ABC news just reported on the 6 PM news that 2 document analysts who were
employed by CBS told CBS before the program aired that the documents had
numerous problems and could not be authenticated. They interviewed the
analysts, one saying she e-mailed CBS the night before the broadcast warning
them that if they went on the air with those documents, by Thursday morning
they would be getting the same questions from hundreds of document analysts
that she raised. One expert CBS quoted on Friday now says he could not
authenticate any documents. He only looked at the signature.

ABC also produced a typewriter expert who said that the IBM Selectric
Composer (the most advanced typewriter at the time) could not produce those
documents.

The bloggers are now calling for Congressional hearings to find the source
for the docs and determine if CBS is guilty of election altering fraud
attempts. At this point, since CBS is not forthcoming, I think
congressional hearings are in order. I have not heard anyone speculate that
any sort of criminal investigation is underway, so I can think of no other
body to take the lead on this.

ScottW

In related news, Texans for Truth is now offering a $50,000 award to anyone
who can prove that Bush reported to service between May 1972 and May 1973.
Does anyone actually think that he was there during that time? I sure as
hell don't. And to be honest, I don't really care! What happened 35 years
ago means nothing!

http://texansfortruth.com/



"ScottW" wrote in message
news:QdN1d.90376$yh.74553@fed1read05...
ABC news just reported on the 6 PM news that 2 document analysts who were
employed by CBS told CBS before the program aired that the documents had
numerous problems and could not be authenticated. They interviewed the
analysts, one saying she e-mailed CBS the night before the broadcast
warning
them that if they went on the air with those documents, by Thursday
morning
they would be getting the same questions from hundreds of document
analysts
that she raised. One expert CBS quoted on Friday now says he could not
authenticate any documents. He only looked at the signature.

ABC also produced a typewriter expert who said that the IBM Selectric
Composer (the most advanced typewriter at the time) could not produce
those
documents.

The bloggers are now calling for Congressional hearings to find the source
for the docs and determine if CBS is guilty of election altering fraud
attempts. At this point, since CBS is not forthcoming, I think
congressional hearings are in order. I have not heard anyone speculate
that
any sort of criminal investigation is underway, so I can think of no other
body to take the lead on this.

ScottW

"Greg Williams" wrote in message
...
And to be honest, I don't really care! What happened 35 years
ago means nothing!


I couldn't agree more. But I do care about a major broadcast (public
airways) network engaging in potentially election altering fraud right now.

ScottW

From: "Greg Williams"

Does anyone actually think that he was there during that time? I sure as
hell don't. And to be honest, I don't really care! What happened 35 years
ago means nothing!

http://texansfortruth.com/

Does it matter if he continues to lie about it today?

"Annika1980" wrote in message
...
From: "Greg Williams"

Does anyone actually think that he was there during that time? I sure as
hell don't. And to be honest, I don't really care! What happened 35
years
ago means nothing!

http://texansfortruth.com/

Does it matter if he continues to lie about it today?



What lie would that be? He's said he served and got an honorable discharge.

In article QdN1d.90376$yh.74553@fed1read05,
"ScottW" wrote:

ABC news just reported on the 6 PM news that 2 document analysts who were
employed by CBS told CBS before the program aired that the documents had
numerous problems and could not be authenticated. They interviewed the
analysts, one saying she e-mailed CBS the night before the broadcast warning
them that if they went on the air with those documents, by Thursday morning
they would be getting the same questions from hundreds of document analysts
that she raised. One expert CBS quoted on Friday now says he could not
authenticate any documents. He only looked at the signature.

ABC also produced a typewriter expert who said that the IBM Selectric
Composer (the most advanced typewriter at the time) could not produce those
documents.

The bloggers are now calling for Congressional hearings to find the source
for the docs and determine if CBS is guilty of election altering fraud
attempts. At this point, since CBS is not forthcoming, I think
congressional hearings are in order. I have not heard anyone speculate that
any sort of criminal investigation is underway, so I can think of no other
body to take the lead on this.

