The Washington Post is finally
reporting on the forgeries but for a paper that ran pretty far with the 60 minutes story on the documents, they are pretty lame in their report on the forgery. According to the Post:
Quote:
|
Experts consulted by a range of news organizations pointed typographical and formatting questions about four documents as they considered the possibility that they were forged.
|
The experts pointed questions? Is that what they did? OR DID THEY PRETTY MUCH ALL PUT THEIR ESTIMATE ON THE CHANCE OF THE DOCS BEING FORGED AT OVER 90% Wouldn't want to include THAT in the story.
And if Killian's son and widow are disputing the memos' authenticity, and CBS either didn't ask them about the memos or blew off their input on whether the memos were authentic....WTF???
