Viet Nam Free-for-All Continues
Reported by Eleanor - September 10, 2004 -
Special Report with Jim Angle substituting for Brit Hume (Sept. 10, 6:00 p.m.) covered the Bush National Guard document flap three times. Major Garrett reported on the controversy; William Campenni was interviewed as the military expert; and it was a topic for the panel discussion.
Major Garrett reported that CBS called the documents legitimate, and democrats kept up the attack. The White House said they don't know if the documents are fabricated or authentic, but that doesn't change the fact that the president met his obligation. Officers did not type memos telling other officers to take physicals. These physicals were performed the last day of one's birth date, that for Bush was July 31. They have three months to get the physical. The memo was dated May 14. No one issues an order that early. The son of the officer said his dad didn't type the memo. It would have taken too much effort. CBS stands by the thoroughness and accuracy of the documents. Terry McAuliffe said George Bush was lying. Tom Harkin said there are serious questions about 1972-73 when he wasn't on duty. Garrett reported that this should have ended long ago. And the ending comment was about seeing CBS squirm.
William Campenni, military commander at the time of Bush's service, was asked about the format, date and phrasing of the memo. He said the typewriters with superscript had special balls inside them, but that kind of typewriter was not in the office areas. He said that Staudt who was mentioned in the memo had already retired. The wrong acronym was used for an officer efficiency course. Angle asked him about the "whispering campaign" concerning not taking the physical because of drug use. Campenni responded that a drug test was command directed and not part of a routine physical.
The panel discussion on this topic was heated. Mort Kondracke said it would take a forensic expert to defend the documents, and it's one expert against another. Although available, access to a sophisticated typewriter was not apparent. This requires further investigation. Fred Barnes stated that CBS didn't come close to dealing with this issue. Such a typewriter existed, so it's conceivable, but the experts must come forward to show that Killian had one. Juan Williams reiterated that superscript typewriters were available, and experts have said that the documents are genuine. Williams referenced the military documents supporting Kerry that weren't challenged, so why are the Bush documents being challenged? Barnes called this "dirty business," and we are investigating to find out the truth. Williams said that the focus is on the wrong item. Whether or not Bush showed up for service is the issue. Angle said that Bush is begging the Pentagon to find the missing items. Williams replied that we need the entire record.
Kondracke then said that being a Swift Boat commander does not qualify Kerry to be commander-in-chief, and Bush's lack of fighting doesn't make him unqualified. Williams, very forcefully, stated that putting oneself in the line of fire does add to credibility. He risked his life. It takes character to put oneself at risk.
Comment: Except for a few comments by Juan Williams, this report was heavily weighted in favor of Bush. Obviously, the Viet Nam free-for-all will continue, and this story is not being covered the same way as the Swift Boat story. With the total focus on the documents, the issue of Bush's service, or lack of service, is completely buried, while we discuss fonts, superscripts and missing typewriters. Talk about leadership. Any chance that the media will engage in any kind of real investigative journalism, or explore any substantive campaign issues before the election will not happen unless people demand it, and that won't happen any time soon. Are there any grownups out there, on or off the tube? You would think not considering that we put up with this.
