Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dan Rather, Terry McAuliffe and those phony papers [Dems say their plot is working]
The Hill ^ | 9/15/04 | BYRON YORK

Posted on 09/15/2004 4:44:25 PM PDT by Brilliant

Dan Rather may have trouble finding supporters these days, but he’s always got one at 430 S. Capitol St.

That’s the address of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), where on Tuesday DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe called in the press to unveil what he called “Operation: Fortunate Son.”

A prominent part of McAuliffe’s new campaign is a video that details the ways in which George W. Bush allegedly received preferential treatment in the Texas Air National Guard.

It’s the standard anti-Bush line. “Where was he?” the narrator asks of the future president. “And why did he miss his physical? This son of privilege. This fortunate son.”

McAuliffe’s video includes a clip from the now-notorious CBS “60 Minutes” program in which Rather relied on apparently forged documents said to have been written by Bush’s superior officer. CBS quickly asked the Democrats to remove the network’s footage from the video — which seemed counterproductive, since McAuliffe’s was the biggest vote of confidence Rather has gotten lately.

The conventional wisdom is that the latest attack on Bush — the one-two punch of the CBS report and McAuliffe’s offensive — is the result of the devastatingly effective anti-Kerry ads aired by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

But it was going on before that.

Back on July 20 — before the Swift boat campaign got under way — McAuliffe held a conference call with reporters to announce that, from that day forward, Democrats would devote a great deal of time and energy to exposing Bush’s Guard record.

“It is time Bush came clean with the American people about what he was doing during the Vietnam War,” McAuliffe said.

At the time, it seemed a little odd. The Guard issue had been thoroughly aired during the Democratic primaries, when McAuliffe called the president “AWOL,” and filmmaker Michael Moore — perhaps the most popular Democrat among the party’s base — called him a “deserter.”

The issue flared again briefly in April, when Kerry himself took a few whacks at Bush’s service.

But in July, things seemed quiet on the military-records front. There were few Democratic attacks on Bush’s service, and no Swift Boat Veterans for Truth attacks on Kerry.

That’s why McAuliffe’s announcement seemed a bit out of place. On the conference call, McAuliffe made it clear that he intended to press the issue every day of the campaign.

He even announced the creation of a new website, democrats.org/wherewasbush. Fast forward to Tuesday. “Bush has stubbornly refused to come clean” about his record, McAuliffe said as he unveiled “Operation: Fortunate Son.”

Of course, this time there’s a new context for McAuliffe’s charges, and that is the ongoing scandal over the apparently phony “60 Minutes” documents.

One might think that the scandal could prove a problem for Democrats, undermining one of their main avenues of attack against Bush. But not for McAuliffe.

In “Fortunate Son,” Democrats included clips from the discredited CBS broadcast after it had been discredited. The DNC is simply pretending that didn’t happen.

It’s sometimes remarked that McAuliffe is a roaring hypocrite on the Vietnam issue because he so ardently defended his friend Bill Clinton, who actively avoided service in any branch of the military during Vietnam. But a look at the Nexis database reveals that for much of his time in the DNC chairman’s office, McAuliffe has in fact lain low on the issue.

He didn’t say much about it during the Clinton years — unlike, say Kerry, who loudly defended Clinton’s non-service. McAuliffe didn’t say much about Vietnam during the 2000 campaign of Al Gore, who went to Vietnam as an Army journalist.

And McAuliffe remained quiet during the months in which it appeared that former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who spent some of the Vietnam years skiing out West, would be the party’s nominee.

Only in recent times has McAuliffe found his voice on Vietnam.

Given the CBS scandal, now might not seem the right time for McAuliffe to press the issue. But Democrats think they have a winner.

“I do think it’s working,” top DNC official Howard Wolfson said Tuesday when asked about the Democratic attack on Bush’s service. “There was a Newsweek poll that came out this week that showed that the president lost 10 points in his credibility numbers in one week since these issues about his service began.”

And that, of course, is what it’s all about. The CBS memos are forgeries? Who cares? They did the job.

Democrats might call it tit for tat after the Swift Boat episode. But those veterans were real — not anonymous — people with real stories who served with Kerry and are now offering themselves up for public scrutiny.

They’ve taken a beating, but in the process have raised real questions about some — but by no means all — of Kerry’s service record.

The author of the CBS memos should face questions, too — if only we knew who he was.

Byron York is a White House correspondent for National Review. His column appears in The Hill each week. E-mail: byork@thehill.com


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: ads; bush; byronyork; cbsnews; coordination; dnc; fortunateson; kerry; kerrystrategy; killian; mcauliffe; rather; sbv; tang
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

1 posted on 09/15/2004 4:44:28 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Bush has overtaken Kerry in NJ in the midst of their brilliant plot.


2 posted on 09/15/2004 4:45:41 PM PDT by ambrose (http://www.swiftvets.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

You know it takes time to produce something like this. I wonder when production was started on this ad?


