Burkett sent them and they're authentic

End of "forgery" story and beginning (finally) of AWOL story.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/politics/campaign/15guard.html?pagewanted=print&position=

Mr. Burkett declined to return telephone calls to his home near Abilene, Tex. His lawyer, David Van Os, on Tuesday repeatedly refused to say in a telephone interview whether the officer had played a part in supplying the disputed documents to CBS. Mr. Van Os said "the real story is and should be, where was George Bush?" and that Mr. Burkett "is not the proper object of attention."

Mr. Van Os called Mr. Burkett "a man of impeccable honesty who would not permit himself to be a party to anything fake, fraudulent or phony." He also said, in response to questions, and stressing that he was speaking only hypothetically, "If Bill Burkett were to later discover that something he was a party to were fake or phony, as a man of honor who lives by a code of honor of the military, he would not permit the falsity to continue." But, the lawyer hastened to add, "This is not intended to be any kind of specific statement."

Asked what role Mr. Burkett had in raising questions about Mr. Bush's military service, Mr. Van Os said: "If, hypothetically, Bill Burkett or anyone else, any other individual, had prepared or had typed on a word processor as some of the journalists are presuming, without much evidence, if someone in the year 2004 had prepared on a word processor replicas of documents that they believed had existed in 1972 or 1973 - which Bill Burkett has absolutely not done'' - then, he continued, "what difference would it make?"

(Seinfeld)

.

Let's hope it does so again! :tost:

The memos were signed by Killian, and the signature did fool his son, at least initially. Look at this quote:
"Mr. Killian died in 1984; his widow and son have said that they did not find any memorandums among the private effects they cleared from his office after his death. Mr. Killian's son, Gary, who also served at the squadron and who initially thought that the signatures on the documents matched his father's, has come to believe they are fakes, and said he doubted Mrs. Knox's account, though he recalled her fondly."
from http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/politics/campaign/15guard.html?pagewanted=print&position=

Now that tells me that Burkett must have had access to Killian's signature. So, he likely has the originals, which he probably pulled out of the trashcan. And, as Marian Knox pointed out on 60 mins tonight, the docs appear to have been changed slightly so as to ensure that the person who gave them to CBS would not get in trouble by giving out Military records to the press without permission. THat is why Burkett copied over the originals: to somehow avoid possible legal consequences.

Now, we know from other reports tonight, that the white house is now planning to release other heretofore unreleased TANG docs from Bush's record. They are probably doing this in order to get out in front of any possible release of new records by Burkett.

I sure hope this all works out OK, but it just might not, and if it does not, then Bush will likely win. I think Burkett and Rather just might both go down on this.

The best possible scenario is that this is going to force Bush to release other docs from his record that are going to do him more damage.

the cloak and dagger stuff will have about as much effect as the debate tapes in 2000

That would explain why they differ from Knox's memos in format but not details or content. If the documents are "CYA", I know I would want backups in a secure location...away from my office.

It's certainly the simplest explanation for how a genuine signature appeared on a document typed and copied in the early 70's, containing accurate details and in the writing style and sentiments of Jerry Killian.

As Killian's secretary pointed out, the Army-style language was probably put in there to change the docs from the original.

Burkett probably forged the sigs. He probably got advice from his atty on this matter. He probably knew that as long as he did not copy the docs directly or copy them for money, he would be ok legally. But Dan Rather goes down on this. THe docs are forged, very likely. ANd Burkett did it to burn Bush, while keeping himself in the clear. But Dan Rather gets burned.

Hopefully this interesting story will catch on in the news. The best case scenario is that other tv outlets start interviewing the secretary. If she gets a lot of interviews, and there is not much other news (ie., hurricane news dies down, etc), her interviews alone could scrape a few points off of Bush's lead, in combination with Kitty Kelley.

She could mean that the lingo he used is not the way she typed official documents back then. There's no reason to be suspicious of a man in the military using military lingo. The divisions of the armed forces are not as segregated as Knox thinks. They do talk to one another from time to time, and pick up jargon.

He joined the New Mexico National Guard to avoid the draft.

So the idea he put Army terminology into forged memos doesn't hold
water.

Correction on edit: He did have a position at the New Mexico Military Academy, and worked with Fort Hood in some capacity that isn't clear from the article.

nm

eom

:kick: