Skip to comments.John Kerry, Criminal
Posted on 09/18/2004 9:39:20 PM PDT by Time4Atlas2Shrug
For years it was said that Jane Fonda committed treason when she went to Vietnam in July 1972. In the late 1990s, with increasingly widespread use of the Internet, the charge became a staple of discussion by conservatives and veterans. However, their belief in Fonda's criminality was not substantiated. We undertook to do just that, and laid out the definitive case against her in our 2002 book, "Aid and Comfort": Jane Fonda In North Vietnam.
A current parallel has arisen in connection with the presidential candidacy of John Kerry. For the past several weeks, the Internet has been ablaze with charges - as yet unexplained, let alone legally substantiated - that by travelling to Paris for meetings with the North Vietnamese communists and their Viet Cong allies in 1970, Kerry violated American criminal statutes. Indeed, one well-intentioned group Patriot Petitions, has disseminated a petition to President of the Senate Richard Cheney, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, and Attorney General John Ashcroft, seeking Kerry's prosecution.
Just as Fonda's critics turned out to have been correct about their gut feelings regarding her treasonable actions in North Vietnam, so, too, Kerry's critics - who feel strongly that his trip violated the law, without quite knowing why - are correct.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
Stuff like this is not helpful. Calling Kerry a criminal is so over the top that it risks backfiring.
There's no statute of limitations on Treason.
WTH are you talking about? He IS a criminal!!! He is a treasonous idiot who met with NV commies 3x in France WHILE there was a war going on. He taped messages directed at the imprisoned soldiers in the Hanoi Hilton. He coached so called 'Vietnam Vets' (who NEVER served) to testify to war crimes. He lied under oath in his testimony before Congress. In this testimony, he repeated KGB propaganda LINE FOR LINE.
We've got plenty to go after without having to resort to hyperbole.
Meanwhile, I'll fight Kerry on his flip-flops and lack of a core.
The truth about Kerry must be exposed. He was part of the effort that undermined the war, don't you get that? As a result of his actions, 2 million Cambodians died, not to mention the other obvious implications of a loss in Vietnam.
Then let the election go off, catalog this little fact away for a couple months, and then let hammer him. After all, then it can rise above politics, and be a matter of right and wrong.
IMHO sKerry IS in fact a criminal. His already documented actions after his 4 month "service" is already grounds for "Aid & Comfort" charges. If the Paris Talks charges pan out, he is in deep doodoo.
That Hanoi Jane is still aiding and comforting our enemies instead of being in a federal prison; and that John Effin sKerry is a US Senator instead of a federal prison, is a national disgrace that only continues to weaken us in the eyes of our enemies.
I say give 'em a fair trial and hang his worthless hide.
Knock yourself out with that stuff. Go ahead. I mean it.
"Knock yourself out with that stuff. Go ahead. I mean it."
Well, I WAS waiting frantically for your approval. Thanks!!
KERRY IS A CRIMINAL!
He can sue me if he wants.
I called Kerry nothing, yet, but I did post a column in which the author has researched the entire episode involving John Kerry's trip Paris to collaborate with representatives from the enemy camp during the Vietnam War. When my father and many others were busy getting fired on regularly by the enemy, the good senator was busy sucking up to the Viet Cong, undermining our government's bargaining power. What he admitted to is illegal. Period.
I was not trying to be helpful, just informative. So, yes, John Kerry is a criminal.
Not only is Mr. Kerry a criminal, he shouldn't even be a Senator.
United States Constitution
Amendment XIV3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Those who say (including me) that Kerry must be called to account for his crimes are morally right. But this is a politically untenable position during the election. We WOULD be marginalized as kooks by the MSM.
A non-election year like 2005 will be a great time to push for a legal reckoning for John Kerry.
Shhh! Don't say that, you might marginalize yourself!!! ;)
Kerry is a documented criminal. Kerry is known by FBI files to have been in the meeting in which the Vietnam Veterns Against the War plotted to kill national leaders. Kerry resigned immediately from the organization, but was an accomplish to the crime and had a duty to report this.
I give up. My only consolation is that Ed Gillespie and the RNC are not following you fools over the cliff.
Hyperbole? Did you bother to read the column?
Hold on a sec! Clinton (against the wishes of his own state department) allowed advanced rocket technology to be sold to the Chi-Comms. Now, instead of worrying about Chinese Nukes that can reach California and Alaska, we can worry about Chinese Nukes that can reach the entire continental US. If that wasn't an act of treason, then I don't know the meaning of the word. And what was the mainstream press covering at the time? Monicagate!
Somebody here have the time to look up the specific requirements for a charge of Treason in the United States Code? I haven't got them here in front of me, but I recall that "giving aid and comfort to the enemy" is in there.
Kerry and Hanoi Jane are traitors under the letter of the law. Period. No question.
Clinton I consider a traitor- although I doubt it could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
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.