I’d planned on sitting on this information until tomorrow to do more research, but developments are moving fast, so I think it’s time to shine some light on one of the most likely suspects behind the CBS memo forgery.
Marty Heldt (or someone known to him)
Why? Three recent developments.
Development #1
The previous article at Wizbang notes that USA Today independently obtained copies of the memo’s that CBS had six weeks ago. Interestingly enough they had six memos (as opposed to CBS’s four), and it’s the first of those that is the first plank in identifying the forger. The first of the new memos is shown below:
Notice that this memo attempts to lay the groundwork for subsequent memos. In making the case for forgery it presents difficulties because the other name (Bath) is redacted in the version of Administrative Order 87 the White House released [View image].
A forger relying on the records released by the White House wouldn’t know Bath’s name making it unlikely that they would have been able to recreate this document. There is one man, an Iowa farmer named Marty Heldt bent advancing the theory that George W. Bush’s was a deserter who was in possession of an unredacted version of Administrative Order 87 (All the way back in August 2000), as received in response to a FOIA request [View image]. Notice that James Bath’s name is NOT redacted in the FOIA copy (paragraphs 6 and 7).
Development #2
In January 2004, former Democratic political consultant Brooks Gregory identified Marty Heldt as peddling a bogus set of documents that Gregory had easily proved were forgeries. The original thread is here, but the relevant paragraph is shown below:
When all of this crap began back in 1999, I was a political consultant for several Democratic candidates, as well as later being a senior consultant for Janet Reno in her run for Governor. I bought the document package from Marty Heldt and we subjected them to the most thorough investigation one could imagine. Why? Because if there was anything there, we damn sure wanted to use it. But guess what? Only two of those documents proved to be authentic and they were not even related to the charge being levelled. Many of them are so blatant in their alterations it is almost funny. Several purport to be signed by real live military personnel, yet they don’t even know the proper format for a military date.
I’m attempting to get the same set of memos the Gregory claims to have received from Heldt, but circumstantially the trail of evidence leads directly to one person who fits the shadowy description of “unimpeachable.” From the time-lines it is possible that Heldt was selling a set of documents before he had received his FOIA requested documents.
Another person who was in contact with Marty about the authenticity of his documents in 2000 has this to say about the CBS documents:
The memos are forgeries. The story is bogus. The memo were done on a modern word processor or computer, and not on 1970’s era typewriter.
I have the same evidence I used to discredit Marty Heldt in 2000. It is almost comical some of the obvious alterations and these documents came from the exact same place.
Just one little item. The address PO Box 34567, is a bit dubious, and that’s what tipped me off back then. I talked to Marty Heldt about that. His answer was that this was Killians home address. So, I decided to check. This address was, at the time shown on the document, unassigned. Further, the address was a po box at the main post office in Houston, Texas. The zip code was for a small town in Texas, Genoa, Texas that did NOT have po boxes.
From, there, I went on to prove the document titled “Chronological” had been altered, and done by someone that had no idea what a military date format looked like.
That took me about 3 days after which, Marty stopped communicating with me. I think I know who dummied up all of these documents but I can’t prove it. But I just have this feeling that if the culprit is ever found out, he will come from a small town outside of Boston, Mass. And I’m not talking about John Kerry either.
Development #3
Who do Salon and David Brock’s Media Matters trot out as their rebuttal witness against the forgery charges? None other than “independent researcher” Marty Heldt.
Conclusion
It’s a circumstantial case at this point, but Heldt (or someone known to him) is looking pretty good. There’s more information on the way on this story, but new tips and leads are always welcome.
Update: The PO box argument, as presented in the quoted text, is not conclusive. It’s been shot down here, and here. It’s only presented in the context of this article to give an accurate account of the comments found.
Update 2: Heldt is certainly not the only suspect. Bill Burkett, a former Texas Air National Guard member and the person who claims to have witnessed shredding of Bush’s Guard records is also high on the list. Tim Blair, Ace of Spades, and JustOneMinute all have more on the Burkett angle.
Interestingly Heldt and Burkett, were they to have worked together, would have had the insider knowledge; background in the minutia of the official documents; and the technical skills necessary to have made a pretty convincing set of memos.
Also, check out my link in the trackback above (Daly Thoughts). I found an article where the reporters talked to Heldt and Burkett back to back, almost like both had made themselves available together, or one had said to call the other. Ace of Spades HQ calls it “One Degree of Separation”
DAN RATHER PROFILES THE FORGER
Reference http://nyobserver.com/pages/frontpage1.asp September 15, 2004 2:36 pm (They seem to update the time every time I check there, so hopefully it will still contain this quote when you look.)
Here’s an excerpt:
Mr. Rather said that it would require an exceptional amount of knowledge to craft a forgery
FORGED DOCS MATCH MICHAEL MOORE’S 11 FEB 04 CHECKLIST
The thought came to me that if you want to understand a forger, you have to think like one.
So, what would you do? One would write a checklist. Then one would create or have some flunky create the matching documents.
On 11 Feb 04 Michael Moore posted a 7-point checklist with “questions” attacking Bush at http://www.calpundit.com/archives/003240.html#102131.
Here’s a full match of his 7 points with the 6 documents on USA Today’s site (which includes the 4 CBS docs) as well as the CBS 60 Minutes” show itself, with the Barnes interview:
MM’s #1: “How were you able to jump ahead of 500 other applicants… to Texas Air National Guard… What calls did your father… make on your behalf…”.
