response of the document examiners [ ] Prior to airing, all four of the examiners responded to Mapes' request for document analysis, though only two to Mapes directly: • Emily Will noted discrepancies in the signatures on the memos, and had questions about the letterhead, the proportional spacing of the font, the 'th' and the improper formatting of the date.

Will requested other documents to use for comparison. • Linda James was 'unable to reach a conclusion about the signature' and noted that the superscripted 'th' was not in common use at the time the memos were allegedly written; she later recalled telling CBS, 'the two memos she looked at 'had problems.' ' • James Pierce concluded that both of the documents were written by the same person and that the signature matched Killian's from the official Bush records. Only one of the two documents provided to Pierce had a signature. James Pierce wrote, 'the balance of the Jerry B. Killian signatures appearing on the photocopied questioned documents are consistent and in basic agreement,' and stated that based on what he knew, 'the documents in question are authentic.' However, Pierce also told Mapes he could not be sure if the documents had been altered because he was reviewing copies, not original documents.

• Marcel Matley's review was initially limited to Killian's signature on one of the Burkett documents, which he compared to signatures from the official Bush records. Matley 'seemed fairly confident' that the signature was Killian's. On September 6, Matley was interviewed by Rather and Mapes and was provided with the other four documents obtained from CBS (he would prove to be the only reviewer to see these documents prior to the segment). Matley told Rather 'he could not authenticate the documents due to the fact that they were poor quality copies.' In the interview, Matley told Rather that with respect to the signatures, they were relying on 'poor material' and that there were inconsistencies in the signatures, but also replied 'Yes,' when asked if it would be safe to say the documents were written by the person who signed them. • Both Emily Will and Linda James suggested to Mapes that CBS contact typewriter expert Peter Tytell. Associate producer Yvonne Miller left him a voicemail on September 7; he returned the call at 11 am on September 8 but was told they 'did not need him anymore.'

September 8 segment and initial reactions [ ] The segment, entitled 'For the Record,' aired on 60 Minutes Wednesday on September 8. After introducing the documents, Rather said, in reference to Matley, 'We consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic.' The segment introduced Lieutenant Robert Strong's interview, describing him as a 'friend of Killian' (without noting he had not worked in the same location and without mentioning he had left the TexANG prior to the dates on the memos). The segment used the sound bite of Strong saying the documents were compatible with how business was done but did not include a disclaimer that Strong was told to assume the documents were authentic. In Rather's narration about one of the memos, he referred to pressure being applied on Bush's behalf by General Buck Staudt, and described Staudt as 'the man in charge of the Texas National Guard.'

Staudt had retired from the guard a year and a half prior to the dates of the memos. Interview clips with, former Speaker of the Texas House, created the impression 'that there was no question but that President Bush had received Barnes' help to get into the TexANG,' because Barnes had made a telephone call on Bush's behalf, when Barnes himself had acknowledged that there was no proof his call was the reason, and that 'sometimes a call to General Rose did not work.' Barnes' disclaimer was not included in the segment. Internet skepticism spreads [ ] Discussion quickly spread to various in the, principally and. The initial analysis appeared in posts by 'Buckhead,' a of Harry W. MacDougald, an attorney who had worked for conservative groups such as the and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, and who had helped draft the petition to the Supreme Court for the of President. MacDougald questioned the validity of the documents on the basis of their typography, writing that the memos were 'in a proportionally spaced font, probably or,' and alleging that this was an: 'I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old.

This should be pursued aggressively.' By the following day, questions about the authenticity of the documents were being publicized by the, which linked to the analysis at the Powerline blog in the mid-afternoon, and the story was covered on the website of the magazine and broke into mass media outlets, including the and the major television news networks. It also was receiving serious attention from conservative writers such as 's.

By the afternoon of September 9, of Little Green Footballs had posted his attempt to recreate one of the documents using with the default settings. The September 9 edition of 's made mention of the controversy, along with an article on the website. Thirteen days after this controversy had emerged the national newspaper USA Today published a timeline of events surrounding the CBS story. Accordingly, on the September 9 morning after the '60 minutes' report, the broadcast was front-page news in the New York Times and Washington Post. Additionally, the story was given two-thirds of a full page within USA Today's news section, which mentioned that it had also obtained copies of the documents.

