question about the Dan Rather documents

[Eric J in MN]

True or False:

1972 typewriters could print in superscript, but not small-text superscript?

[Cocoa]

1. false

see this document known to be genuine

[Flammable Materials]

3. Why is the "th" key only used once?

The other times, an unsuperscripted "th" is used.

Were each of those entries typed at different times?

[Paradise]

5. possible, probable?

typed on different dates, at different locations, on different typewriters, by different typists. :shrug:

[Jackpine Radical]

9. The entries on that form were typed at different times.

Just scan down one of the fields & you can readily see that each row of type begins in a slightly different place relative to the letters above & below. This could not have happened if the form had not been removed from the typewriter between lines. Thus one line might have been typed with a superscript-bearing ball & the next either on a different typrwriter or the same machine with a different ball.

[Toots]

4. This document appears to have all the same faults as the memos

Why is it not being questioned as well?

[Flammable Materials]

2. I understand that they had a "th" key. n/t

[rfranklin]

7. I was using an IBM Selectric back in 1972 and they had different...

tytpe balls that you could change. We used different typefaces--a different type ball for each. Some type balls had the superscript "th." There is no controversy about that.

Those entries were typed on a personell record--probably card stock--that was updated over a number of years. So the fact that there are a variety of type styles is not signigicant.

[Eric J in MN]

8. Do you think the documents are real? nt

nt

[punpirate]

6. False...

... the same small-text script appears in other official documents from the same time period already released by the White House.