I only saw the last half of the ABC report, but it looks like CBS has
blown it.

The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting, or do they want a Swift vets
investigation too?

We've already seen the absurdity of Robert Novak calling on CBS to
reveal its sources.

Stephen

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction if it
gores my ox.

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction if it
gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.

Why forge something with accurate content?

Bloggers over-react. That's the nature of blogging.

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction
if it gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.

Typical obfuscation of the main topic and far more relevant fact:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/I..._040914-1.html
Emily Will, a veteran document examiner from North Carolina, told ABC News
she saw problems right away with the one document CBS hired her to check the
weekend before the broadcast.

"I found five significant differences in the questioned handwriting, and I
found problems with the printing itself as to whether it could have been
produced by a typewriter," she said.

Will says she sent the CBS producer an e-mail message about her concerns and
strongly urged the network the night before the broadcast not to use the
documents.

"I told them that all the questions I was asking them on Tuesday night, they
were going to be asked by hundreds of other document examiners on Thursday
if they ran that story," Will said.

But the documents became a key part of the 60 Minutes II broadcast
questioning President Bush's National Guard service in 1972. CBS made no
mention that any expert disputed the authenticity.

"I did not feel that they wanted to investigate it very deeply," Will told
ABC News.

---------------------

Why forge something with accurate content?

Why obfuscate the fact that the main topic of the ABC report was far more
damning to the objectivity and reliabilty of CBS news?

Bloggers over-react. That's the nature of blogging.

Obfuscators and those who deceive themselves obfuscate and deceive
themselves. That's their nature!

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction
if it gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.

Typical obfuscation of the main topic and far more relevant fact:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/I...ments_040914-1
.html

I saw the complete report this morning, thanks. The Dallas Morning News
tracked down Killian's typist. I may take the trouble of registering
with their website to read more. I'll bet the story is linked somewhere
out there in blogland.

Actually, arguing about this stuff obfuscates the greater issue of
Bush's National Guard service, which itself is a lesser issue than his
presidential record.

Why forge something with accurate content?

Why obfuscate the fact that the main topic of the ABC report was far more
damning to the objectivity and reliabilty of CBS news?

I've already acknowledged CBS's foul-up.

Bloggers over-react. That's the nature of blogging.

Obfuscators and those who deceive themselves obfuscate and deceive
themselves. That's their nature!

Do tell.

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction if it
gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.


The forged document dontains a forged Killian signature. It was not
what Killian was thinking

Why forge something with accurate content?


It wasn't accurate content. The reason to forge a document
with 'that' content was because no real document with
'that' content exists.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction if
it
gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.


The forged document dontains a forged Killian signature. It was not
what Killian was thinking

Why forge something with accurate content?


It wasn't accurate content. The reason to forge a document
with 'that' content was because no real document with
'that' content exists.


Bingo!

CBS is trotting out the former secretary to Killian who says that she
believes the memos are forged as well, but that they reflect his thinking at
the time.

IOW CBS is staking their credibility on hearsay.

In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction if it
gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.


The forged document dontains a forged Killian signature. It was not
what Killian was thinking

Separate the memo from the man. She said what Killian was thinking. She
also says she didn't type them.

Why forge something with accurate content?


It wasn't accurate content. The reason to forge a document
with 'that' content was because no real document with
'that' content exists.

Wait and see.

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...

We've already seen the absurdity of Robert Novak calling on CBS to
reveal its sources.


What is wrong with that? They duped and used CBS. I don't
see why CBS is beholden to them to protect their identity.
Those preps are hoaxters and frauds. Sure, if it were a
legitimate source, CBS should fight to withold the id.
But the clown who is the CBS source gave up rights to
protection by perpetrading a fraud upon CBS.