However, the authenticity of the memos was not part of the story carried by major news outlets on that day. Also on that day, CBS published the reaction of Killian's son, Gary, to the documents, reporting that Gary Killian questioned one of the memos but stated that others 'appeared legitimate' and characterized the collection as 'a mixture of truth and fiction'. In an interview with, Gary Killian expressed doubts about the documents' authenticity on the basis of his father's positive view of Bush. In 2006, the two (Rathergate) bloggers, Harry W. MacDougald, username 'Buckhead,' an Atlanta-based lawyer and Paul Boley, username 'TankerKC', were awarded the Reed Irvine Award for New Media by the right-of-center at the (CPAC). CBS's response and widening media coverage [ ] At 5:00 p.m. On Thursday, September 9, CBS News released a statement saying the memos were 'thoroughly investigated by independent experts, and we are convinced of their authenticity', and stating, 'this report was not based solely on recovered documents, but rather on a preponderance of evidence, including documents that were provided by unimpeachable sources, [.]'.

In an interview with, CBS News spokesperson Kelli Edwards said, 'CBS verified the authenticity of the documents by talking to individuals who had seen the documents at the time they were written.' The statement was replaced later that day with one that omitted this claim. The first newspaper articles questioning the documents appeared on September 10 in, The New York Times and in USA Today via the. The Associated Press reported, 'Document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines.said she was 'virtually certain' [the documents] were generated by computer. Lines said that meant she could testify in court that, beyond a reasonable doubt, her opinion was that the memos were written on a computer.' Also on September 10, reported that 'the officer named in one memo as exerting pressure to 'sugarcoat' Bush's military record was discharged a year and a half before the memo was written. The paper cited a military record showing that Col.

Walter 'Buck' Staudt was honorably discharged on March 1, 1972, while the memo cited by CBS as showing that Staudt was interfering with evaluations of Bush was dated August 18, 1973.' In response to the media attention, a CBS memo said that the documents were 'backed up not only by independent handwriting and forensic document experts but by sources familiar with their content' and insisted that no internal investigation would take place. On the CBS Evening News of September 10, Rather defended the story and noted that its critics included 'partisan political operatives.' • In the broadcast, Rather stated that Marcel Matley 'analyzed the documents for CBS News. He believes they are real,' and broadcast additional excerpts from Matley's September 6 interview showing Matley's agreement that the signatures appeared to be from the same source. Rather did not report that Matley had referred to them as 'poor material', that he had only opined about the signatures or that he had specifically not authenticated the documents.

• Rather presented footage of the Strong interview, introducing it by stating Robert Strong 'is standing by his judgment that the documents are real,' despite Strong's lack of standing to authenticate them and his brief exposure to the documents. • Rather concluded by stating, 'If any definitive evidence to the contrary of our story is found, we will report it. So far, there is none.' In an appearance on that day, Rather asserted 'I know that this story is true. I believe that the witnesses and the documents are authentic.

We wouldn't have gone to air if they would not have been.' However, CBS' Josh Howard spoke at length by telephone with typewriter expert Peter Tytell and later told the panel that the discussion was 'an 'unsettling event' that shook his belief in the authenticity of the documents.' Producer Mapes dismissed Tytell's concerns. A former vice president of CBS News, Jonathan Klein, dismissed the allegations of bloggers, suggesting that the 'checks and balances' of a professional news organization were superior to those of individuals sitting at their home computers 'in their pajamas.' CBS' defense, apology [ ] As media coverage widened and intensified, CBS at first attempted to produce additional evidence to support its claims.

On September 11, a CBS News segment stated that document expert Phillip Bouffard thought the documents 'could have been prepared on an IBM Selectric Composer typewriter, available at the time.' The was introduced in 1966 for use by professionals to generate copy; according to archives describing this specialized equipment, 'To produce copy which can be reproduced with 'justified', or straight left-and right-hand margins, the operator types the copy once and the composer computes the number of spaces needed to justify the line.

As the operator types the copy a second time, the spaces are added automatically.' ) Bouffard's comments were also cited by the Boston Globe in an article entitled 'Authenticity backed on Bush documents.' However, the Globe soon printed a retraction regarding the title. CBS noted that although General Hodges was now stating he thought the documents were inauthentic, 'we believed General Hodges the first time we spoke with him.' CBS reiterated: 'we believe the documents to be genuine.'

