Kerry takes legal action against Vietnam critics

[alchemize]

This campaign is getting nasty! Watch for a complaint against moveon.org next...

Link

FORT MYERS, United States (AFP) - Democratic White House hopeful John Kerry (news - web sites)'s campaign formally alleged that a group attacking his Vietnam war record had illegal ties to US President George W. Bush (news - web sites)'s reelection bid.


In a statement released to reporters, Kerry's campaign announced it had "filed a legal complaint against Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (SBVT) before the Federal Election Commission (news - web sites) (FEC) for violating the law with inaccurate ads that are illegally coordinated with the Bush-Cheney presidential campaign."

The move by the Kerry campaign came shortly after the Swift Boat group released a second ad attacking the Democratic presidential candidate, who was wounded three times while serving on a Swift Boat in Vietnam and decorated twice for valor.

Swift Boat Veterans for Truth have accused Kerry of lying about one of the wounds he suffered and of embellishing his acts of heroism during his four months in Vietnam, charges strongly rejected by the senator from Massachusetts.

Kerry on Thursday accused the Bush administration of using the Swift Boat veterans as a front group to do the "dirty work" of attacking his Vietnam War record.

The New York Times on Friday reported that there is a "web of connections" between the Swift Boat group and the "Bush family, high-profile Texas political figures and President Bush (news - web sites)'s chief political aide, Karl Rove."

 

[glenn1]

Maybe Kerry wants to lose. That's the only reason I can think of for him taking such an action, thereby guaranteeing this story won't die as it should have weeks ago.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: glenn1
Maybe Kerry wants to lose. That's the only reason I can think of for him taking such an action, thereby guaranteeing this story won't die as it should have weeks ago.

The Bush Boyz (oh, sorry, the non-partisan 527 group) will make sure this doesn't die amongst their target audience.

So, John Kerry has chosen to stand and deliver. Good for him. These people are spreading low life lies and need to be confronted.

 

[KarenMarie]

I agree, this should have died weeks ago. Would have certainly died soon, after the inconsistencies, and retractions by some of the SBVFT. I think he would be better served by focusing on those things, instead of dragging this on and on.

 

[Hossenfeffer]

Ugh, the whole damn swift boat thing is such a non-issue. Should have died months ago.

Was it D.L. Hughley that recently said "It's better to have been on a swift boat at all than at a party in Alabama"

 

[glenn1]

So, John Kerry has chosen to stand and deliver. Good for him. These people are spreading low life lies and need to be confronted.

Whatever you want, it's your funeral...

 

[KarenMarie]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: glenn1
Maybe Kerry wants to lose. That's the only reason I can think of for him taking such an action, thereby guaranteeing this story won't die as it should have weeks ago.

The Bush Boyz (oh, sorry, the non-partisan 527 group) will make sure this doesn't die amongst their target audience.

So, John Kerry has chosen to stand and deliver. Good for him. These people are spreading low life lies and need to be confronted.

Ok, seriously.... Don't the SBVFT ads hurt Bush? I mean from my POV... Kerry is attacking Bush over this, and that is smart, cause it drags Bush into the fray publically. And there is no way that Bushs war record could stand up to Kerry's. I mean, Bush did not serve in battle, Kerry did. So, by dropping this in Bush's lap, Bush has to answer in some way and that focuses on his own military record.

I don't think even Bush could be stupid enough to want to get involved in anything like this.

 

[arsbanned]

He's absolutely right to take action. Dukakis provided the example of a campaign not taking action. Bad plan. Every smear must be responded to, otherwise it's taken as truth. The Repubs are definitely better at running smear campaigns, but that doesn't mean they can't be countered.

...and that focuses on his (Bush's) own military record.

hehe. I guess you could call it that. Does skipping out on duty to attend coke snorting sessions count? lol.

 

[Todd33]

This only helps Kerry. The worst thing for Bush is keeping Kerry's Vietnam service on center stage. People in the past attacked Kerry in the same way, it only helped him win.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Todd33
This only helps Kerry. The worst thing for Bush is keeping Kerry's Vietnam service on center stage. People in the past attacked Kerry in the same way, it only helped him win.

I would disagree no new charges would be available to level against Bush's record as all of his record have been released. Nor did he make this part of his life central to his campaign.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Todd33
This only helps Kerry. The worst thing for Bush is keeping Kerry's Vietnam service on center stage. People in the past attacked Kerry in the same way, it only helped him win.

I would disagree no new charges would be available to level against Bush's record as all of his record have been released. Nor did he make this part of his life central to his campaign.

No, not all of his records have been released. There are still major gaps. See this Rueters article

Bush's Military Records Fail to Dispel AWOL Charges
Fri Jul 23, 2004 07:15 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Some of President Bush's missing Air National Guard records during the Vietnam War years, previously said to be destroyed, turned up on Friday but offered no new evidence to dispel charges by Democrats that he was absent without leave.

His whereabouts during his service as a pilot in the Texas Air National Guard in the United States during the Vietnam War have become an election-year issue. Bush's Democratic presidential challenger, John Kerry, is a decorated Vietnam War veteran.

