Posted on 09/18/2004 9:51:35 PM PDT by JayRay
It is being reported by major news outlets like FoxNews and ABC News now that Bill Burkett, the source of the fake memos, first sent them to the Kerry campaign before CBS even knew about them. The Associated Press obtained a copy of an email transmitted to a list of Texas Democrats about a conversation he had with Kerry campaign advisor, and former Senator, Max Cleland. The email to the Texas Democrats indicated that Burkett and Cleland spoke about information that would counter criticism of Kerry's Vietnam War service. It stated, "I asked if they wanted to counterattack or ride this to the ground and outlast it, not spending any money. (Cleland) said counterattack. So I gave them the information to do it with" (SOURCE: http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040918_1312.html).
Tell me anyone here is surprised...I know I wasn't.
Now we know for sure why these bozos in the democrat party came out flailing the day after the "59 Minutes" forged hit piece.
Rumors of this were printed last Thursday. This is additional detail.
I question the timing of the coordinated DNC ad campaign. They knew in advance the full content of the CBS story, assumed that it would fly, and crafted an ad campaign around it.
Clelanad makes more sense as the sourse, since it had to be someone CBS would really trust.
And were dumb enough to continue with this coordinated attack even after the story blew up.
KC has to be right on this. The DNC had that ad out a day after the fake memos aired. That's why I now firmly believe they had advance knowledge of this. The AP article confirms this.
And they're STILL continuing. DNC Chairman Terry McCauliff is STILL touting this story as of yesterday! They have no problem spreading a proven lie.
These guys are so hung up on their hatred towards Bush, they think everybody will buy into their phoney arguements. I don't think they even realize how irrational they look to the typical voter because they believe all this crap. I think Dems are still hung up on their failure to steal the election in 2000 and can't see how anyone can support Bush.
And that's collusion, if not conspiracy!
This has to be costing them supporters. Most people hate to be lied to.
And come to think of it, if Kerry didn't support these memos and the fake story, why isn't Kerry coming out and publically condeming THIS particular ad against the President? Isn't that what President Bush was supposed to do against the Swift Boat ads because they were lies? No one has proven completely the Swifties are lying, but I think it's pretty clear that the memos are proven fakes. Why isn't Kerry following his own advice and condeming the DNC ad and the CBS story?
I didn't really need anyone to answer that. =)
Not even a little bit. Every single shred of evidence available supports what the Swifties are saying.
Well, to be fair...they have gotten one or two people to defend Kerry. Don't get me wrong, I love the Swift Boat Vets for doing what they did, but ultimately, it all comes down to heresay on both sides.
In contrast...EVERYONE has distanced themselves from CBS. The only person who swears the story can still be true is Dan Rather who got the fake memos from an "unimpeachable source" who just happens to be:
A. Bill Burkett, Democrat and Bush hater
B. The Kerry Campaign, obviously Democrats and Bush Haters
C. The DNC...more Democrats and Bush Haters.
What does the word..."unimpeachable" mean again? Maybe I got the meaning on that one mixed up. I could have sworn it was along the lines of "objective" or "trustworthy" or in this case, "non-partisan". If unimpeachable is even close to any of those three, how can C-BS call the source "unimpeachable"?
> ... I love the Swift Boat Vets for doing what they did,
> but ultimately, it all comes down to heresay on both sides.
Uh, no. Apart from whether or not it was scammed or earned,
and ignoring the "Combat V" mess, Kerry has three (3)
citations for the same Silver Star, two extremely
post-dated, and one entirely disowned by the SecNAV who
supposedly authored and signed it. That's not a hearsay
issue, and Kerry has made no explanation.
On the first Purple Heart, ignoring the Admiral who
says it was an accidental self-inflicted wound, Kerry's
own journal was quoted in "Tour of Duty" that on
a date AFTER that incident, he still had not experienced
any enemy fire. Kerry has made no explanation, but one
of his spokespeople has admitted that there may be a
problem with that medal.
> What does the word..."unimpeachable" mean again?
Well, at first we thought it meant the memos came from
Clinton :-) But my theory is that what it really means is
that CBS mistook a failure to impeach as confirmation.
CBS gave the memors to the White House, who essentially
said "no comment". Grima Rathertongue's fevered brain
figured that meant his source was WH-approved, ergo,
unimpeachable.
No, the Swifties are not liars, and it is not just the Swifties' word against kerry's word. You really need to do your homework on this one.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1220315/posts?page=32#32
http://www.archive-news.net/Kerry/JK_timeline.html
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=352185
http://ejsmithweb.com/fr/newsoldier/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040820-125031-5676r.htm
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040818-121346-4803r.htm
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040819-123903-5094r.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1191488/posts
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/kerry/articles/2004/04/23/discrepancies_noted_in_kerrys_record/
http://www.nationalreview.com/document/document200408280010.asp
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1197486/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1197486/posts?page=81#81
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C119101%2C00.html
http://www.paperlessarchives.com/john_kerry.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200405041626.asp
http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/2004/kerryawards.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1180788/posts?page=11#11
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1062437/posts
http://stolenhonor.com/
http://www.vnsfvetakerry.com/
http://www.powmiafamiliesagainstjohnkerry.com/
http://www.powforum.org/kerry.htm
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/
When you've finished reading those, let me know, and I'll give you some more.
As for the Kerry journal...I will agree with you that holds more weight. I misspoke when I said it was all heresay, but the basic premise is a lot of the charges to both sides are largely unsubstantiatied. But to agree with you, BECAUSE of that fact, Kerry should be answering questions about it.
And don't misunderstand me either. I BELIEVE the Swift Boat Vets...it's hard not to when you see who they're arguing with. I am simply stating that O'Neil and Kerry have been pitted against each other on this issue for years. I know Kerry has backpedaled on the first Purple Heart...backpedaled on the Cambodian Christmas,and backpedaled on other issues.
I guess the point I was making was that the fake memos were proven fakes by virtually everyone and the Swift Boat Vets are still in the heresay category, as far as the mainstream press goes. They're still arguing the validity of the Swift Boat Vets...NO ONE is arguing the validity of these memos...except C-BS, that is. That was the point I was trying to make.
Max Cleland.
Ain't we got fun?
I think I calrified the point I was trying to make in my previous reply.
I wonder if Cleland met with Burkett on the day of his Crawford gate crashing photo op?
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.