By September 13, CBS's position had shifted slightly, as Rather acknowledged 'some of these questions come from people who are not active political partisans,' and stated that CBS 'talked to handwriting and document analysts and other experts who strongly insist the documents could have been created in the '70s,' (emphasis added). The analysts and experts cited by Rather did not include the original four consulted by CBS. Rather instead presented the views of Bill Glennon and Richard Katz.

Glennon, a former typewriter repairman with no specific credentials in typesetting beyond that job, was found by CBS after posting several defenses of the memos on blogs including and 's blog hosted. However, in the actual broadcast, neither interviewee asserted that the memos were genuine.

As a result, some CBS critics began to accuse CBS of. 60 Minutes Wednesday, one week later [ ] The original document examiners, however, continued to be part of the story.

By September 15, Emily Will was publicly stating that she had told CBS that she had doubts about both the production of the memos and the handwriting prior to the segment. Linda James stated that the memos were of 'very poor quality' and that she did not authenticate them, telling ABC News, 'I did not authenticate anything and I don't want it understood that I did.' In response, 60 Minutes Wednesday released a statement suggesting that Will and James had 'misrepresented' their role in the authentication of the documents and had played only a small part in the process.

CBS News concurrently amended its previous claim that Matley had authenticated the documents, saying instead that he had only authenticated the signatures. On CNN, Matley stated he had only verified that the signatures were 'from the same source,' not that they were authentically Killian's: 'When I saw the documents, I could not verify the documents were authentic or inauthentic.

I could only verify that the signatures came from the same source,' Matley said. 'I could not authenticate the documents themselves. But at the same time, there was nothing to tell me that they were not authentic.' On the evening of September 15, CBS aired a segment that featured an interview with Marian Carr Knox, a secretary at from 1956–1979, and who was Killian's assistant on the dates shown in the documents.

Dan Rather prefaced the segment on the recorded interview by stating 'She told us she believes what the documents actually say is, exactly, as we reported.' In the aired interview, Knox expressed her belief that the documents reflected Killian's 'sentiments' about Bush's service, and that this belief motivated her decision to reach out to CBS to provide the interview. In response to a direct question from Rather about the authenticity of the memo on Bush's alleged insubordination, she stated that no such memo was ever written; she further emphasized that she would have known if such a memo existed, as she had sole responsibility to type Killian's memos in that time period. At this point, she also admitted she had no firsthand knowledge of Bush's time in the Guard. However, controversially, Knox said later in the interview, 'The information in here was correct, but it was picked up from the real ones.' She went on to say, 'I probably typed the information and somebody picked up the information some way or another.' The New York Times' headline report on this interview, including the phrase 'Fake but Accurate,' created an immediate backlash from critics of CBS's broadcast.

The conservative-leaning Weekly Standard proceeded to predict the end of CBS's news division. At this time, Dan Rather first acknowledged there were problems in establishing the validity of the documents used in the report, stating: 'If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story.' CBS also hired a private investigator to look into the matter after the story aired and the controversy began. Copies of the documents were first released to the public by the. Press Secretary stated that the memos had been provided to them by CBS in the days prior to the report and that, 'We had every reason to believe that they were authentic at that time.'

The Washington Post reported that at least one of the documents obtained by CBS had a fax header indicating it had been faxed from a Kinko's copy center in Abilene, Texas, leading some to trace the documents back to Burkett. CBS states that use of the documents was a mistake [ ] As a growing number of independent document examiners and competing news outlets reported their findings about the documents, CBS News stopped defending the documents and began to report on the problems with their story. On September 20 they reported that their source, Bill Burkett, 'admits that he deliberately misled the CBS News producer working on the report, giving her a false account of the documents' origins to protect a promise of confidentiality to the actual source.' While the network did not state that the memos were forgeries, CBS News president said, 'Based on what we now know, CBS News cannot prove that the documents are authentic, which is the only acceptable journalistic standard to justify using them in the report. We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret.'

Dan Rather stated, 'if I knew then what I know now — I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question.' In an interview with Rather, Burkett admitted that he misled CBS about the source of the documents, and then claimed that the documents came to him from someone he claimed was named 'Lucy Ramirez', whom CBS was unable to contact or identify as an actual person. Burkett said he then made copies at the local and burned the original documents.