Clyde 'while Fester's still around, just call me' Slick wrote:

Those preps are hoaxters and frauds. Sure, if it were a
legitimate source, CBS should fight to withold the id.
But the clown who is the CBS source gave up rights to
protection by perpetrading a fraud upon CBS.

Something extraordinarily fishy about this whole episode.
They were obvious blatant forgeries too easily discredited.
Normally, you'd wonder who this would help, but first
consider who this hurts ... obviously Kerry, with Bush
merely being an incidental beneficiary. Now, who this
really helps is the Clintons, both in unchallenged continuing
control of the Democratic party, and particularly Hillary's
presumptive bid for the presidency in 2008. Yep, this has
all the earmarks of being hatched from the diabolical minds
of Begala and Carville.


GeoSynch

"GeoSynch" wrote in message
k.net...
Clyde 'while Fester's still around, just call me' Slick wrote:

Those preps are hoaxters and frauds. Sure, if it were a
legitimate source, CBS should fight to withold the id.
But the clown who is the CBS source gave up rights to
protection by perpetrading a fraud upon CBS.

Something extraordinarily fishy about this whole episode.
They were obvious blatant forgeries too easily discredited.
Normally, you'd wonder who this would help, but first
consider who this hurts ... obviously Kerry, with Bush
merely being an incidental beneficiary. Now, who this
really helps is the Clintons, both in unchallenged continuing
control of the Democratic party, and particularly Hillary's
presumptive bid for the presidency in 2008. Yep, this has
all the earmarks of being hatched from the diabolical minds
of Begala and Carville.

Wouldn't that be great to see revealed. The serpent slain.

ScottW

ScottW wrote:

[T]his has all the earmarks of being hatched from the diabolical
minds of Begala and Carville.

Wouldn't that be great to see revealed. The serpent slain.

Nah, that'd be no fun at all.

That slippery snake is too clever to have himself directly or
indirectly linked to the chain of events. Also, the 2008 race
would be a bore without that beady-eyed psycho-snake
making political mischief and giving the Republicans fits.


GeoSynch

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 04:32:39 GMT, "GeoSynch"
wrote:

Clyde 'while Fester's still around, just call me' Slick wrote:

Those preps are hoaxters and frauds. Sure, if it were a
legitimate source, CBS should fight to withold the id.
But the clown who is the CBS source gave up rights to
protection by perpetrading a fraud upon CBS.

Something extraordinarily fishy about this whole episode.
They were obvious blatant forgeries too easily discredited.
Normally, you'd wonder who this would help, but first
consider who this hurts ... obviously Kerry, with Bush
merely being an incidental beneficiary. Now, who this
really helps is the Clintons, both in unchallenged continuing
control of the Democratic party, and particularly Hillary's
presumptive bid for the presidency in 2008. Yep, this has
all the earmarks of being hatched from the diabolical minds
of Begala and Carville.


GeoSynch

Actually it strikes me more likely that it might come from the mind of
the great political trickster, Karl Rove. Do you really think that
Begala and Carville would sabotage a four year Democratic term just to
help Hillary? If so, I think you need to step back and think
logically. Giving the Repbulicans four more years is in no way helpful
to either Senator Clinton *nor* the Democratic Party platform
(especially when you consider the possibility of another couple of
Supreme Court justice appointments).

No, the more likely source would be Rove and *his* ilk. That's what's
fishy to me, *if* they are forgeries, which isn't yet proven. What's
bizarre is CBS' gullibility if this ends up being the case.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 04:32:39 GMT, "GeoSynch"
wrote:

Clyde 'while Fester's still around, just call me' Slick wrote:

Those preps are hoaxters and frauds. Sure, if it were a
legitimate source, CBS should fight to withold the id.
But the clown who is the CBS source gave up rights to
protection by perpetrading a fraud upon CBS.

