The Killian Documents

The 2020 Presidential election is upon us and, as expected, controversy has ensued. However, rather than focus on this election, I would like to revisit a controversy from a past election, an affair that rocked the 2004 Presidential race and effectively ended the career of one of the most celebrated names in news journalism.

Let's revisit the Killian Documents.

1st Lt. George W. Bush in the Texas Air National Guard (TexANG).

Background

In August 2004 (three months before the 2004 Presidential election), Lt. Col. Bill Burkett, a former US Army National Guard officer, made contact with CBS News producer Mary Mapes, claiming to have documents proving that President George W. Bush received improper treatment during his time in the Texas Air National Guard (TexANG).

The documents were memos supposedly written in 1973 by Bush's then-commanding officer, the late Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian. They claimed that Bush had disobeyed orders and that outside influence had been exerted on his behalf to improve his record. Burkett claimed that he obtained the documents from Killian's personal files via a former TexANG Warrant Officer.

Burkett had previously made multiple unsubstantiated allegations against Bush, one of which he later retracted. This led to many media outlets considering him an 'anti-Bush zealot' and an unreliable source.

In early September, Burkett provided photocopies of the documents to Mapes. Mapes informed CBS News anchor Dan Rather of the story and together they planned to air it on September 8.

CBS Investigation

Before airing the story, CBS conducted an investigation to determine if the documents were authentic. This investigation consisted of two interviews with individuals who knew Killian and an analysis of the documents by four forensic experts.

Both interviewees, Robert Strong (Killian's friend and head of the TexANG administrative office) and General Robert Hodges (Killian's immediate superior at the time), maintained that the documents could have been legitimate based on their content, but they had no first-hand knowledge that could verify their authenticity.

Opinion was split among the document experts. Two said that the documents had outstanding issues that called their authenticity into question, while the other two experts cautiously believed that the documents were authentic based on the document signatures.

Breaking the Story

Despite the mixed findings from the investigation, Mapes and Rather decided to push forward with breaking the story on September 8.

Immediately after the story was aired, several bloggers began discussing and analyzing the documents. By the next day, claims that the documents were forgeries had spread across the internet.

Animated GIF comparing one of the documents to a copy made in Microsoft Word

On the night of September 9, CBS News released a statement saying that the documents were "thoroughly investigated by independent experts, and we are convinced of their authenticity" and "this report was not based solely on recovered documents, but rather on a preponderance of evidence, including documents that were provided by unimpeachable sources", though the latter claim was soon dropped.

By September 10, other news outlets such as The Washington Post, The New York Times, and the Associated Press were openly questioning the documents. The Dallas Morning News pointed out that one of the officers mentioned in one of the documents was discharged a year and a half before the document was supposedly written.

Nevertheless, CBS News continued to defend the authenticity of the documents.

CBS's Defense

Media coverage of the story intensified daily. CBS attempted to have additional experts verify the authenticity of the documents, but the results continued to be inconclusive.

Meanwhile, the original document examiners began to speak publicly. The two who had expressed doubts to CBS about the documents continued to do so, while the other two stated that they had only been asked to verify the signatures on the documents, not the documents themselves.

On September 15, CBS interviewed Killian's former secretary, Marian Knox. During the interview, Knox made contradictory statements about whether she believed in the authenticity of the documents themselves and the information they contained.

The next day, September 16, Rather acknowledged that the documents could be fake, stating: "If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story."

CBS Apologizes

On September 20, CBS reported that their source, Bill Burkett, admitted that he had lied about where he had obtained the documents. Burkett now claimed that the documents were not obtained from Killian's personal files, but were instead given to him by a person named "Lucy Ramirez" (multiple subsequent investigations failed to produce any evidence that "Lucy Ramirez" was a real person). Additionally, Burkett claimed that he destroyed the original documents after faxing copies to Mapes.

In an official statement, CBS News president Andrew Heyward stated that "Based on what we now know, CBS News cannot prove that the documents are authentic, which is the only acceptable journalistic standard to justify using them in the report. We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret".

Aftermath

Following an extensive internal investigation, Mapes was terminated, and resignations were demanded of several other CBS News staff. Rather retired in March 2005; it's unknown if his decision to retire was a result of the controversy surrounding the Killian documents.

To this day, no generally recognized document expert has positively authenticated the documents. The widely accepted view among experts is that the documents are forgeries, compiled on a modern computer using a word processing application (such as Microsoft Word), printed out, and run through a copier for several generations to make them appear older.

Despite not being directly involved with the controversy, it is believed that the presidential campaign of John Kerry was damaged by the fallout, ultimately leading to Bush's reelection in November. Some Left-leaning conspiracy theorists, including then-Democratic National Committee chair Terry McAuliffe, suggested (without evidence) that the documents were plants by Bush campaign strategist Karl Rove. Rove denied any involvement.

Nevertheless, Mapes and Rather still maintain to this day that they believe the documents to be authentic.