Official Misconduct! Kerry Abused His Senate Position to Broker Sweatheart Deal for Forbes Cousin

Reports indicate that Democratic nominee, Senator John Kerry, committed official misconduct in 1994, abusing his position as Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA by suppressing evidence of live prisoners of war in Vietnam to give his cousin's company a billion dollar deal.

As Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA in the early 1990s, Senator Kerry lobbied zealously for normalized relations with Vietnam. As a result, his cousin, C. Stewart Forbes, was able to broker a billion dollar deal between Hanoi and Colliers International, a large company based in Kerry's home state of Massachusetts.

Further, according to the Toronto Sun, , Baltimore Sun, Washington Times, et al, in a multitude of articles in February of 1994, there is credible evidence that his committee suppressed evidence – including live sightings – that there were still indeed American prisoners in Vietnam.

If introduced, this evidence may have prevented the normalized relations Kerry sought – normalized relations that were paramount to sealing the Colliers deal.

Some investigators have charged that Kerry actually threatened that, if the suppressed evidence ever leaked out, that they would “wish [they’d] never been born.”

.
http://www2.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=11534

From the Swift Vets and POWS for Truth site:

Joining this website in August and throwing my two cents worth into the discussion surrounding the SBVT controversy, I had no idea what a small world this would be. I worked on the US/Russia Joint Commission on POW/MIA with various Senators, Congressmen, STATE and DOD officials for 4 years. This is where my first encounter with Senator Kerry came from. His office was aloof in our work on this important issue. They refused to participate in our findings and hard work to account for American POW/MIAS from WWII, Korea, Cold War, and Vietnam -- even though Senator Kerry was appointed the Co-Chairman of the Vietnam War Working Group by President Bush Sr in 1992. As you can see, my two worlds came together while working with the SBVT and the POW/MIA issue. And now I rejoice in the union of the SBVT and the POWs for Truth. This issue is tying my fate to this cause even more every day.
[snip]
Very few people know of which I'm about to divulge regarding my time with the POW/MIA office. I have been waiting to tell someone about this, since I've been working with the actions in Vietnam for the past several months.
In 1995, shortly after I returned from a tour at the American Embassy in Moscow, Russia, our office received information that the Polish government had compiled a list of some 12,500 names of Americans MIA from WWII, Korea, Cold War and Vietnam. You should remember that Poland was a Soviet Union satellite country for many years. They were quick to capitalize on their freedom from the Soviet Union and it's downfall in late 1991. The Polish government had been in charge of the IRCR mission, which saw many of our POWs in captivity in Vietnam and had access to them when our own government did not. They claimed to know the disposition of these 12,500 American servicemen and were willing to give us the information if done secretly. During this timeframe, President Clinton wanted Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary to join the NATO alliance to bolster his legacy. In an effort to slow down their joining NATO and use the POW/MIA issue to our advantage and get this list, Senator Robert Smith (NH-R) managed to place a stipulation in the Treaty allowing these countries to join NATO. Senator Smith had been doing most of the work as another Co-Chairman of the Vietnam War Working Group, while Senator Kerry's absense was felt keenly during those years of the Democratic run Executive Branch. Our office found no friends in the Clinton administration to help us in our struggle to account fully for our POW/MIAs and Kerry's influence would have been essential to secure that assistance. It never came. The stipulation placed in the Treaty was intended to allow our office to prepare for a trip to Poland and retrieve this list. We finally came to an agreement with the Polish officials and made our travel arrangements to retrieve the list. Alas, President Clinton took it upon himself to declare that all three countries had been forthcoming in a full accounting of any and all information regarding American POW/MIAs from WWII to the present. Our office was crushed! We had worked so hard and carefully to get that list and with a deft swoop of the pen -- President Clinton had defeated all our efforts.
An immediate protest went up from our office to the President (after all, we were the Presidential Commission tasked with this effort). President Clinton had not consulted with us before his declaration, nor did any of his staff. Everyone within the STATE Department and DOD were baffled when confronted with the knowledge, that our office had not given the President the green light. Once, the President had been confronted by this information, he replied that he had been told that a full accounting was achieved. Not a single person in the government (and certainly not our office), was willing to confess to this outrageous defeat. All eyes had turned to the one Commissioner who had the authority to speak on behalf of POW/MIA issues. The one who was a senior Senator amongst the Democratic Party and had access to the President's ear. The one who never showed up to work on this issue. The one who had already closed the case on the POW/MIA issue from the Vietnam War.
To really know the truth why President Clinton had done this to the families and friends of 12,500 American servicemen, will probably never come to light. We shall never know for sure if our candidate to whom President Clinton stated in his DNC speech said, "Send Me" for the POW issue, was responsible for the statement that a full accounting had been achieved. We shall never know this for sure and it can only be called speculation by those on the outside. But a few of us who worked this issue to the core of our beings -- we will know. We will bear the knowledge that our political system is ugly. We will know when we look at the families of those who have not found closure.
I will know that this is indeed a small world.
- Chief

* * *

Lots of facts and quotes about the president-wannabe at the John F. Kerry Timeline.
.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1209454/posts?page=187#187