The Pentagon, which had announced two weeks ago that the payroll records had been accidentally destroyed, blamed a clerical error for previous failure to find them.

In May 1972, Bush moved to Alabama to work on a political campaign and, he has said, to perform his Guard service there for a year. But other Guard officers have said they have no recollection of ever seeing him there.

Bush was the son of a U.S. congressman at a time when National Guard service was seen as a way for the privileged to avoid being drafted for Vietnam War duty.

Questions over his record resurfaced this year as Bush sought, in the midst of the Iraq war, to cast himself as a "war president" in his drive to win reelection on Nov. 2.

The documents released on Friday by the Pentagon included two faded computerized payroll sheets showing Bush was not paid during the latter part of 1972 and offer no evidence to place Bush in Alabama during the latter part of 1972.

Still, White House spokesman Trent Duffy said: "They show the president served in the military and completed his service, which is why he received an honorable discharge."

"UNANSWERED QUESTIONS"

The Democratic National Committee called the "supposed discovery" of Bush's payroll records late on Friday -- on the eve of the Democratic National Convention -- "highly questionable."

"If the Bush administration continues to search, maybe they'll find answers to the long list of unanswered questions that remain about George W. Bush's time in the Air National Guard. Bush's military records seem to show up as randomly as he did for duty," said DNC spokesman Jano Cabrera. Continued ...

In February, the White House released hundreds of pages of Bush's military records. The White House included a footnote to those earlier records saying that files for the 3rd quarter of 1972 had apparently been lost in microfilm processing.

Defense Finance and Accounting Service spokesman Bryan Hubbard said the microfilm payroll records were found in a Denver facility.

"We're talking about a manual process for records that are over 30 years old," Hubbard said.

He said officials had previously looked in the wrong place for the records relating to the first quarter of 1969 and the third quarter of 1972, and concluded incorrectly that they had been destroyed.

Hubbard said that after the Pentagon announced two weeks ago that the records were lost, officials went back to double check, and found an "unlabeled binder" that led them to the right place.

The Pentagon had announced on July 9 that microfilm payroll records of large numbers of service members, including Bush, were ruined in 1996 and 1997 in a project to save large, brittle rolls of microfilm.

 

[KarenMarie]

Originally posted by: Todd33
This only helps Kerry. The worst thing for Bush is keeping Kerry's Vietnam service on center stage. People in the past attacked Kerry in the same way, it only helped him win.

This is my point, exactly.
Kerry actions were pure political genius. Instead of squaring off with the SBVFT, he attaked Bush over it. Now not only does it make it seem that Bush was directly innvolved, and is a heel, but it also makes people (even if subconsciously) compare the military service of the two candidates! And a 'possible liar' beats a 'possible rich AWOL' any day!

 

[DealMonkey]

By the way, I'm forming a 527 group entitled "Alabama ANG Vets for Truth" and will be looking for ad funding and lots of air time in the liberal media so the ANG boys can tell their side of the story.

PM me if you're interested in helping.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Was listening to Sean Hanity yesterday and a caller made a good point (that I myself haven't researched to check the facts). But the caller's point was that G.W. Bush could NOT have served in Vietnam even if it was his greatest goal in life. Why not? His father was director of the CIA at the time. Now just what government in their right mind would allow the son of the director of the CIA to fight and face the possiblity of capture?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Was listening to Sean Hanity yesterday and a caller made a good point (that I myself haven't researched to check the facts). But the caller's point was that G.W. Bush could NOT have served in Vietnam even if it was his greatest goal in life. Why not? His father was director of the CIA at the time. Now just what government in their right mind would allow the son of the director of the CIA to fight and face the possiblity of capture?

That is absurd, plain and simple. McCain's father was an admiral, and such military legacies are common, as I believe you know firsthand. It's not as though the Director of Central Intelligence goes home and shares state secrets with his kids over dinner (nor is he a particularly high-visibility official anyway - do you really think a garden-variety VC would have known who the head of the CIA was?). If the risk of Bush serving overseas was so unacceptable, why was he permitted to train as a pilot in the first place?

EDIT: He didn't even become Director, CIA, until 1976, years after GWB's ANG service. That should tell you something about the wisdom of callers to the Hannity show.

 

[PELarson]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Was listening to Sean Hanity yesterday and a caller made a good point (that I myself haven't researched to check the facts). But the caller's point was that G.W. Bush could NOT have served in Vietnam even if it was his greatest goal in life. Why not? His father was director of the CIA at the time. Now just what government in their right mind would allow the son of the director of the CIA to fight and face the possiblity of capture?

We actually have a long history of it, a few -

Franklin D. Roosevelt's son(Elliott) flew recon flights during WWII

Admiral Zumwalt's son fought in Vietnam, I believe at the same time his father was serving there

Brigadier General Theodore Roosevelt Jr. led his Division onto the beaches at Normandy

AG Ashcroft's son served/serves on destroyer in the Persain Gulf

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Todd33
This only helps Kerry. The worst thing for Bush is keeping Kerry's Vietnam service on center stage. People in the past attacked Kerry in the same way, it only helped him win.

I would disagree no new charges would be available to level against Bush's record as all of his record have been released. Nor did he make this part of his life central to his campaign.