Investigations by CBS, CNN and the Washington Post failed to turn up any evidence relating to this supposed 'Lucy Ramirez' being an actual person.: On September 21, CBS News addressed the contact with the Kerry campaign in its statement: 'It is obviously against CBS News standards and those of every other reputable news organization to be associated with any political agenda.' The next day the network announced it was forming an independent review panel to perform an internal investigation. Review panel established [ ]. Named by CBS to investigate with the events that led to the CBS report. Soon after, CBS established a review panel 'to help determine what errors occurred in the preparation of the report and what actions need to be taken.' , a former and under George H.W. Bush, and, retired president and chief executive officer and former executive editor of the, made up the two-person review board.

CBS also hired a, a former agent named Erik T. Rigler, to gather further information about the story. Findings [ ] On January 5, 2005, the Report of the Independent Review Panel on the September 8, 2004, 60 Minutes Wednesday Segment 'For the Record' Concerning President Bush's Air National Guard Service was released.

The purpose of the panel was to examine the process by which the September 8 Segment was prepared and broadcast, to examine the circumstances surrounding the subsequent public statements and news reports by CBS News defending the segment, and to make any recommendations it deemed appropriate. Main article: No generally recognized document experts have positively authenticated the memos. Since CBS used only faxed and photocopied duplicates, authentication to professional standards is impossible, regardless of the provenance of the originals. Document experts have challenged the authenticity of the documents as photocopies of valid originals on a variety of grounds ranging from anachronisms of their typography, their quick reproducibility using modern technology, and to errors in their content and style. The CBS independent panel report did not specifically take up the question of whether the documents were forgeries, but retained a document expert, Peter Tytell, who concluded the documents used by CBS were produced using current word processing technology. Tytell concluded. That (i) the relevant portion of the Superscript Exemplar was produced on an Olympia manual typewriter, (ii) the Killian documents were not produced on an Olympia manual typewriter and (iii) the Killian documents were produced on a computer in Times New Roman typestyle [and that] the Killian documents were not produced on a typewriter in the early 1970s and therefore were not authentic.

David Hailey, director of the Interactive Media Research Labs in the English Department of has argued that the Killian documents were not in Times New Roman, and were produced on an unspecified typewriter, though he does not assert their authenticity. Accusations of bias [ ] Some critics of CBS and Dan Rather argued that by proceeding with the story when the documents had not been authenticated, CBS was exhibiting and attempting to influence the outcome of the. Freelance journalist Michael Smith had emailed Mapes, asking, 'What if there was a person who might have some information that could possibly change the momentum of an election but we needed to get an ASAP book deal to help get us the information?' Mapes replied, 'that looks good, hypothetically speaking of course.'

The Thornburgh-Boccardi report found that Mapes' contact with Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart was 'highly inappropriate', and that it 'crossed the line as, at a minimum, it gave the appearance of a political bias and could have been perceived as a news organizations' assisting a campaign as opposed to reporting on a story;' however, the Panel did not 'find a basis to accuse those who investigated, produced, vetted or aired the Segment of having a political bias.' In a later interview with, when asked about the issue of political bias, review panel member Louis Boccardi said 'bias is a hard thing to prove.' The panel concluded that the problems occurred 'primarily because of a rush to air that overwhelmed the proper application of the CBS News Standards'. Some Democratic critics of Bush suggested that the memos were produced by the Bush campaign to discredit the media's reporting on Bush's National Guard service. The chairman of the,, suggested that the memos might have originated with long-time Bush strategist. McAuliffe told reporters on September 10, 'I can tell you that nobody at the Democratic National Committee or groups associated with us were involved in any way with these documents,' he said. 'I'm just saying that I would ask Karl Rove the same question.'

McAuliffe later pointed out that Rove and another Republican operative,, had 'a known history of dirty tricks,' and he asked whether chairman would rule out any involvement by GOP consultant. At a community forum in in 2005, (D-NY) pointed out that the controversy served Rove's objectives: 'Once they did that, then it undermined everything else about Bush's draft dodging. That had the effect of taking the whole issue away.' After being criticized, Hinchey responded, 'I didn't allege I had any facts. I said this is what I believe and take it for what it's worth.' Rove and Stone have denied any involvement. In a 2008 interview in, Stone said 'It was nuts to think I had anything to do with those documents.[t]hose papers were potentially devastating to George Bush.