So the CBS show of 8 Sept 04 answers that by bringing on Barnes, who claims as Lt. Gov. he made those calls. Except it’s now been proven, Barnes only became Lt. Gov. many months later.
MM’s #2: “Why were you grounded…”
This is then answered in the forgery dated 1 Aug 72, ordering “suspension”. Not shown on CBS’s show, but on USA Today’s site. Part of the same series of forgeries.
MM’s #2 cont’d: “…after you either failed your physical or failed to take it in July 1972?”
This is answered in forgery dated 4 May 72 and followed up by forgery dated 1 Aug 72.
MM’s #2 cont’d: “The records show that, after the Guard spent years and lots of money training you…”
This is answered in forgery dated 19 May 72 with the line “I advised him of our investment in him…” in paragraph 2.
MM’s #2, 3, 4, 5 and 6: These are all accusations of being AWOL and not being in Alabama or Houston during a certain time frame in mid 72 to mid 73.
This is answered in forgeries dated 19 May 72, 1 Aug 72, 24 June 73 and 18 Aug 73.
MM’s #7: “How did you get an honorable discharge? What strings were pulled? Who called who?”
This is answered in forgery dated 18 Aug 73 which mentions Staudt (who had already retired the previous year), Hodges, Harris, thus falsely implicating these military personnel, including Lt. Colonel Killian as the alleged author, in falsifying Bush’s records.
***********************
Is there anything in the forged docs NOT discussed in Michael Moore’s checklist? They seem tailor-made.
As a humorous postscript: Moore’s next paragraph after the 7-point checklist says: …”wanting to see a debate between the general and the deserter.” Earlier on that chat site, it was mentioned that Moore was a Gen. Clarke supporter (who was in turn supported by the Clintons). The weirdest quirk is that just two posts above Michael Moore’s appears one from someone calling himself “Terry Lenzner” !!! (Probably not the Clinton TL, but so strange how all these old Watergate ghosts are coming back.)
UPDATE on RICO
OETR – it appears spelled out fully on page one of Lechliter’s 36-pager:
” Bush
After Drudge reported that the WaPo has traced the memos to a Kinko’s in Abilene, TX, I did some digging here.
Interestingly, there is a link between Burkett and Heldt. Heldt in involved with a website OnlineJournal.com, and the site has a piece Burkett wrote in 2003.
check it out (if you can connect, it took me several times)
http://onlinejournal.com/bush/
Correction to typo in the “Dan Rather Profiles the Forger” item earlier – the Boston Globe article referred to is dated 9/8/04, not 9/9/04.
Also, that heading is MY analysis of what Dan Rather’s quote amounts to, not the title of the NYObserver.com article. I thought it was so amazing that he would go into such detail about the qualifications the forger would need to create the memos, and then to find the Air Force Manual reference 45 times in Lechliter’s 36-page attack, where he ACKNOWLEDGES that Heldt helped him. This made me lean more towards Heldt as the typist than Burkett, although I think they’re all involved.
There’s an update of the “Dan Rather Profiles the Forger – for us” item at http://blog.mu.nu/cgi/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=46126 (at Ace of Spades HQ ace.mu.nu.)
I don’t want to hog your space here, but I wanted to let you all know.
From Online Journal:
Thursday, February 12, 2004 – posted by Bev Conover : 11:22 PM
“Now, the more they[Bush Administration]fuss, fume, waffle and spin, the more determined even the corporate media are now to join us in digging even deeper.
The true heroes in this effort are Lt. Col. Bill Burkett, now retired, who served under then-Adjutant Gen. Daniel James of the Texas Air National Guard, and Iowa farmer Martin Heldt. Online Journal, among other online publications, broke the stories about what Burkett had to say and Heldt obtained through Freedom of Information requests, beginning in June 2000″
Team work?
Hi, Randal, hmmmm…
I’ve gone over to the new thread “Kerry May Have Gotten Forged Memos” But see below, this is the thing that bothers me – Burkett wrote this himself at veteransforpeace.org/what_do_you_say_032203.htm : (last paragraph on that site)
“Lt. Col. Bill Burkett completed 28 years of decorated service and was medically retired from the US Army National Guard in 1998…”
BURKETT = ARMY Natl Guard. But Bush/Killian – AIR Natl Guard.
If that’s true, as he plainly writes it, then he couldn’t have been at the AIR Natl Guard Base building or office. Surely these two arms of the Guard don’t share the same space? I suppose one would now have to check if he was ever under then-Adjutant Gen. Daniel James – if James even exists. I’m beginning to think his whole miles-long net trail is a bunch of baloney.
Dear Randal, the more I look at our two posts juxtaposed, the more I realize the fraud that’s been perpetrated. Surely, Burkett wouldn’t make such a mistake on his own resume? Army when he meant Air? So, then he’s convinced even his own side to continue the falsehood that he was in the Air Guard. I don’t think it’s likely that someone switches during their career, is it? He retired in 98 and the incidents he claims to have occurred with the phonecalls/hallway meetings/files trashing was in 1997. Also Bush’s records weren’t even there anymore. But I’m repeating myself. Let’s switch over to the new thread.
Hi!
I was trying to post to Allah, but could not, so I am doing so here. I just reread The Prowler’s articles in the American Spectator. They wrote one on Sept. 13 that said two Kerry staff people insisted they had the memos by way of an additional source. Could someone go back and read that article? Would that help clarify all the facts as to when and who received what, and about the additional source? The Prowler’s information is inside the DNC and should be true.
Interesting, Marty is my nephew…laugh…wow..now i could tell ya stories…good reading