April 27, 1992
Memorandum for: Vice Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Prisoners of War and Missing in Action

From: John F. McCreary

Subject: Legal Misconduct and Possible Malpractice in the Select Committee

1. As a member of the Virginia State Bar, I am obliged by Disciplinary Rule DR-1-103(a) to report knowledge of misconduct by an attorney "to a tribunal or other authority empowered to investigate or act upon such violations." Under Rule IV, Paragraph 13, of the Rules for the integration of the Virginia State Bar, this obligation follows me as a member of the Bar, regardless of the location of my employment, for as long as I remain a member of the Virginia State Bar. Therefore, I am obliged, as a matter of law and under pain of discipline by the Virginia State Bar, to report to you my knowledge of misconduct and possible prima facie malpractice by attorneys on the Select Committee in ordering the destruction of Staff documents containing Staff intelligence findings on 9 April 1992 and in statements in meetings on 15 and 16 April to justify the destruction.

2. The attached Memoranda For the Record, one by myself and another by Mr. Jon D. Holstine, describe the relevant facts, which I summarize herein:

a. On 9 April 1992, the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, in response to a protest by other members of the Select Committee, told the Select Committee members that "all copies" would be destroyed. This statement was made in the presence of the undersigned and of the Staff Chief Counsel who offered no protest.

b. Later on 9 April 1992, the Staff Director, Frances Zwenig, an attorney, repeated and insured the execution of Senator Kerry's order for the destruction of the Staff intelligence briefing text. I personally delivered to Mr. Barry Valentine, the Security Manager for SRB-78, the original printed version of the intelligence briefing text. I also verified that the original was destroyed by shredding in the Office of Senate Security on 10 April 1992, along with 14 copies.

c. On 15 April 1992, the Staff Chief Counsel, J. William Codinha of Massachusetts, when advised by members if the Staff about their concerns over the possible criminal consequences of destroying documents, minimized the significance of the act of destruction; ridiculed the Staff members for expressing their concerns; and replied, in response to questions about the potential consequences, "Who's the injured party," and "How are they going to find out because its classified." Mr. Codinha repeatedly defended the destruction of the documents and gave no assurances or indications that any copies of the intelligence briefing text existed.

d. On 16 April, the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee, Senator John Kerry, stated that he gave the order to destroy "extraneous copies of the documents" and that no one objected. Moreover, he stated that the issue was "moot" because the original remained in the Office of Senate Security "all along."

e. I subsequently learned that the Staff Director had deposited a copy of the intelligence briefing text in the Office of Senate Security at 1307 on 16 April.

3. The foregoing facts establish potentially a prima facie violation of criminal law and a pattern of violations of legal ethics by attorneys in acts of commission and omission.

a. It is hornbook law that an attorney may not direct the commission of a crime. In this incident two attorneys, one by his own admission, ordered the destruction of documents, which could be violation of criminal law.

b. Neither the Staff Chief Counsel nor any member of the Select Committee made a protest or uttered words of caution against the destruction of documents, by admission of the Chairman, Senator Kerry. The Chief Counsel has an affirmative duty to advise the Staff about the legality of its actions, and, in fact, had earlier issued the general prohibition to the Staff against document destruction.

c. The Chief Counsel's statements during the 15 April meeting to discuss the document destruction showed no regard for the legality of the action and displayed to the Staff only a concern about getting caught. By his words and actions, he presented to the Staff investigators an interpretation of the confidentiality and security rules that the rules of the Select Committee may be used to cover-up potentially unethical or illegal activity.

d. The Staff Director's action in placing an unaccounted for copy of the intelligence briefing text in the Office of Senate Security on 16 April constitutes an act to cover-up the destruction. Throughout the 16 April meeting, all three attorneys persisted in stating that the document had been on file since 9 April. This is simply not true.

4. I believe that the foregoing facts establish a pattern of grave legal misconduct - possibly including orders to commit a crime, followed by acts to justify and then to cover-up that crime. Even absent criminal liability, the behavioral pattern of the attorneys involved plays fast and loose with the Canons of Legal Ethics and establishes that one or more of the attorneys on the Select Committee are unfit to practice law. I am obliged to recommend that this report be filed with the appropriate disciplinary authorities of the State Bars in which these attorneys are members.

John F. McCreary, Esquire

Maybe this will have legs:

Here's more all of us can do to defeat Kerry in one way or another! Actions speak louder than words.

See the highly regarded conservative website The Federalist http://patriotpetitions.us/kerry/.

They have a petition all of us can sign - nearly 184000 signers so far. On October 18, the petition was submitted with 180,000 signers to the Senate President, Senate Majority Leader and Attorney General, for consideration after the election. Signatures are still being taken - let Congress know our sentiments!

Petition to Indict and Disqualify John Kerry from National Office

"Though John Kerry has an extensive and well-documented record of anti-American activities over the past three decades, it is his acts of treason in 1970-71 that are the subject of this petition for indictment. Our appeal notes both Kerry's violations of the UCMJ (Article 104 part 904) and U.S. Code (18 USC Sec. 2381 and 18 USC Sec. 953), and calls for his disqualification for public office in accordance with the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, which states: "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President ... having previously taken an oath ... to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."