You couldn’t put them out there assuming that they would be discredited. You couldn’t have assumed that this would redound to Bush’s benefit. I believe in bank shots, but that one was too big a risk.' See also [ ]. • Two entitled 'Memo to File,' one 'Memorandum,' and one 'Memorandum for Record,' see here for versions at the website.

• Dobbs, Michael; Howard Kurtz (September 14, 2004).. The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-14. • Ross, Brian; Howard Rosenberg (September 14, 2004).. Retrieved 2008-03-14. Associated Press. January 10, 2005.

Retrieved 2008-03-14.: 'Boccardi and Thornburgh found that Mapes had said the documents were authenticated, when in fact she had found only one expert to vouch for only one signature in the memo.' • Including Peter Tytell and Thomas Phinney, as well as a Joseph Newcomer, a man with 35 years of computer font technology experience. See: Last, Jonathan.. Retrieved 2008-03-10. The Weekly Standard, January 11, 2005, and Cohen, Sandee.

2007-09-27 at the., creativepro.com, September 23, 2004. • Also, Bill Flynn, 'one of country's top authorities on document authentication.' September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-18. And document expert Sandra Ramsey Lines: 'I'm virtually certain these were computer generated,'. September 10, 2004.

Retrieved 2008-03-12. CBS News, September 10, 2004 • 'Because the memos were copies, Matley said in a recent interview, 'there's no way that I, as a document expert, can authenticate them.' The Washington Post. September 19, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-12. The Washington Post, September 18, 2004. Marcel Matley was one of the four document examiners originally retained by CBS to examine the Killian documents.

• Dave Moniz; Kevin Johnson; Jim Drinkard (September 21, 2004).. Retrieved 2008-03-18. • TB report, p. • TB report, p. 137: 'This statement was without factual support.It is without question, however, that Matley [the expert referenced] did not authenticate any of the documents in question.' • ^ Memmot, Mark (September 21, 2004).. Retrieved 2008-03-21.

September 20, 2005. Retrieved 2017-01-17. September 22, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20. Retrieved 2005-12-21. The Hollywood Reporter. October 16, 2015.

Retrieved September 26, 2016. • Burkett, Bill.. Archived from on June 9, 2008. Retrieved 2012-05-11. Archived copy from archive.org of story originally from onlinejournal.com, March 19, 2003. • See Ripley, Amanda (September 13, 2004).. Time Magazine.

Retrieved 2008-03-25. And Dobbs, Michael (September 12, 2004).. The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-25. • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, p. • Moniz, Dave; Drinkard, Jim; Kevin Johnson (September 21, 2004).. Retrieved 2008-03-13.

• Bill Burkett (March 19, 2003).. Online Journal. Archived from on February 10, 2006. Retrieved 2006-03-20. • Michael Rezendes (February 13, 2004).. Boston Globe online. Retrieved 2005-12-20.

• Robinson, Walter V. (December 11, 2005).. The Boston Globe.

Retrieved 2008-03-13. • Johnson, Kevin; Moniz, Dave; Jim Drinkard (September 20, 2004)..

Retrieved 2008-03-14. • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp.

60–62 • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp. 64–65 • Dave Moniz; Kevin Johnson; Jim Drinkard (September 21, 2004)..

Retrieved 2008-03-14. September 8, 2004.

Retrieved 2008-03-14. • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp.

90–91 • Carl Cameron; et al. (September 22, 2004).. Retrieved 2008-03-14. Retrieved 2006-03-17. Retrieved 2006-03-17. Retrieved 2006-03-17. Retrieved 2006-03-17.

• Moniz, Dave; Drinkard, Jim (2004-09-09).. Retrieved 2008-03-17. Retrieved 2006-03-17.

• ^ Dave Moniz; Kevin Johnson; Jim Drinkard (September 21, 2004).. Retrieved 2005-12-20. CBS News, Associated Press. September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2005-12-20.

• Thornburgh-Boccardi report, p.88 • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, p. • Michael Dobbs; Mike Allen (September 9, 2004).. Washington Post. Retrieved 2004-12-20.

• Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg 103 • Ralph Blumenthal; Jim Rutenberg (September 12, 2004).. New York Times. Retrieved 2005-12-20. Registration required. • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg 12 • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp 84–86 • ^ Howard Kurtz; Michael Dobbs; James V.

Grimaldi (September 19, 2004).. The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-17. • ^ CBS/AP (September 15, 2004).. Retrieved 2008-03-17. • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, p.

