Posted on 09/12/2004 12:01:19 AM PDT by woodb01
A new face on the horizon is Former Texas House Speaker Ben Barnes, who is garnering headlines by saying he helped Mr. Bush avoid service in Vietnam. But Mr. Barnes in 1999 said that no one from the Bush family asked for such assistance; he testified to the same fact under oath. Barnes, a Democrat, was defeated in Texas after he was implicated in a quick-profit stock scheme that was allegedly designed to win the passage of two banking bills. He is also a Kerry campaign vice chair.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Yea .. but I think Danny could be in more trouble over the FORGED signatures issue
On CBS, he said it was a Bush family friend who asked him. In the lawsuit it looks like he took great pains to say only an explicitly that no Bush family member asked him. I looked into it and that's what I found.
What Barnes said was that an intermediary approached him about getting W into the ANG. Barnes will say that does not contradict what he said in 1999 that nobody from the Bush family asked him.
Fact is, the whole DNC, including their media affiliates need to be exposed in this election cycle.
That means, when CBS, ABC, the AP, GLOBE, NY Times, and all the other lefty loonies have to address this because alternative media is picking it up, and then it goes to still more media sources, there will be shrieking and wailing.
They'll try to dismiss or excuse the perjury, and the talking heads will make excuse after excuse because it's just too painful for them. And as they do, the American people are going to tune out of the DNC and Main Stream Media like they've never done before in the history of this country!
When its raining ten dollar bills, are you going to check the serial numbers you like best?
Every statement I've read so far, he reiterates that nobody from the Bush family asked him for assistance.
Barnes is an idiot and a scumbag and an opportunist, but he (as far as I know) has never claimed that a member of the Bush family asked him to do anything.
I don't get the point of this entire thread.
That's sort of a nasty comment to woodb01. In some parts of this country you don't get honest news reporting. Especially in hotels. They pretty much show the afternoon sitcoms during the day and the evening news shows the OJ, Kobi, Lacie soap operas. Lighten up.
Perjury is not about just DIRECT false statements, unknown to most people who don't deal with the law, perjury ALSO INCLUDES STATEMENTS THAT ARE DESIGNED TO DECEIVE OR MISLEAD. THAT ALSO INCLUDES STATEMENTS THAT ARE EVASIVE WHEN YOU'RE UNDER OATH.
If the context of the question was one related to helping out Bush, and he's singing a different tune now, then the statement is perjured.
Please pardon the question, but just where, exactly is the claim in your title "BARNES, KERRY CAMPAIGN VICE CHAIRMAN ADMITS PERJURY ABOUT BUSH!!" contained in the acticle you linked??
You are as wrong as wrong can be.
His statement under oath was that no member of the Bush family ever asked him for assistance in getting GWB into the TANG.
Can you please show me where he's contradicted that statement?
He hasn't. I really have no idea what you're trying to say here.
NO, he is not. And therefore it is not perjury. He is saying someone outside of the family asked him to do it.
No perjury here under those conditions. Sorry.
We all know what we're reading right now; but none of us (to my knowledge) has read Barnes' actual deposition.
*** Just emerge from a coma
No, just an epiphany. Until I saw that Barnes had made the statement UNDER OATH, it didn't click.
His statement now is inconsistent with his statement under oath. Clinton did NOT get off for his perjury, he ACTUALLY WAS IMPEACHED in the US House. And his law license was removed because of perjury as well. So just claiming that he didn't know the meaning of "is" doesn't get you off. That is actually an evasive answer that falls under the domain of perjury. That's why even with his "is" statement, he was still impeached by the House, and he still lost his law license.
It is rash to accuse someone of perjury if the evidence suggests that he didn't. "Family friends" are by definition not members of the family with which they are friends.
Perjury is very difficult to prove.
Although I think he should have been found guilty of perjury, a perjury rap was never pinned on Slimeball Clinton. He was found to have "lied under oath."
So far, my understanding of this situation suggests that Barnes is guilty of neither.
Give me the link so that I can see his testimony myself!! You say you've looked into it, that testimony would be invaluable. I've dealt a LOT with perjury, and in fact, am right in the middle of working with an attorney to have another attorney disbarred for perjury, AND to get a 2 year old Court order voided on perjury grounds.
I NEED THAT TESTIMONY LINK!! This could be another smoking gun.
What most people don't know about perjury is that it DOESN'T take a direct false statement. It takes a few elements:
1. Did deceive or mislead
2. Material to the issue
3. Knowledge of the falsity or reckless regard for the truth
Those are the primary elements. Some states add an additional threshold test that requires INTENT to Deceive or mislead, but there is generally a whole set of criteria for that which are usually not too difficult to prove.
Nothing to see here. Lets just move along to something we can do something about. If murder, treason, taking bribes, meeting with drug dealers,and pardoning Mr. Rich doesn't cause a flap, then why would a little perjury against a mean ole Republican?
Well, at least its not lying about sex. We know everybody does that!
Good analysis. Thanks. Carville spoke of Hillary in 4 yrs. He said he would be 64 yrs old and would not be able to take care of his family and do what was required from a campaign. He threw in the fact that if Kerry won and stayed in for 8 years it would be even less likely. I was surprised by his lack of enthusiasm. And I believe you are right about Clinton or Carville not being behind the forgeries. I do not think they are. I do think, however, that they are giving advice that leads the Kerry camp to do something stupid like this. Not that they advised this. Kerry is perfectly capable of coming up with his own bag of dirty tricks. I just don't think he is very good at it. He is going to take the Clinton torpedoes and drive his little swift boat right in front of them. JMO.
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.