3 posted on 09/15/2004 4:46:59 PM PDT by stockpirate (Kerry; supported by, financed by, trained by, guided by, revered by, in favor of, Communists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

About the same time the papers were forged.


4 posted on 09/15/2004 4:48:20 PM PDT by hoosiermama (Bush Democrats = Zell's Angels)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

I don't understand the DNC talking heads saying the SBVT's published lies. Nothing published by the Swifties has been retracted...has it? In fact, since their book came out, it is Kerry and his group that has had to do the "explaining." So, why is it the Kerry campaign threatens to sue media outlets saying they are promoting "slander" if they publish any of the Swifty info,,,yet, they are not even threatening to sue the Swifties? I am so tired of these Dem mouthpieces saying the Swiftboat book is garbage and lies,,,I say,,,prove it!

I think the Swifties should consider legal action against anyone who slanders their book without proof!!!

Sorry if a little off topic, they were mentioned in the post.


5 posted on 09/15/2004 4:48:32 PM PDT by austinaero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

I demand Kerry come clean and sign the 180 form to release his service records!!!


6 posted on 09/15/2004 4:49:03 PM PDT by avant_garde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

It is time to really turn up the heat... The swiftboat vets need to hold a rally...


7 posted on 09/15/2004 4:49:46 PM PDT by tomnbeverly (Do not let the UN make decisions for the protection of the United States... VOTE for George W. Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

"The CBS memos are forgeries? Who cares? They did the job. "

Yes, that is all they care about. If a lie will do it, and the truth will not, then the LIE is preferred.

This is brazen; it is "out there". We cannot allow it to succeed. Not that I think it will, but the result they face should be more than a "back-lash". It needs to be a melt-down so complete that they know WHY they lost.


8 posted on 09/15/2004 4:50:21 PM PDT by AMDG&BVMH (Proudly served in the National Guard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

and a new poll shows President Bush gaining the the great state of IL.


9 posted on 09/15/2004 4:51:26 PM PDT by man from mars
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
“I do think it’s working,” top DNC official Howard Wolfson said Tuesday when asked about the Democratic attack on Bush’s service. “There was a Newsweek poll that came out this week that showed that the president lost 10 points in his credibility numbers in one week since these issues about his service began.”

Bush and he people better wake up, there should be an investigation by the Justice Department over these fakes.
10 posted on 09/15/2004 4:51:59 PM PDT by stockpirate (Kerry; supported by, financed by, trained by, guided by, revered by, in favor of, Communists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: man from mars
Re#9 Survey USA shows W leading New Jersey too...
11 posted on 09/15/2004 4:52:53 PM PDT by eureka! (It will not be safe to vote Democrat for a long, long, time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: austinaero
I don't understand the DNC talking heads saying the SBVT's published lies. Nothing published by the Swifties has been retracted...has it?

I don't understand why, when the RATS say the Swiftie statements are lies, no one bats them down! It is infuriating to hear this over and over, and no one that I see or hear has the guts to stop the lying RATS in their cheesy tracks and call them on it. Kerry hasn't read the book but knows they're lies. Really? He must be omniscient. By the way, did you know Kerry was in Vietnam? Pass it on!

12 posted on 09/15/2004 4:53:26 PM PDT by Use It Or Lose It (Dan Rather is headed toward the IBM Selectric Chair.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

Has he really lost 10% in credibility in that poll?


13 posted on 09/15/2004 4:54:16 PM PDT by BonnieJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
The conventional wisdom is that the latest attack on Bush — the one-two punch of the CBS report and McAuliffe’s offensive — is the result of the devastatingly effective anti-Kerry ads aired by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

But it was going on before that.

That is what I have been saying. I have pointed out this was NOT in answer to the Swift Vets.

The Kerry Kamp is still complicit, being associated with the DNC and Kerry's propensity to bash Bush in this area personally.

Congressional hearings are needed.

14 posted on 09/15/2004 4:56:45 PM PDT by cyncooper (We're mad as Zell and we're not going to take it anymore!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
That’s the address of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), where on Tuesday DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe called in the press to unveil what he called “Operation: Fortunate Son.”

What a coincidence! They just happened to be ready to take advantage of CBS 60 Minutes II's journalistic coup on the National Guard story with Ben Barnes and a new set of bombshell documents, had an ad all produced and everything warmed up on the runway, so to speak.

That couldn't have anything to do with why CBS is having trouble realizing the memos are

FAKED AS HELL,

could it?
15 posted on 09/15/2004 4:57:11 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: austinaero
I don't understand the DNC talking heads saying the SBVT's published lies.

DNC (and CBS) lies and projects this onto good and decent folk. Not off-topic.

