Posted on 08/12/2004 11:31:14 PM PDT by Diddley
The only reason I can imagine that the Swift vets don't sue the authors of that threatening letter to tv stations - which was a pack of lies, and certainly actionable - is that bringing the suit might force them to remove the ads. I don't know.
But comes Oct, when 'McCain law' kicks in, I HOPE they sue both law firms, who probably didn't have any standing to threaten as they did, anyway. Bring the 'band o brahs' up to testify. Find out why Rassmann and the others are lying. Have them put it in the court record.
At some point, the vets need to go that last step.
Has anyone checked into the guys Kerry trotted on to the stage? Everyone in the press seems to have given them a pass, but isn't there some obligation to do some investigating? These guys were under Kerry's command; the Swifties were officers with same or higher rank. And how many bronze or silver stars were awarded in Vietnam for pulling someone out of the water? Was it SOP for a soldier like Rassman to recommend such an award for a navy man (Kerry)?
"Thirty-five years ago when his swift boat on patrol in Vietnam was under heavy fire from the shore"
One gook kid with a B-40 does not constitute heavy fire. What planet is this guy living on?
"heavy fire from the shore": A wounded teengager with a single grenade launcher. What would the libs call Iwo Jima?
Letters to the Editor, Wall Street Journal, August 13, 2004:
Kerry Put His War Record in the Line of Fire
Regarding Jim Rassmann's Aug. 10 editorial-page commentary on Swift Boat Veterans for Truth: It was the Kerry campaign that chose to wrap its candidate in the mantle of his four months service in Swift boats in an obvious effort to offset the negative image of his subsequent antiwar work and undeniably antimilitary voting record in the Senate. Mr. Kerry orchestrated the filming of himself in "action," Mr. Kerry assembled his "band of brothers," and it's Mr. Kerry who bases his fitness to be commander in chief on his four months in-country. It's only fair that those who might not agree with the senator's version of events have the opportunity to present their side of the story.
Mr. Rassmann says the Swifties are lying, yet presents no evidence to support his assertion. He claims to have "worked with him [Sen. Kerry] on many operations" -- despite the Senator only being in-country for four months -- yet presents no other recollections of Mr. Kerry demonstrating his superior leadership abilities beyond his having helped Mr. Rassmann aboard the Swift boat. Thus this brief interlude from some 35 years in the past constitutes the basis for Mr. Rassmann's unequivocal assessment of Mr. Kerry's fitness for the presidency. Mr. Rassmann asks voters to blithely ignore not only the conflicting statements of numerous other veterans, many of whom had longer experience with Mr. Kerry and greater insight into the propriety of his conduct, but Mr. Kerry's subsequent actions and voting record as well.
I for one am not in a position to assess the truth of Mr. Rassmann's version of the events in question, but I would maintain neither he, nor Sen. John McCain for that matter, are in a position to characterize other veterans with different recollections of the facts as liars and "without decency" if they can't provide evidence to refute them.
Thomas McKee
Marriottsville, Md.
...
Jim Rassmann is the one who should be ashamed. He calls the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth liars several times in his article but never states what the lie is. He also tries to associate this group with President Bush, but the president has no more control over this 527 organization than Sen. Kerry has over groups like MoveOn.org.
Richard Anderson
Pineville, La.
Regarding Mr. Rassmann's touching account of how John Kerry was awarded the Bronze Star on his recommendation -- can Rassmann please tell us if this was one of the medals Kerry threw away when he decided he was ashamed of serving his country?
Mark Rufo
Nashua, N.H.
Letson was on Hannity the other day and did say that he was the only doctor available. He became very emotional while discussing this. You could tell that he didn't enjoy exposing Kerry but felt that it was his duty with the info that he has.
So that wound was obviously caused by your own M-79 and was thus self-inflicted, right?
Busted!
I live to see such a lawyer walk away from the stand with a dismissive wave of his hand, saying, "I have no further use for this witness."
O'Neil has been all over the cable talk shows. This story is just getting started.
BlueOysterDemocrat
I'm ABB, so I really don't care about Cambodia
Kerry wasn't even in my top three choices during the primaries, but he's THE MAN now. I don't care if he was boinking chickens in Cambodia, nor do I care if he was really in France when he said he was in Cambodia. Screw it. If the man is running against Bush, he can do no wrong until he takes the oath.
From that point on, no promises.
One gook kid with a B-40 does not constitute heavy fire. What planet is this guy living on?
Excellent question.
Sorry for the late response.
I wondoer what they'd call it?
These are letters that point out the (apparent) hypocrisy of the F'n One.
Kerry lied before he lied.
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.