Something extraordinarily fishy about this whole episode.
They were obvious blatant forgeries too easily discredited.
Normally, you'd wonder who this would help, but first
consider who this hurts ... obviously Kerry, with Bush
merely being an incidental beneficiary. Now, who this
really helps is the Clintons, both in unchallenged continuing
control of the Democratic party, and particularly Hillary's
presumptive bid for the presidency in 2008. Yep, this has
all the earmarks of being hatched from the diabolical minds
of Begala and Carville.


GeoSynch

Actually it strikes me more likely that it might come from the mind of
the great political trickster, Karl Rove. Do you really think that
Begala and Carville would sabotage a four year Democratic term just to
help Hillary? If so, I think you need to step back and think
logically. Giving the Repbulicans four more years is in no way helpful
to either Senator Clinton *nor* the Democratic Party platform
(especially when you consider the possibility of another couple of
Supreme Court justice appointments).

No, the more likely source would be Rove and *his* ilk. That's what's
fishy to me, *if* they are forgeries, which isn't yet proven. What's
bizarre is CBS' gullibility if this ends up being the case.


Dave, if it came from Rove, it is a very, very dumb move.
A 'smart' Democrat would not have released it to
60 minutes, "at least" not yet. Better to hold onto it
and not leak it until the day before the election,
when the Republicans would not have time to counter it.
I think Rove would have thought that the Democrats
might do that, so, sensing it could easily backfire
against the Reps, Rove would instigate this.
I'm not saying he's ethical, I'm just saying he
is to smart to do something so dangerous that
could easily backfire on him.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 04:32:39 GMT, "GeoSynch"
wrote:

Clyde 'while Fester's still around, just call me' Slick wrote:

Those preps are hoaxters and frauds. Sure, if it were a
legitimate source, CBS should fight to withold the id.
But the clown who is the CBS source gave up rights to
protection by perpetrading a fraud upon CBS.

Something extraordinarily fishy about this whole episode.
They were obvious blatant forgeries too easily discredited.
Normally, you'd wonder who this would help, but first
consider who this hurts ... obviously Kerry, with Bush
merely being an incidental beneficiary. Now, who this
really helps is the Clintons, both in unchallenged continuing
control of the Democratic party, and particularly Hillary's
presumptive bid for the presidency in 2008. Yep, this has
all the earmarks of being hatched from the diabolical minds
of Begala and Carville.


GeoSynch

Actually it strikes me more likely that it might come from the mind of
the great political trickster, Karl Rove.

Based on what evidence?

Do you really think that
Begala and Carville would sabotage a four year Democratic term just to
help Hillary?

Abso-****ing-lutely.

If so, I think you need to step back and think
logically.

Irony?

Giving the Repbulicans four more years is in no way helpful
to either Senator Clinton *nor* the Democratic Party platform

Of course it is. The odds of winning the White House for the same party
after having one of their own in for 2 terms are very slim.

(especially when you consider the possibility of another couple of
Supreme Court justice appointments).

No, the more likely source would be Rove and *his* ilk. That's what's
fishy to me, *if* they are forgeries, which isn't yet proven. What's
bizarre is CBS' gullibility if this ends up being the case.

What's bizarre is your paranoia.

dave weil wrote:

Something extraordinarily fishy about this whole episode.
They were obvious blatant forgeries too easily discredited.
Normally, you'd wonder who this would help, but first
consider who this hurts ... obviously Kerry, with Bush
merely being an incidental beneficiary. Now, who this
really helps is the Clintons, both in unchallenged continuing
control of the Democratic party, and particularly Hillary's
presumptive bid for the presidency in 2008. Yep, this has
all the earmarks of being hatched from the diabolical minds
of Begala and Carville.

Actually it strikes me more likely that it might come from the mind of
the great political trickster, Karl Rove.

Radioactive risk for chump-change reward? Not likely.

Do you really think that Begala and Carville would sabotage
a four year Democratic term just to help Hillary?

Yes, they would ... and in a New York minute.

If so, I think you need to step back and think logically.
Giving the Repbulicans four more years is in no way helpful
to either Senator Clinton *nor* the Democratic Party platform
(especially when you consider the possibility of another couple of
Supreme Court justice appointments).