86 • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp 98–99 • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg 101 • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp. 108–110 • (PDF). Retrieved 2010-05-24. • David Folkenflik (September 13, 2004).. The Baltimore Sun. Retrieved 2008-03-17.

• Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pp. 128–129 • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg.

130 • (2004-09-20).. Washington Post. • ^ Wallsten, Peter (September 18, 2004).. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved July 11, 2015. • ^ Baxter, Tom (September 19, 2004)..

Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Archived from on September 3, 2005. • Wallsten, Peter (September 18, 2004).. The Seattle Times. Archived from on August 9, 2007. Retrieved 2008-03-17. • Grossman, Lev (December 19, 2004)..

Time Magazine. Retrieved 2008-03-18.

• Hayes, Stephen F. (September 9, 2004).. The Weekly Standard. Retrieved 2008-03-18. • Boehlert, Eric (September 10, 2004)..

Retrieved 2008-03-18. • Jim Geraghty (September 10, 2004).. National Review Online. Retrieved 2008-03-18. • Wallsten, Peter.

'No disputing it, blogs are major players.' LA Times, September 12, 2004. 'My Microsoft Word version, typed in 2004, is an exact match for the documents trumpeted by CBS News as ‘authentic,’ ' Johnson wrote, posting images of his creation and the CBS document.' September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-19.

September 9, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20. • Rosen, James (September 10, 2004).. Retrieved 2008-03-25.

• Roger Aronoff (4 November 2005),, retrieved 14 February 2017 •.. Retrieved 10 February 2017.

Jim Hoft, Proprietor of Gateway Pundit • ^ Michael Dobbs; Mike Allen (September 10, 2004).. The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-18. September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-18. • Moore, Art (September 9, 2004).. Retrieved 2008-03-18.

September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2007-03-20.

• Seelye, Katharine Q.; Rutenberg, Jim (September 10, 2004).. The New York Times.

Retrieved 2008-03-18. Associated Press. September 10, 2004. Retrieved March 19, 2008. • Slover, Pete (September 11, 2004).. Dallas Morning News.

Archived from on September 12, 2005. Retrieved March 24, 2008. Also published this story as '.' The archived DallasNews.com article requires to be disabled to work; a permalinked version of the link with all scripts disabled is. • Kurtz, Howard (September 11, 2004).. The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-25.

September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-12. September 10, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.

January 11, 2005. Retrieved 2006-03-20. • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg 174 • Last, Jonathan (September 27, 2004).. The Weekly Standard. Retrieved 2008-03-20.

Buku Tata Bahasa Indonesia Pdf Reader. September 11, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20. • Latour, Francie; Rezendes, Michael (September 11, 2004)..

San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 2006-03-20. • • • Latour, Francie; Rezendes, Michael (September 11, 2004)..

The Boston Globe. Retrieved 2007-03-25.

The Boston Globe, September 15, 2004. September 15, 2004. Archived from on June 19, 2006.

Retrieved 2007-03-25. September 13, 2004.

Retrieved 2006-03-20. • Kevin Drum (September 10, 2004)..

Washington Monthly. Retrieved 2017-01-17. • Emery, Noemie (September 21, 2004).. The Weekly Standard. Retrieved 2008-03-24. September 15, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.

September 15, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20. September 15, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.

• • Crowe, Robert; Mason, Julie (September 15, 2004),, Houston Chronicle, p. A7, from the original on September 15, 2004 • Balleza, Maureen; Zernike, Kate (September 15, 2004).. The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-03-24. • Slover, Pete.. Dallas Morning News.

Archived from on September 18, 2004. The archived link works only with JavaScript disabled in the browser; a version with all scripts disabled is.

The Weekly Standard. September 27, 2004. Retrieved 2008-03-24. • Taranto, James (September 15, 2004).. The Wall Street Journal Online. Retrieved 2008-03-15. • Kurtz, Howard (September 16, 2004)..

The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-25. • Hagan, Joe (February 27, 2005).. The New York Observer.

Retrieved 2008-03-24. Retrieved 2010-05-24. • Dobbs, Michael (September 15, 2004).. The Washington Post. Retrieved 2006-03-20.

• Jarrett Murphy (February 11, 2009).. Retrieved 2011-07-27. • Rutenberg, Jim; Prendergast, Mark J. (September 20, 2004).. The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-03-25. September 20, 2004.

