-
@ 17c81daa:6998f1ac
2025-05-17 02:08:11
The memorandum states that Robert G. Baker is "twenty-two years of age" and "has been employed for twenty-two years," which creates a contradiction. As noted, historical context confirms Baker was 32 in 1964, meaning the "twenty-two years of age" is indeed a typographical error. Baker was born on November 12, 1928, making him 35 years old in 1964, not 32 as previously stated—my apologies for the earlier miscalculation.
Now, addressing the employment timeline: the document claims Baker "has been employed for twenty-two years." If we take his correct age in 1964 (35), subtract 22 years of employment, Baker would have started working at age 13 (1964 - 22 = 1942; 1928 + 13 = 1941/1942). Starting work at 13 is plausible, especially in the context of the 1940s, when child labor laws were less stringent, and young individuals often took on part-time or informal roles, particularly in political or administrative settings like the U.S. Senate, where Baker began as a page.
The phrase "has been employed for twenty-two years" likely refers to the duration of his career up to that point, not continuous employment from age 10 (which would be improbable even for that era). The confusion stems from the document’s typographical error in stating his age as 22, which, when paired with the 22 years of employment, creates the misleading impression he started working at age 0. Correcting his age to 35 aligns the employment timeline more realistically, starting from his early teens, consistent with his known history as a Senate page from a young age.