One oddity in Howard Kurtz's story is his continuingÂ
agnosticism about the forged documents. He complacently
accepts the absurd notion that the documents'
authenticity is beyond verification: "Mapes is right that the
purported 30-year-old memos by Bush's long-dead squadron
commander have not been proved to be forgeries..."Â Why does
he grant her this concession? Just to make his
criticism of her seem a little more even-handed?Â