"Why prosecute John Kerry now? In October 2003, Mr. Kerry chose to make his Vietnam war record the centerpiece of his campaign for the presidency; this has been especially true since his primary victory in March 2004. In response, more than 165,000 signatories of the above-referenced petition for indictment have made his war record the centerpiece of their campaign to disqualify Kerry from public office. We understand that no action is likely to be taken on this petition until after the 02 November election. Be it known, however, that on 03 November, we will seek full recourse in an effort to have John Kerry prosecuted for acts of treason and disqualified from any future campaign for any national office. We are thus committed to holding Mr. Kerry accountable for his actions, as there is no statute of limitations for acts of treason."

There is more background at their site.

Send the petition to as many as possible and have them do likewise!

"Kerry cousin C. Stewart Forbes' company won a $900 million contract from Vietnam after Sen. Kerry pushed to normalize relations."

The media for Kerry -- The Washington Times

http://www.washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20041021-100643-8508r

The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

The media for Kerry
By Diana West
Published October 22, 2004

"Absolutely," most reporters want John Kerry to win the election, declares Newsweek's Evan Thomas, commenting on the media bias he says translates into "maybe" five extra points for the Democratic ticket at the polls. That's down from the 15 points Mr. Thomas first predicted Fourth Estate favor would bestow on Kerry-Edwards, but even five points could tip a race as close as this one.
Which is a chilling thought, but also a golden opportunity. It means that a vote for Bush-Cheney is not only a vote against Kerry-Edwards, but also a vote against Kerry-Edwards-CBS-CNN-New York Times. Are you incensed over Dan Rather's crude attempt to influence the presidential election with a sheaf of pathetic forgeries? Appalled by "Nightline's" Ted Koppel for using dictatorship-vetted sources in communist Vietnam to contradict the testimonies of decorated American veterans? Outraged by ABC's head-office directive to its reporters to go easier on John Kerry than George W. Bush, and not "reflexively and artificially hold both sides 'equally' accountable"? Don't get mad, vote Republican.
The fact is, never before have mainstream media (MSM) organizations, and I mean the hunters and gatherers of news, not its cooks and consumers, sunk so deep in the tank for a Democratic ticket. The election is days away, but vital questions about Mr. Kerry remain not just unanswered in MSM outlets, but unasked. This is evidence of the efficiency with which the only-selectively adversarial media have embraced the role of Democratic star-maker, not newsmaker.
"It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course," ABC News political director Mark Halperin admits in a "1984"-style directive leaked to the Drudge Report. "But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying ..." -- gee, thanks a lot -- "now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right." And how's that done -- by covering for Mr. Kerry? Given what we still don't know about the candidate after practically incessant blah-blahing, including three debates, this becomes the inescapable conclusion. And I don't just mean de-emphasizing such Kerry facts as his inexplicable failure to attend three-quarters of his public Senate Intelligence Committee hearings. Or failing to ponder the coincidence that Kerry cousin C. Stewart Forbes' company won a $900 million contract from Vietnam after Sen. Kerry pushed to normalize relations.
Here we are, on the brink, possibly, of electing a self-confessed war criminal to the Oval Office -- a man who, as an American officer, parlayed with the enemy, and... nothing. No questions, no stories. No thoughts, no curiosity. We contemplate a new wartime leader whose political epiphany -- the famous Christmas in Cambodia, "seared, seared" into Mr. Kerry's memory -- never happened. Questions, stories in the MSM? Not a one. We consider trusting our very lives to a man who has consistently hewed to the wrong side of history, favoring appeasement and disarmament over democratic principle and strength, but we know nothing of his current thinking on those old positions.
How, for instance, does this American presidential candidate explain his place of honor in a Vietnamese war museum dedicated to an American defeat? Does Mr. Kerry believe the anti-war movement in which he figured so prominently bears any moral responsibility for the mass brutality -- executions, re-education camps, boat people -- that marked Hanoi's victory? Indeed, does Mr. Kerry still believe North Vietnam "liberated" South Vietnam, and that the conflict itself was not a front in the Cold War? We saw valedictory comments from Mr. Kerry on Ronald Reagan's death, but we have no idea whether he still reviles the Reagan years as a "moral blackness." We don't know because no one in the MSM has asked him. This glaring failure makes a mockery of the media. It leaves us gasping for facts. It also explains the volcanic eruption of alternative sources of campaign information like the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the newsies of the blogosphere, and a slew of independent ads and documentaries, including "Stolen Honor." Such activity has injected vital blasts of oxygen into otherwise stilted coverage.
But in the land of the free and the free press, we shouldn't have to rely on the unique gumption of, say, a John O'Neill, the Swiftee spokesman who went so far as to write a best-selling book about John Kerry ("Unfit for Command") to publicize crucial information the MSM ignored. I remember well the veritable news blackout on the Swift Boat vets when they first assembled last spring in downtown Washington. The Associated Press didn't even send a correspondent, calling the group's press conference "old news"before it happened.
Whatever the final tally on Election Day, we, the people, need to take a good hard look at the MSM scorecard the day after.

Copyright © 2004 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.

Return to the article

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.