16 posted on 09/15/2004 4:58:08 PM PDT by cyncooper (We're mad as Zell and we're not going to take it anymore!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

Are you unaware of the Congressional letters and calls for hearings that were put out today?

It is not bluster or idle talk.


17 posted on 09/15/2004 4:59:50 PM PDT by cyncooper (We're mad as Zell and we're not going to take it anymore!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

"... there should be an investigation by the Justice Department over these fakes."


It needs to be framed as collusion between the Network and the DNC as a fraud perpetrated on the electorate. I wonder, Sarbanes-Oxley or Campaign Finance Reform violations?

But not by the Justice Department, they'd be screaming ASHCROFT the Boogeyman again. Who else could bring it?


18 posted on 09/15/2004 4:59:50 PM PDT by OpusatFR (Let me repeat this: the web means never having to swallow leftist garbage again. Got it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
In “Fortunate Son,” Democrats included clips from the discredited CBS broadcast after it had been discredited. The DNC is simply pretending that didn’t happen.

Nah! They wouldn't do that.

;)

19 posted on 09/15/2004 5:00:34 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
These docs have only slightly more credibility than the charges that he did cocaine in the WH in the 90's. Remember the weeks of press obsession with getting him to confess to something that: there were no witnesses for, there were no accusers, there was no evidence, there was not even an allegation from any single person.

At least in this case, they forged somebodies name on the allegation. That's a step up for the MSM in this election.

20 posted on 09/15/2004 5:01:07 PM PDT by bpjam (I don't know what a neo-con is and neither does anybody else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
You know, this whole affair is really stupid.

Let's assume for a moment that everything they say is true (not that I believe that).
35+ years ago, his dad, Congressman and/or U.N. Ambassador G.H.W. Bush (depending on exactly when), pulled some strings to get him into the TANG.
While there, he flew planes for a while, then pulled some strings of his own (by going over Killian's head), and being the son of an important leader, got lax duty.
He did a poor job at that, then disobeyed a direct order to get a physical, and disappeared for a while (I'm sure that happens all the time in the N.G., right?)

Let's assume that ALL of that is true.
Is that something that Joe and Jane Average are going to care about?
If anybody is surprised at string-pulling, they haven't been paying attention.
There's absolutely nothing in there to convince me that he's not who he says he is.
He has not claimed any hero status, or made it a centerpiece of his campaign.

So why is the other side so willing to go down in flames over this little bitty thing - even to the point of forging documents to make it appear true?

21 posted on 09/15/2004 5:04:37 PM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR
It needs to be framed as collusion between the Network and the DNC as a fraud perpetrated on the electorate. I wonder, Sarbanes-Oxley or Campaign Finance Reform violations?

Congressman Christopher Cox Requests Congressional Hearing on CBS Memogate

Following his appearance on the Hugh Hewitt program ths evening, Congressman Cox sent a letter to Congressman Fred Upton, Chair of the Subcommittee of Telecommunications and the Internet, of which Cox is a member. The letter reads in part:

"Dear Chairman Upton:

This is a request that you commence a Subcommittee investigation into the continued use by CBS News of apparently forged documents concerning the service record of President George W. Bush intended to unfairly damage his reputation and influence the outcome of the 2004 presidential election.

In February 2001, the Energy & Commerce Committee held hearings calling the television networks to account for irresponsibly (and inaccurately) calling the outcome of the presidential election in Florida before the polls had closed. At those hearings, CBS News vowed that the competitive drive to get the story first would be subordinated to 'making sure we are correct,' given that the stakes --the outcome of the presidential election-- were so high....

Despite the growing abundance of the evidence that CBS News has aided and abetted fraud, the network has declined to reveal the source of the disputed documents. USA Today possesses the same documents, obtained independently from a person representing them to be authentic, and likewise is refusing to disclose his identity.

Given the shortness of time between now and the election which the apparent fraud is meant to influence, and the even shorter time before Congress is scheduled to adjourn, I strongly urge that the Subcommittee move with all deliberate speed to uncover the facts.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter within the Subcommittee's jurisdiction.

Sincerely,

Christopher Cox

U.S. Representative"

22 posted on 09/15/2004 5:04:39 PM PDT by cyncooper (We're mad as Zell and we're not going to take it anymore!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne

They are insane with hatred of George W. Bush.

They have hashed and re-hashed his service during every single race the man has ever run. They never gained traction so the "solution" was to create a paper trail to finally convince the electorate that George Bush is no better than their own scummy offerings of candidates and that George Bush is a liar.

The only issue they've ever found to push the "liar" angle was this area of his life and the "cocaine" allegation gets tucked in there, too.

But that's why---they are completely mad when it comes to painting George Bush in this manner and evidently we now see they will do anything at all in their power to push it and push it.


23 posted on 09/15/2004 5:10:00 PM PDT by cyncooper (We're mad as Zell and we're not going to take it anymore!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

We know that George W. Bush was not shooting wounded vietnamese in the back. Nor was he burning villages, torturing innocent civilians or fleeing the scene when the swift boats hit an underwater mine.


24 posted on 09/15/2004 5:15:48 PM PDT by OldFriend (It's the soldier, not the reporter who has given US freedom of the press)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Sorry for the long post. The following was released by the Kerry Campaign on 4/24 and is currently posted on their website. Reading the verbiage, questions and allegations contained in this press release, one can only conclude that this is a long planned and carefully orchestrated effort by the DNC/Kerry campaign and CBS to destroy Bush.



April 27, 2004
Key Unanswered Questions: Bush’s Record In The National Guard
For Immediate Release

“If George Bush wants to ask me questions about that through his surrogates, he owes America an explanation about whether or not he showed up for duty in the National Guard. Prove it. That's what we ought to have. I'm not going to stand around and let them play games.” -- John Kerry, NBC News, 4/26/04


Bush Has Said He Used No Special Treatment To Get Into The Guard. How Does He Explain The Fact That He Jumped Ahead Of 150 Applicants Despite Low Pilot Aptitude Scores?

Col. Albert Lloyd Said A Report From Alabama To Ellington Should Have Been Filed. Where Is That Report?

Why Did Bush Miss His Medical Exam In 1972?

Where Are The Complete Results Of The Required Investigation Into Bush’s Absence From The Exam?

Why Did Bush Specifically Request To NOT Be Sent Overseas For Duty?

Why Does The White House Say Bush Was On Base When Bush’s Superiors Had Filed A Report Saying He Was Gone For A Whole Year?

Why Is The Pentagon Under Orders To Not Discuss Bush’s Record With Reporters?

Where Are Bush’s Flight Logs?

Why Hasn’t Bush Himself Demonstrated That He Showed Up For Service in Alabama?

Bush Has Said He Used No Special Treatment To Get Into The Guard. How Does He Explain The Fact That He Jumped Ahead Of 150 Applicants Despite Low Pilot Aptitude Scores?
“There was no special treatment.”

--Then-Gov. George W. Bush [Dallas Morning News, 7/4/99]

FACT: With Family Connection, Bush Got Coveted Slot in Texas Guard Shortly After Graduating from College.

A family friend of Bush’s father pulled strings to secure Bush’s spot; Bush joined the Texas Air National Guard after his student deferment ran out when he graduated from Yale in 1968. Before he graduated, Bush personally visited Col. Walter “Buck” Staudt -- the commander of the Texas Air National Guard -- to talk about the Guard. After Bush met with Staudt, he applied and was quickly accepted -- despite a waiting list of over 150 applicants. Staudt recommended Bush for a direct appointment, which allowed Bush to become a second lieutenant right out of basic training without having to go though officer candidate school. The direct appointment also cleared the way for a position in pilot training school. [New York Times, 9/27/99; Houston Chronicle, 10/10/92; Los Angeles Times, 7/4/99]

FACT: Bush Scored in 25th Percentile on Pilot Aptitude Test. When Bush applied for the Guard, his score on the Air Force pilot aptitude section, one of five on the test, was in the 25th percentile, the lowest allowed for would-be fliers. [Dallas Morning News, 7/4/99]

FACT: No Shortage of Pilots in Texas Guard. Although a Bush spokesman claimed Bush was fast-tracked because the Guard needed pilots, Charles C. Shoemake, a chief of personnel in the Texas Guard from 1972 to 1980 remembered no such shortage. “We had so many people coming in who were super-qualified,” Shoemake said. Texas Guard Historian Tom Hail said there was no apparent need to fast-track applicants. “I’ve never heard of that,” he said. “Generally they did that for doctors only, mostly because we needed extra flight surgeons.” [Los Angeles Times, 7/4/99] Col. Albert Lloyd Said A Report From Alabama To Ellington Should Have Been Filed. Where Is That Report?

FACT: Col. Lloyd: Guard Records Should Include Evidence Of Alabama Service. Lloyd also said he did not know whether Bush performed duty in Alabama. “If he did, his drill attendance should have been certified and sent to Ellington, and there would have been a record.” [Boston Globe, 5/23/00; AP, 6/24/00]

FACT: White House’s Own Expert Said Bush Should Have Done More. According to the Globe, “the White House included with the documents a memorandum from a Texas Air National Guard personnel specialist stating that the documents prove that Bush had a ‘satisfactory year’ for ‘retirement/retention’ purposes between May 27, 1972, and May 26, 1973. But that specialist, retired Lieutenant Colonel Albert C. Lloyd Jr., acknowledged in an interview last night that he evaluated Bush using the lower of two measures for rating Guard service. Guardsmen, he said, needed to serve more days to meet minimum-training requirements than to meet the lower threshold to receive retirement credit for the year. ‘Should he have done more? Yes, he should have,’ Lloyd said of Bush, who was a fighter-interceptor pilot. ‘Did he have to? No.’” [Boston Globe, 2/11/04] Why Did Bush Miss His Medical Exam In 1972?

FACT: Bush Was Suspended From Flight Duty For Failing To Take Mandated Medical Exam.

On September 29, 1972, Bush was officially suspended from flying for missing his annual medical examination. The orders note that Bush’s suspension is authorized under the guidelines presented in Air Force Manual 35-12 Para 2-29m, which reads that Bush’s local commander “will direct an investigation as to why the individual failed to accomplish the medical examination.” [Aeronautical Orders, Number 87, 29 Sept 72; AFM 35-13, Para 2-29m] Where Are The Complete Results Of The Required Investigation Into Bush’s Absence From The Exam?

FACT: The order suspending Bush from flight duty stated: “Verbal orders of the Comdr on 1 Aug 72 suspending 1STLT George W. Bush…from flying status are confirmed…Reason for Suspension: Failure to accomplish annual medical examination. Off will comply with para 2-10, AFM 35-13. Authority: Para 2-29m, AFM 35-13. [Aeronautical Orders, Number 87, 29 September 1972, emphasis added]

Para 2-29m, AFM 35-13: “When a Rated Officer Fails To Accomplish a Medical Examination Prescribed by AFM 160-1…(1)The local commander who has authority to convene a Flying Evaluation Board will direct an investigation as to why the individual failed to accomplish the medical examination. After reviewing the findings of the investigation, the local commander may convene a Flying Evaluation Board or forward through command channels a detailed report of the circumstances which resulted in the officer’s failure to accomplish a medical examination, along with a recommendation that the suspension be removed. (2) The individual’s major command will forward the report along with the command recommendation to USAFMPC/DPMAJD, Randolph AFB TX 78148 for final determination.” [Para 2-29m, AFM 35-13, emphasis added] Why Did Bush Specifically Request NOT To Be Sent Overseas For Duty?

FACT: Bush’s Application Indicated Bush Did Not Volunteer for Overseas Duty. On Bush’s application to the 147th Fighter Group at Ellington Air Force Base in Texas, Bush was asked what his “Area Assignment Preferences” were. Bush checked the box beside “Do Not Volunteer” for overseas duty. [Application for Extended Duty With The United States Air Force, 5/27/68] Why Does The White House Say Bush Was On Base When Bush’s Superiors Had Filed A Report Saying He Was Gone For A Whole Year?

FACT: Bush’s Superiors Were Unable to Evaluate Him for a Full Year, Saying he “Has Not Been Observed at This Unit…”
May 2, 1973: Bush’s superior officers William D. Harris Jr. and Jerry B. Killian, wrote on his yearly evaluation form, “Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report,” and that a “civilian occupation made it necessary for him to move to Montgomery, Alabama. He cleared this base on 15 May 1972 and has been performing equivalent training in a non flying status with the 187 Tac Recon Gp, Dannelly ANG Base, Alabama.” [AF-77, 2 May 73, emphasis added]

…But the White House Claims Bush was on Base the Same Day Superiors Filed Report.
White House release says Bush was paid on May 2, 1973, the very day his superiors reported that “Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report.” [2nd Q 1973 pay record]

FACT: Bush’s Superior Officer Says He Would Have Known If Bush Had Reported for Duty.
November 12, 1973: Rufus G. Martin signed a report on Bush’s evaluation, saying Bush was “Not rated for the period 1 May 72 through 30 April 73.” [AF-77a, 12 Nov 73, emphasis added]

Boston Globe: “But retired colonel Martin, the unit's former administrative officer, said he too thought Bush had been in Alabama for that entire year. Harris and Killian, he said, would have known if Bush returned to duty at Ellington.” [Boston Globe, 5/23/00, emphasis added]

Why Is The Pentagon Under Orders Not To Discuss Bush’s Record With Reporters?
FACT: Freedom of Information Officers Under Orders From Senior Pentagon Officials To Ignore Requests on Bush Files. According to the Spokane Spokesman-Review, “at the National Guard Bureau, now headed by a Bush appointee from Texas, officials last week said they were under orders not to answer questions. The bureau's chief historian said he couldn't discuss questions about Bush's military service on orders from the Pentagon. ‘If it has to do with George W. Bush, the Texas Air National Guard or the Vietnam War, I can't talk with you,’ said Charles Gross, chief historian for the National Guard Bureau in Washington, D.C. Rose Bird, Freedom of Information Act officer for the bureau, said her office stopped taking records requests on Bush's military service in mid-February and is directing all inquiries to the Pentagon. She would not provide a reason. Air Force and Texas Air National Guard officials did not respond to written questions about the issue. James Hogan, a records coordinator at the Pentagon, said senior Defense Department officials had directed the National Guard Bureau not to respond to questions about Bush's military records.” [Spokane Spokesman-Review, 3/14/04, emphasis added]





25 posted on 09/15/2004 5:20:47 PM PDT by tefis (Time for the truth to be told!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tefis

I must admit that if it hadn't been for the fact that Dan Rather used these forged memos, I would never have studied the actual facts to find out why all those allegations by the Democrats are nothing but a bunch of lies.


26 posted on 09/15/2004 5:25:27 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
I do think it’s working,” top DNC official Howard Wolfson.

You just keep thinking that Howie. All the way to November 3rd.

27 posted on 09/15/2004 6:11:29 PM PDT by Wonderama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne

They have nothing else to run on thats why the Dems are sticking to this, Kerrys a BORE and He's DULL, watching the grass grow is more interesting than watching a Kerry Speach! Besides that Kerry won't tell anyone how he plans to go about doing the few things he has mentioned in his campaign. He(Kerry) said the Educational system is a mess and needs to be fixed, but wont tell how he plans to fix it just says he will.


28 posted on 09/15/2004 6:33:08 PM PDT by KingNo155
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
FWIW: Just how stupid do we think Kerry and his campaign people are? These documents are just TOO PHONY. We must assume that the person who actually sat down and made these documents knew that they would be questioned within minutes of becomming public.

So, my theory (grab your TF hat): Hitlery had the documents made up and leaked to the Kerry campaign (knowing that 60 Minutes had been working on the story for four years and must by now be desperate for documents to substansiate their premise that Bush cheated or whatever). Carville et.al. were there to agrue for giving the the documents to CBS. The rest is history. The last step will be to leak proof that the Kerry campaign supplied the documents to CBS.

29 posted on 09/15/2004 6:59:41 PM PDT by jonathonandjennifer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jonathonandjennifer

Would agree they are pretty hokey, but your comment has one big flaw: CBS fell for it. They were obviously good enough forgeries to trick CBS, so they weren't so bad that it had to be a plant.


30 posted on 09/15/2004 7:02:31 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
Bush has overtaken Kerry in NJ in the midst of their brilliant plot.

It's a long strategy, you see...

31 posted on 09/15/2004 7:04:00 PM PDT by Citizen of the Savage Nation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Citizen of the Savage Nation

long term strategy...I meant to say that.


32 posted on 09/15/2004 7:04:33 PM PDT by Citizen of the Savage Nation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: jonathonandjennifer
"The last step will be to leak proof that the Kerry campaign supplied the documents to CBS."

Carville will leak the source that in a few weeks, say mid October.

We're having way TOO MUCH FUN!

33 posted on 09/15/2004 7:07:48 PM PDT by agincourt1415 (Memos are phoney and even Dan Rather knows now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

The 'some' quoted in the article are misinformed. McAuliffe is not a roaring hypocrite, he is a roaring idiot.


In the face of all of this Machiavellian cleverness from the fool, Bush will always be running on his record as President and Lurch will always be running on whatever agenda he tries to set, plus his record.

Most people find Kerry to be an imperious snobby wierdo and Bush to be a misspoken spiritual patriotic American cowboy.

LOL


34 posted on 09/15/2004 7:08:27 PM PDT by Petronski (Pajamarazzi power!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

This is such a lame plan. There will be a new DNC chairman next year after they get their a** handed to them in November.


35 posted on 09/15/2004 7:11:16 PM PDT by Clump
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
With respect, They WERE that bad.

I think CBS (Rather) is obsessed to the point that they barely checked on the documents AT ALL. Their arogance and ignorance blinded them to what would happen when the fakes were exposed. They didn't think talk radio, FOX News, etc. would report on the fakes without absolute proof they were fake, and didn't count on FR and the bloggers being so persistent.

What did Hitlery have to lose? If CBS didn't use them, oh well, on to the next "destroy Kerry" plan.

36 posted on 09/15/2004 7:21:10 PM PDT by jonathonandjennifer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: austinaero

I don't understand the DNC talking heads saying the SBVT's published lies.......

I have lost count of this being repeated over and over and no host - radio or TV - is calling them on it! Why aren't they paying attention? Are they just concentrating on what they want to say next and not listening to the person spouting this nonsense?


37 posted on 09/15/2004 7:24:01 PM PDT by Thank You Rush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jonathonandjennifer

Well, I have to agree that the documents were bad, but I don't think they were so bad that the only possible explanation was that they were a plant. Rather fell for it, and whoever gave them to Rather probably believed he would because he himself thought the forgery was pretty good.

I don't think Hillary is trying to destroy Kerry. He's doing it all by himself.


38 posted on 09/15/2004 7:24:47 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Use It Or Lose It

"I don't understand why, when the RATS say the Swiftie statements are lies, no one bats them down! It is infuriating to hear this over and over, and no one that I see or hear has the


"

I should have read further down before I posted but that's exactly what is happening here. AND it's getting downright perturbing.....


39 posted on 09/15/2004 7:26:44 PM PDT by Thank You Rush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Bump to focus on the real sources - Burkett is not the smoking gun.


40 posted on 09/16/2004 5:16:57 AM PDT by mabelkitty (Watch for a CBS employee in a trench coat going by DeepWord.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
Here's something I'd like to know:

Where was Terry McAuliffe during the Vietnam War?

41 posted on 09/16/2004 5:29:46 AM PDT by wai-ming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: avant_garde
Copies of blank SF180 forms are available at this site:

http://www.archives.gov/research_room/obtain_copies/standard_form_180.pdf

Anybody who might be able to attend one of Kerry's appearances should download, print, bring, and try to present to the candidate the blank form. Oh, doing so within the reach of a camera and/or reporter wouldn't be a bad idea either.

Hey, Dan. You want documents? I've got your documents right here!

42 posted on 09/16/2004 5:30:56 AM PDT by katana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: katana

Yeah, the "plot" is working. What little illusions credibility CBS and the DNC once had, now errased!


43 posted on 09/16/2004 5:33:41 AM PDT by z3n
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

Don't forget John Kerry is suppose to "speak" to the National Guard today.


44 posted on 09/16/2004 5:36:25 AM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: z3n

Dems Take Chance With 'Fortunate Son' Slam

Democrats Taking a Chance on 'Fortunate Son' Criticism of President Bush's Guard Records

The Associated Press


WASHINGTON Sept. 9, 2004 — Seizing on 30-year-old memos and memories, Sen. John Kerry's operatives are painting an unflattering portrait of President Bush as the "fortunate son" who used family connections to dodge the Vietnam War and then lied about it.

But even some sympathetic Democrats say voters won't be easily swayed, and they fear the controversy will deflect attention from Bush's biggest vulnerabilities: the Iraq war and the economy.

The challenge for Kerry is to talk about issues that matter to voters today health care, education, jobs and the war while his allies at the Democratic National Committee do the dirty work. The DNC's goal: convince voters that Bush string-pulling in the Texas Air National Guard is part of a pattern of elitism, lies and lack of credibility that stretches to the White House.

"Two things: One, he didn't tell the truth and that's not going to go away," said Howard Wolfson, a strategist dispatched to the DNC by Kerry's campaign to go negative on Bush. "Second, it begins to paint a picture of a very fortunate son who uses connections and pulls strings for special favors. That is a theme running through the man's life."

The DNC has nicknamed its effort "Operation Fortunate Son" after a Creedence Clearwater Revival anti-war anthem from the 1960s. The song speaks of the privileged few, "born silver spoon in hand," who send others to war.

Bush is not the "senator's son" written about in the song, but he's the son of a former president who served in the House during the Vietnam War.

SNIP

This time, Democrats are pressing media organizations to dig deeper while Kerry and his team make a broader argument about Bush's credibility and character. He misled the nation into war against Iraq, Kerry says. There are no weapons of mass destruction, no broad alliance as promised.

Bush promised fiscal discipline but ran up the debt. He promised education reforms but didn't pay for the changes. He promised to lower the price of prescription drugs, but the costs are higher so say Democrats trying to make 30-year-old records relevant to this year's campaign.

"This is not about George Bush's service. It is about who he is and why he lied and continues to lie today," Wolfson said. "These guys are knee-deep in the big muddy."

Kerry focused on health care Thursday, declining to address the controversy, both in an interview with The Associated Press and when a crowd member mentioned her military service number. "That's something you never forget," Kerry said, prompting another audience member to shout, "George did!"

"Well," Kerry said, "moving on."

Some Democrats wish he would do just that move on to Iraq, the economy and domestic issues that traditionally favor Democrats. Polls show Bush opening a lead over Kerry nationally and in key states, causing a rash of second-guessing.

Democratic strategist Dane Strother noted that Kerry has sharpened his message in recent days, accusing Bush of squandering money in Iraq that could improve lives at home. "That's a very salient argument," he said, "but it's getting overshadowed by Vietnam."

Other Democrats, including a top Kerry adviser and a Midwest governor, said the strategy, combined with Bush's own negative tactics, could lead undecided voters not to vote and most of them lean toward Kerry.

The senior Democrats spoke on condition of anonymity, not wanting to upset Kerry. Voters are not so shy.

"I'm not interested in Bush's military service or what he did back when," said Cara Easterly, a 37-year-old health care worker in Everett, Wash. The undecided voter said, "I only want to know how they're going to take care of us."

Sue Docekal, 49, a graphics artist in Seattle, said Bush "is clearly a hypocrite" on the Guard issues, "but what's that got to do with my vote?"


45 posted on 09/16/2004 5:42:00 AM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Terry McAuliffe is possibly the biggest dunder head in American politics today. The only reason the DNC didn't can him after 2002 is because he is former President Clinton's crony. As for Dan Rather, he has a well known history of hating the Bushes. I still remember him being rude to former President Bush during an interview while the 1988 Presidential campaign was going on. Rather is such a gutless coward to initially brush off claims of fraudulent document claims and instead say President Bush needs to answer questions. The truth is people are tired of hearing about what happened 35 years ago. President Bush has said he was irresposible when he was younger. In truth Sen. Kerry was too, but his pride and ego obstruct him from admitting this to voters. Yet I still don't believe there is compelling evidence that Bush received preferential treatment. Bush has some enemies in Texas. I think many are still angered by the fact that he unseated former Gov. Ann Richards.


46 posted on 09/16/2004 5:45:03 AM PDT by miloklancy (The biggest problem with the Democrats is that they are in office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
Tue Aug 12 13:50:56 2003

Bush Biographer J.H. Hatfield Who Died 2 Years Ago of an Alleged Suicide Amidst Controversy Over his Book Fortunate Son

In the book Fortunate Son: George W. Bush and the Making of an American President author J.H. Hatfield charges that President Bush was arrested in 1972 for cocaine possession and that Bush’s father George Sr. used his political connections to have his son’s record expunged.

Soon after publication, Hatfield’s credibility was challenged. He had been convicted in 1988 for hiring a hit-man in a failed attempt to kill his boss and had served five years in prison.(was convicted in 1988 of paying a hit man to car-bomb his boss).

J.H. Hatfield died of an alleged suicide in July 2001.

St. Martins Press promised to turn Fortunate Son into “furnace fodder.” It withdrew 70,000 copies from bookshelves and destroyed them.

In July 2001, Hatfield was found dead of an apparent suicide in a hotel room in Springdale, Arkansas. He was 43 years old. Police said he left notes for his family and friends that listed alcohol, financial problems and Fortunate Son as reasons for killing himself.

Hatfield discusses the Bush-Bin Laden connection in the interview which was conducted before Bush was elected President and well before the Sept. 11 attacks. The writer spent a year investigating Bush.

J. H. HATFIELD: Well he was also in the National Guard with George W. back in the 70’s which is interesting too because in 1972 in August, my publisher was able not too long ago to get hold of Bush’s national guard records. And in 1972, at the same time we alleged he was doing community service for cocaine arrest James Bath who was in the unit with him. Both of them were grounded for failing to show up for medical exam.

47 posted on 09/16/2004 6:06:36 AM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

IN THE wake of the controversy over J.H. Hatfield's Fortunate Son: George W. Bush and the Making of an American President, Robert B. Wallace, editor in chief of St. Martin's Press, resigned yesterday (Wednesday, October 27, 1999).

Wallace, 48, who once worked for Rolling Stone and ABC News, has been editor in chief at St. Martin's for three years. He said the book was published under the imprint of Thomas Dunne, another editor at the company.

He is the same Thomas Dunne who in 1996 was forced to cancel the publication of a biography of Nazi propaganda overlord Joseph Goebbels, written by Holocaust denier David Irving, after early reviews denounced the book as misleading and "repellent." In that case, Dunne claimed that he didn't know that Irving, an English historian, frequently lectured on the "hoax" of the Holocaust and had been convicted of violating Germany's law against Holocaust denial.

In his resignation announcement, Robert Wallace said, "I do not in any way wish to have my name associated with 'Fortunate Son' or future books published by Thomas Dunne Books."

48 posted on 09/16/2004 6:10:53 AM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

Online Journal editor Bev Conover worked with Jim Hatfield during the last turbulent year of his life. Hatfield's detailed biography of Bush, "Fortunate Son,"

******

Burkett says he wasn’t pointing a finger, but trying to get Bush to release the pertinent documents in his military records

By Bev Conover

November 5, 2000—Texas National Guard Lt. Colonel (retired) Bill Burkett, in providing clarifications to published reports, says he was not pointing fingers but raising the question of whether Gov. George W. Bush, his aides, and other Guard officers were merely incompetent in their handling of Bush’s military records and trying to get Bush to order the release of the pertinent records: his payroll and retirement records, which would settle the question of whether he fulfilled his military obligation.

49 posted on 09/16/2004 6:20:47 AM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: austinaero

http://swift1.he.net/~swiftvet/images/sellout.png

How can this be a lie? I guess the Kerry campaign needs to trot out an 86-year-old dementia patient to testify that the prisoners of war actually enjoyed having the Viet Cong play Kerry's testimony that they were war criminals.

O'Neill has challenged Kerry to sue them for libel. Kerry can't. They are telling the truth, and a lawsuit would open Kerry up to full disclosure.


50 posted on 09/16/2004 6:37:17 AM PDT by Samwise (Kerry's convoluted speaking style correlates with his convoluted thought processes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson