Bush AWOL: Something reeks

What's next?  Inviting Kenneth Starr to be the chief counsel for a Congressional investigation?

I'm referring of course to the stink the Republicans are kicking up over documents relating to Bush's failing to do his National Guard duty.

GOP slams CBS on Bush memos CBSNews.com 09/15/04

Congressional Republicans turned the high heat on CBS News, charging that last week's revelations about Lt. George Bush, which aired on 60 Minutes, were based on fake documents and demanding that 60 Minutes and Dan Rather retract the story.

"It's very clear the documents were forged. They were laid on him [Dan Rather] and this time he bit," said Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah. (my emphasis)

Gee, CBS didn't need to hire consultants to examine the documents.  All they needed to do was call Sen. Robert Bennett!  I hope Democratic staffers are keeping a file on statements like this.  If there really is a McCarthy-style Congressional investigation of this, it will be interesting to hear Sen. Bennett explain under oath just how he knew this on September 15.

Is it just me?  Or is there something here that smells like the Republican sleaze machine that went after Bill Clinton relentlessly throughout his Presidency?  Obviously, Congressional Republicans that don't care about Bush administration officials outing a CIA agent for cheap political payback to one of their critics certainly don't think the Republic is in danger over the technical verification of documents relating to Bush's failing to do his National Guard duty.

The article linked above also provides links to pdf files of two letters from CBS' document examiners.  (Full disclosure:  I have not checked to see if the proportional spacing on them was consistent with word-processing software commonly available this week.)

Marcel Matley Re: Killian Signatures 09/14/04
Professional Opinion of James J. Pierce 09/14/04

Matley's opinion states that he "found nothing about the documents that could disprove their authenticity."

Pierce's opinion says:

In regard to the balance of the typed-written photocopied questioned documents, the same typed-face designs are strongly similar to corresponding samples that indicate the same typed-face existed prior to the date in question on the photocopied documents.

In my professional opinion, with what I know and have examined based on the photocopied questioned documents, the documents in question are authentic.

The Republican zealots seem to want a spectacle where they grill Dan Rather and these two document experts and berate them before the cameras just like Tail Gunner Joe used to do.  (That was Joseph McCarthy's nickname.)  Maybe they can bring in Bill "SHUT UP!" O'Reilley to do some of the questioning.

CBS also released a new statement (*.pdf file) on the story, whose focus is Bush's failing to do his National Guard duty.  In it, they discuss the expert opinions they employ, which all but the most Bircher-minded conspiracy theorist would have to say shows at a minimum they made a serious effort to vet the documents for authenticity.  CBS' summary:

The editorial content of the report was not based solely on the physical documents, but also on numerous credible sources who supported what the documents said.

Through all of the frenzied debate of the past week, the basic content of the 60 MINUTES Wednesday report – that President Bush received preferential treatment to gain entrance to the Texas Air National Guard and that he may not have fulfilled all of the requirements -- has not been substantially challenged. (my emphasis)