Don't be so disingenuous, Dave. Hillary's (or Bill's) ambitions would
trump party loyalty every time. Their ambitions know no bounds, just ask
long-time acquaintances like Web Hubbell or, if you could, Vince Foster.

BTW, the smartest thing Kerry ever did was NOT selecting Hillary for
the VP slot, because if he did and he went on to win the presidency,
he'd know his life wouldn't be worth a plugged nickel.

No, the more likely source would be Rove and *his* ilk. That's what's
fishy to me, *if* they are forgeries, which isn't yet proven.

Come off it, Dave. Even their liberal media brethren, like the Washington
Post and ABC News, have concluded the documents are forgeries.

What's bizarre is CBS' gullibility if this ends up being the case.

A good "mark", by definition, is one eager to be conned. And ever since
old man Bush gave Dan his come-uppance many years ago in a live
interview, Rather has been *seething* for revenge.


GeoSynch

In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...

We've already seen the absurdity of Robert Novak calling on CBS to
reveal its sources.


What is wrong with that?

Novak refused to identify the source he used to expose Valerie Plame.

They duped and used CBS. I don't
see why CBS is beholden to them to protect their identity.
Those preps are hoaxters and frauds. Sure, if it were a
legitimate source, CBS should fight to withold the id.
But the clown who is the CBS source gave up rights to
protection by perpetrading a fraud upon CBS.

I want to know who burned CBS, too.

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...

We've already seen the absurdity of Robert Novak calling on CBS to
reveal its sources.


What is wrong with that?

Novak refused to identify the source he used to expose Valerie Plame.


Being that he wasn't defrauded by the source, he should keep
his source confidential.

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...

We've already seen the absurdity of Robert Novak calling on CBS to
reveal its sources.


What is wrong with that?

Novak refused to identify the source he used to expose Valerie Plame.

They duped and used CBS. I don't
see why CBS is beholden to them to protect their identity.
Those preps are hoaxters and frauds. Sure, if it were a
legitimate source, CBS should fight to withold the id.
But the clown who is the CBS source gave up rights to
protection by perpetrading a fraud upon CBS.

I want to know who burned CBS, too.

They burned themselves by being so eager to attack Bush.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...

We've already seen the absurdity of Robert Novak calling on CBS to
reveal its sources.


What is wrong with that? They duped and used CBS. I don't
see why CBS is beholden to them to protect their identity.
Those preps are hoaxters and frauds. Sure, if it were a
legitimate source, CBS should fight to withold the id.
But the clown who is the CBS source gave up rights to
protection by perpetrading a fraud upon CBS.

I think it's far more likely to be from the Kerry campaign than some plot by
Karl Rove.

"ScottW" wrote in message
news:QdN1d.90376$yh.74553@fed1read05

ABC news just reported on the 6 PM news that 2 document analysts who
were employed by CBS told CBS before the program aired that the
documents had numerous problems and could not be authenticated.

Also posted at:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/polit...Noted_Now.html

which points to:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/I..._040914-1.html

"ScottW" wrote in message
news:QdN1d.90376$yh.74553@fed1read05...
ABC news just reported on the 6 PM news that 2 document analysts who were
employed by CBS told CBS before the program aired that the documents had
numerous problems and could not be authenticated. They interviewed the
analysts, one saying she e-mailed CBS the night before the broadcast
warning
them that if they went on the air with those documents, by Thursday
morning
they would be getting the same questions from hundreds of document
analysts
that she raised. One expert CBS quoted on Friday now says he could not
authenticate any documents. He only looked at the signature.

ABC also produced a typewriter expert who said that the IBM Selectric
Composer (the most advanced typewriter at the time) could not produce
those
documents.

The bloggers are now calling for Congressional hearings to find the source
for the docs and determine if CBS is guilty of election altering fraud
attempts. At this point, since CBS is not forthcoming, I think
congressional hearings are in order. I have not heard anyone speculate
that
any sort of criminal investigation is underway, so I can think of no other
body to take the lead on this.

