Posted on 11/01/2004 3:46:20 PM PST by stockpirate
If they could have gotten it out now, then why not 2 weeks ago??
John
"re: "we pride ourselves on a 'free press'"
Actually this is a great example of a free press. They are free to print what they choose to print and they are simply exercising their rights when they sit on a story. It might be bad journalism, but it's certainly within their rights as a 'free press'."
Yup, your right on the mark. To many people have a quite naive view as to what they think the news papers and broadcasting networks are in business for. Certainly not to provide accurate and balanced news. If you believe that you will believe Big John Kerry is an honest and upright honorable man.
Lets run with it guys (and gals).....If we don't no one will....It is not too late, really.
Read article link posted in #153
better-late-than-never BUMP
I hope this story, if true, gets lots of coverage in the next few hours.
It is close, but no cigar.
so friggin close here, but if this story breaks, it is likely going to come in the form of getting several sources to confirm off the record that Kerry's original discharge was not honorable.
Not much, probably a negotiated classification like most criminal charges.
I haven't read all the posts - why would John F'n Kerry be dishonorably discharged, if Bush was able to be honorably discharged if he didn't fully complete all his requirements? What did Johnny do to get dishonorably discharged?
I'm being technical.
An other than honorable discharge can be one of three things: either (1) dishonorable discharge, (2) bad conduct discharge or (3) under conditions other than honorable.
Maybe I'm being ticky-tacky, but I used to discharge people for a living. It's not just semantics, there are real differences between these discharges. The first two are punitive and are awarded as a result of a court-martial. The OTH is administrative, and can be awarded in lieu of a court-martial or for misconduct. It matters.
...right?
Suspicions confirmed, but a week too late.
Read between the lines of Middendorf's statement, knowing that he CANNOT say definitively what he knows about Kerry having an other than honorable discharge. Even if he knows for sure it is TRUE, he would be breaking the privacy law to say it outright.
"Bill Middendorf has agreed to publicly state that 'to the best of his knowledge and recollection' (code for - to the the extent to which I can say what I know to be true but cannot publicly legally say - wink wink), John Kerry was dishonorably discharged from the military."
He's taken a big step even coming out and saying this - read between the lines and understand HE KNOWS, but cannot legally say that he does.
In order for Middendorf to get in trouble, wouldn't sKerry have to get extremely vocal about all his records not being made public?
BMP
Same crap, different name. Yawn
Reply to you 150
What you said and
Who's got the guts?
cool...thanks.
Why so late? What was wrong with last week? Or, was the statement coaxed out of a 90 year old by withholding his Geritol?
I agree.
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.