Just a little bone to chew on...

[Jackpine Radical]

Juxtapose the following facts:
1) The White House saw the documents at least 3 hours before the CBS story ran & did not cry "Forgery" or in any other way suggest that there might be problems with them.
2) MacDougald popped out his forgery charges within less than 2 hours of the CBS broadcast.
3) He apparently did so without access to even faxed or Xerox copies of the memos.
4) His actual points of criticism--the superscript "th," the Times New Roman font, etc.--don't hold water as evidence that they were created with a modern-style word processor.
5) The documents may be exposed as forgeries anyway--not on the grounds cited by MacDougald, but due to unrelated issues of provenance.

Is there an organizing principle or theory that makes sense of these disparate bits and pieces?

Is there one that does so without bringing in the name of Karl Rove?

[NewYorkerfromMass]

1. Valid points all, but

let's see what Rather throws out tonight to chew on.

[Qutzupalotl]

2. Simplest explanation here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=841272

Killian typed these memos in case the ones Knox typed were lifted. (They were.)

This explains why...
-the letters rise and fall individually, like a typewriter and not a computer.
-the letters are slightly different from one another, like a typewriter and not a computer.
-the signature is genuine
-the facts and sentiments are genuine
-Knox said she typed similar memos, but not these
-rumors of forgery started by right-wing hack with no typography experience
-White House doesn't deny contents, but carefully implies forgery

Remember that a forger would have to know that 1972 typewriters could do superscripts and proportional spacing. How many people knew that two months ago?

[DemBones DemBones]

3. All worth thinking about. People need to think more,

wait for this to play out.