Posted on 09/05/2004 10:29:40 AM PDT by areafiftyone
Sen. John Kerry's campaign biographer Douglas Brinkley said Sunday that if an ongoing Navy investigation into Kerry's military decorations turns up evidence of "purposeful" deception, it could spell doom for the top Democrat's White House bid.
Praising reporter Thomas Lipscomb, who broke news of the Navy investigation on Friday, Brinkley told WABC Radio's Steve Malzberg, "Journalists are going to have to see whether there's a discrepancy on [the citations posted to Kerry's] web site - whether there's something wrong that's said there or not."
"If so," said the "Tour of Duty" author, "Kerry would have to fix it immediately - and it does raise some questions as to why that would happen."
"Is it sloppiness, is it purposeful intent, is there an easy explanation for it?" Brinkley wondered.
He said that while questions raised by the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth about Kerry's war record have been very damaging, "so far they haven't been lethal." But Brinkley predicted that a discrepancy with Kerry's medals could seriously escalate his political problems.
Asked if inconsistencies uncovered by the Navy probe could be the "death knell" for Kerry's campaign, Brinkley told Malzberg, "It could."
In the next breath he hastened to add, however, "Right now it's unclear. So we have to just wait to see what all this adds up to."
The presidential historian called on Kerry to authorize the release of his full military file, saying, "Clearly some of these military records should be made available to the press."
I think you're spot on. And for all the reasons you listed.
As for Judicial Watch, oft mentioned in the thread, well I suppose they could hit a BINGO every once in a while.
Because, yes, I think this story has legs and further, I agree with Brinkley that it could cause the end of his campaign. Brinkley's practically begging someone to look into it during that interview. John Lehman's tossed the gauntlet for more investigation. The discovery of John Kerry's forged medals and documentation is out there for any intrepid and eager reporter to dig right up.
Which makes start to speculate. Who's been on the Sunday talk shows all this morning defending Kerry? Hmmmm?
Dick Gebhardt, a fellow we haven't seen in quite a while now that you mention it. What's the chance the Dem powers called him up and promised him a shot at the candidacy if he would only show up on the shows and defend Kerry?
If the Dems think Kerry's about to fall, however distant the inkling, they've got to begin a backup plan. Which is, first, finding a candidate to replace the fallen Kerry. With all of his loyal years, this is about the only shot the Dems are ever going to give Gebhardt.
Or maybe the organized labor called up Gebhardt and begged him to go on and do some trouble-shooting, I don't know. And where the hell has Ted Kennedy been lately? Here's his shadow Kerry, his loyal puppet in the senate for the past 20 years, the reason the small state of Massachusetts always has TWO senate vote on any issue, and Kenney's nowhere to be seen defending his buddy!
Dick Gebhardt?
\ Anyway, the thought popped into my head. That midnight press conference was not bedazzled by the Dems. That was pure Kerry through and through.
Maybe Kerry's wife will take ill and Kerry will resign. It would be noble and would appeal to the Oprahs of the country.
Who knows? Except me knows that something seems to be up.
If deception is found, Kerry will attack the Pentagon and demand that Bush fire everyone in the Pentagon who "is attacking my patriotism." The media will join him in lockstep.
The DNC can change candidate at any time, up to the date the electors (not us, voters) cast their ballots in December.
What the DNC won't be able to easily do, and they may not care, is change the name of the presidential candidate on the voters ballot in each and every state. But naming the presidential candidate on the voters ballot is merely a convenience for voters. When the voter pulls a party lever, the voter's vote actually goes to an elector. Electors and their alternates have already been timely named by their respective parties.
As a practical matter, the DEM party wants to come up with a scenario that results in obtaining a majority of the electors' votes. But there is no legal impediment to changing the candidate -- even after the November election (it would be bizarre, but it is legal and possible).
See http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/3/ch1.html <-- 3 USC 1
US Code, Title 3
CHAPTER 1 - PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND VACANCIES
What does he mean by IF? They will, and it won't just sound the doom of Kerry's White House bid; it will go much, much, deeper and be extremely devastating to Kerry, all his supporters, and the DNC.
Is there any possibility that Kerry or his friend Kennedy can alter the outcome of this investigation?
Hmmm. Looks like the major media is going to have a hard time ignoring this one, though I'm sure they'll try their best.
They don't. They leave Kerry's name on the ballot. So ...
What the DNC won't be able to easily do, and they may not care, is change the name of the presidential candidate on the voters ballot in each and every state. But naming the presidential candidate on the voters ballot is merely a convenience for voters. When the voter pulls a party lever, the voter's vote actually goes to an elector. Electors and their alternates have already been timely named by their respective parties.
As a practical matter, the DEM party wants to come up with a scenario that results in obtaining a majority of the electors' votes. But there is no legal impediment to changing the candidate -- even after the November election (it would be bizarre, but it is legal and possible).
My personal opinion is that Hillary is the kiss of the death of Democrats in '08 as well. I think she'd be crushed in a national election -- any national election this side of Sweden. She's a horrid candidate, but the RATS are just blind to see that. She's a big bugaboo to us and so we turn her into Goliath in our minds. I think she loses in the general election in '08, almost regardless of who the Republicans throw against her. The only way she could win is with a third-party candidate coming out of the Republican primaries -- like her husband, she needs an election that can be won with 40% of the vote.
So do I. There were obvious discrepancies that he didn't even question. Either he isn't too bright and easily duped, or he was complicit in promoting falsehoods. His credibility as a biographer and historian should be seriously questioned.
If proven, will Tom Lantos tell Kerry that he should emulate Admiral Boorda as he advised Craig Livingstone?
Gephardt would do better for the RATS than Hillary would. Gephardt would rally labor and hold the base together. He'd still get crushed badly, of course. But the RATS just want to survive to start the next campaign on Nov. 3. They know dern well that no one is going to beat Bush this year.
...He wants to retain some shred of credibility as a historian...hedging his bets or suspecting he's been had?
Did anyone else see him last week on MSNBC? He was absolutely defending Kerry's military record. I think, even denouncing the Swift Vets.
We don't, which is why I am skeptical that anything will come of it. Judicial Watch and others seem prooccupied with the "V" device on the Silver Star and the campaign stars on the Vietnam Campaign mdedal. To me, these are meaningless. Unless the Navy goes into great detail and provides us with all the documents, it will be a whitewash. Senator Warner (R-VA) has been defending the Navy's process, which leads me to believe that the Navy will try to protect the integrity of the award process lest evryone's medals becomes suspect. The Navy IG is supposed to be independent, but I never trust people to investigate themselves.
Is there any possibility that Kerry or his friend Kennedy can alter the outcome of this investigation?
If there is, it has already been done, weeks ago.
When your own biographer starts to back away, Youve got serious troubles.
OH I truly believe this time Hillary will run in 2008. She is going to conveniently win her Senate Seat in 2006 - sit comfortably there for two more years and then make her move for president. This is her only chance to run.
Kerry camp issued a statement that it was because he had changed boats and meant only that he hadn't been shot at in that particular boat.
He made Brinkley out to be the fool.
Ping Have you seen this?
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.