Retrieved 2006-03-20. •, Washington Post, Tuesday, January 11, 2005. •, The Weekly Standard, Jan 10, 2005. September 22, 2004. Retrieved 2006-03-20.

• Hagen, Joe (March 13, 2005).. The New York Observer. Retrieved 2008-03-24.

• Dick Thornburgh and Louis D. CBS News: January 5, 2005 • ^ Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg. 175 • Battaglio, Stephen. 'The Blunder Years',, November 1, 2010, Pages 20-21 • Jacques Steinberg (February 26, 2005). '2 Involved in Flawed Report at CBS Resign'. The New York Times.

Associated Press. March 25, 2005. Retrieved 2006-03-20.

March 9, 2005. Archived from on May 17, 2008. Retrieved 2007-03-23. • Carter, Bill (January 11, 2005).. The New York Times.

Retrieved 2008-03-24. • Zernike, Kate (2004-09-25)..

The New York Times. Retrieved 2007-09-20.

• Mapes, Mary (November 11, 2005).. The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-03-25. • Mapes, Mary (2007-09-20).. The Huffington Post. Retrieved 2008-01-22.

• Baker, Mike (2006-11-07).. Associated Press. Retrieved 2006-11-10.

The News & Observer. Retrieved 2006-11-09. Associated Press. September 20, 2007.

Retrieved 2008-03-24. • A PDF copy of the suit can be found on. • Gilette, Felix (January 23, 2008).. The New York Observer.

Retrieved 2008-03-24. • October 2, 2009, at the. • Kurtz, Howard Washington Post'.' Retrieved April 2006. Retrieved 2005-12-21.

• David Hailey (August 2006). Retrieved 20 April 2015.

• Phinney, Thomas (3 August 2006).. The Typekit Blog.

Retrieved 20 April 2015. • Thornburgh-Boccardi report, pg.

62 • Thornburgh-Boccardi Report, pg. 211 •, January 11, 2005; Page A01, • Thornburgh-Boccardi Report, pg.

221 • Noelle Straub (September 11, 2004). 'CBS; Guard memos are authentic; Dems rip Bush's service'. The Boston Herald. • Robert Sam Anson (September 20, 2004).

'Who Is Buckhead? Kerry Assaulter Seemed Prepped'. New York Observer.

Via Lexis/Nexis • Matthew Continetti (October 4, 2004). 'The Case of the Phony Memos'. The Weekly Standard. Via Lexis/Nexis • Stephen Dinan; Bill Sammon (September 22, 2004)..

The Washington Times. Retrieved 2006-03-20. • ^ Brooks, Paul (February 22, 2005)... The Washington Times. September 22, 2004.

Retrieved 2005-12-21. • Kasindorf, Martin; Benedetto, Richard (September 21, 2004).. Retrieved 2005-12-21.

• Toobin, Jeffrey (June 2, 2008).. The New Yorker. Retrieved 2008-06-14.

External links [ ] Killian documents PDF files [ ] These are the Killian documents supplied to CBS Reports by Bill Burkett: • (CBS News) • (CBS News) • (CBS News) • (CBS News) • (USA Today, six memos in one.pdf file) Bush documents from the TexANG archives [ ] Page 31 is a 3 November 1970 memo from the office of Lt Col Killian on promotion of Lt Bush: • (USA Today) 60 Minutes II, September 8 transcript [ ] • Dan Rather interviews Marion Carr Knox - September 15, 2004 [ ] • YouTube Statements of the CBS document examiners [ ] • • • • The Thornburgh-Boccardi Report [ ] • (PDF). Retrieved 2006-03-18. January 10, 2005. Retrieved 2006-03-18. Document analysis [ ] • — The Washington Post, September 14, 2004 • The Washington Post, September 18, 2004 • The Washington Post, September 19, 2004 • •, response by Joseph Newcomer •, analysis by Richard Polt Overview Timeline at USA Today [ ] • — timeline from USA Today — September 21, 2004 Further reading [ ] • Truth and Duty: The Press, the President, and the Privilege of Power ( ), by Mary Mapes, November 2005, St.

Martin's Press, In other media [ ] •, 2015 movie starring Cate Blanchett and Robert Redford, whose story is based on the Mapes book above about this controversy.