Alleged Killian memos part III

I am going to stop wasting my time psychoanalysing 30 year old typewriters --- uhm fairly soon.

I have to wonder why Martin Heldt (who IIRC is a farmer in Iowa) is running circles around the New York Times, the Washington post (both questining CBS) and CBS (ineptly defending itself)
From Salon.com

"Yet independent researcher Marty Heldt notes that he had received an undisputed Bush military document in 2000 from the Vietnam era that clearly contains a superscripted "th." He also notes that when Killian's Aug. 14, 1973, memo is enlarged and the word "interference" is examined, it's clear the two middle e's rest higher on the page than the other two e's; that is not something a modern-day word processor would likely do."

The link in the Salon story shows that I did recall correctly in Alleged Killian memos part II to guess that the goods on Bush were posted by Martin Heldt "Called to read his countries memos Martin Heldt did leave the plow."

As noted in Alleged Killian Memos part I I noted that the August18th memo is not the only one to include the raised e which suggests it was typed " memo dated May 4 1972 [snip] The thing that struck me most was the e in "Colonel" under the signature. It is slightly higher up than the other letters in the word." I am honored to make the same point made by Martin Heldt.

Also, I repeat that the topical and important issue is that the Bush administration argued that it was OK for Bush to disobey the order to take a physical, since he thought it made little sense. The fact that the people who argued that still work for the Bush administration is proof that Bush is unqualified to serve as commander in chief.