ScottW



I DESPISE Congressional investigations. Politicians are incapable of truth-
fully, honestly and competently investigating anything.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...



I DESPISE Congressional investigations. Politicians are incapable of
truth-
fully, honestly and competently investigating anything.

I want to see Dan Rather squirming on TV in front of a Congressional
Committee under oath. You won't get that kind of entertainment from the FBI
or some Special Investigator.

ScottW

On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 21:47:56 -0700, "ScottW"
wrote:


"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...



I DESPISE Congressional investigations. Politicians are incapable of
truth-
fully, honestly and competently investigating anything.

I want to see Dan Rather squirming on TV in front of a Congressional
Committee under oath. You won't get that kind of entertainment from the FBI
or some Special Investigator.

ScottW

If it's a Rove operation, we won't likely be seeing that any time
soon.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"ScottW" wrote in message
news:QdN1d.90376$yh.74553@fed1read05...
ABC news just reported on the 6 PM news that 2 document analysts who were
employed by CBS told CBS before the program aired that the documents had
numerous problems and could not be authenticated. They interviewed the
analysts, one saying she e-mailed CBS the night before the broadcast
warning
them that if they went on the air with those documents, by Thursday
morning
they would be getting the same questions from hundreds of document
analysts
that she raised. One expert CBS quoted on Friday now says he could not
authenticate any documents. He only looked at the signature.

ABC also produced a typewriter expert who said that the IBM Selectric
Composer (the most advanced typewriter at the time) could not produce
those
documents.

The bloggers are now calling for Congressional hearings to find the
source
for the docs and determine if CBS is guilty of election altering fraud
attempts. At this point, since CBS is not forthcoming, I think
congressional hearings are in order. I have not heard anyone speculate
that
any sort of criminal investigation is underway, so I can think of no
other
body to take the lead on this.

ScottW



I DESPISE Congressional investigations. Politicians are incapable of
truth-
fully, honestly and competently investigating anything.

The only thing worse is "Blue Ribbon Committees" where Congress abdicates
their job and passes it off to people no longer in office but just a
partisan.

On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 18:50:40 -0700, "ScottW"
wrote:


The bloggers are now calling for Congressional hearings to find the source
for the docs and determine if CBS is guilty of election altering fraud
attempts. At this point, since CBS is not forthcoming, I think
congressional hearings are in order. I have not heard anyone speculate that
any sort of criminal investigation is underway, so I can think of no other
body to take the lead on this.

This is a Karl Rove masterpiece: he'll be crowing about it
in his memoirs.

"GregP" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 18:50:40 -0700, "ScottW"
wrote:


The bloggers are now calling for Congressional hearings to find the
source
for the docs and determine if CBS is guilty of election altering fraud
attempts. At this point, since CBS is not forthcoming, I think
congressional hearings are in order. I have not heard anyone speculate
that
any sort of criminal investigation is underway, so I can think of no
other
body to take the lead on this.

This is a Karl Rove masterpiece: he'll be crowing about it
in his memoirs.



And your evidence?
What? You haven't "recreated" it yet?

"GregP" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 18:50:40 -0700, "ScottW"
wrote:


The bloggers are now calling for Congressional hearings to find the source
for the docs and determine if CBS is guilty of election altering fraud
attempts. At this point, since CBS is not forthcoming, I think
congressional hearings are in order. I have not heard anyone speculate
that
any sort of criminal investigation is underway, so I can think of no other
body to take the lead on this.

This is a Karl Rove masterpiece: he'll be crowing about it
in his memoirs.

What color is the sky in your world?

GregP wrote:

This is a Karl Rove masterpiece: he'll be crowing about it
in his memoirs.

As Zippy would be wont to say: "BWAH-HAH-HAH-HAH!!!!!!"


GeoSynch