Because John Kerry has been exposed as having lied often and in great detail and with great emotion about his Christmas Eve trip to Cambodia in 1968, his claims about having made other trips to Cambodia simply cannot be believed unless and until clear and convincing proof of those trips is offered.
Because historian Douglas Brinkley recently wrote a book that either missed or covered up the very-obvious-to-anyone-who-was-studying-the-matter lies that Kerry told about his Christmas Eve 1968 trip to Cambodia. Thus Professor Brinkley's assurances that Kerry went to Cambodia in 1969 --assurances that have been made to the British newspaper The Telegraph, but which haven't had to have been made in the U.S. yet due to a big paper balckout of the story-- do not rise to the level of proof, and even if they did, the materials on which he makes such assurances are not in the public domain and cannot be tested, and Professor Brinkley's bona fides are insufficient to persuade us of the content of those documents.
Because it is in John Kerry's power to authorize the release of documents bearing on the truthfulness of his assertion that he has made other trips into Cambodia on dates other than Christmas Eve 1968, but because John Kerry has refused to release those documents, we have to assume those documents do not support his assertions of other trips.
Given John Kerry's shattered credibility on this matter, it is unreasonable to believe his "magic hat" tory unless and until a person who can be proven to have been a CIA man doing cross border missions in early 1969 steps forward to claim his hat.
And finally, given Kerry's shattered credibility on the Christmas Eve, 1968 trip to Cambodia, it is more reasonable than not reasonable to believe that the individuals who brought the story to the attention of most o the public --John O'Neill and the other swift boat veteran critics-- may have other important and persuasive information to share. Further, because the swift boat veterans supporting Kerry, at least some of whom knew or ought to have known that the swift boat mission to Cambodia on Christmas Eve 1968 was false and could have stepped forward to correct the record, but did not step forward to correct the record, their testimony on this and related matters is less trustworthy than it had previously been thought to be.
All of these statements are the inevitable conclusions that follow from the application of the rules most people use on issues of credibility and trustworthiness in everyday life to the specifics of John Kerry's Vietnam claims and, further, to the claims he makes about himself and his plans for his presidency. Many people refuse to apply these rules because they want Kerry to win --the elite media-- and they don't really care about his credibility. But let's not kid ourselves, Kerry's not trustworthy. And anyone who will let the facts get in the way of their loyalties will have to admit it, at least to themselves.
Very good point by Hugh that the believability of Kerry's own vets is now ruined because they knew & previously admitted the Christmas in Cambodia story was a lie and never said anything to correct the record. On the air today Hugh also notes that Doug Brinkley has also lost all credibility because he actually published a book - either knowing or not knowing the story was a fraud - and didn't address it in his glowing portrayal.
All I have to say, it was good the private investigator interviewed Kerry's crew first.
He'll make a good witness later...even if the crew members recant their stories. It will add more credence to the Swift Vets assertion that they were told not to talk.
Hope the PI taped the information.