Posted on 10/30/2004 10:50:51 PM PDT by icecold
Kerry's non-honorable discharge Exclusive: Earl Lively makes solid case senator left Navy under a cloud There is overwhelming evidence that the Navy gave John Kerry either a dishonorable discharge or an undesirable discharge – which is the equivalent of a dishonorable discharge without the felony conviction – and that, as a result of such discharge, he was stripped of all of his famous but questionable Navy awards and medals. And the kicker? The evidence is on his website!
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
unfortunatly other than a suprise that is all they will get him for, They can't get him for violating and laws cause I bet if it did happen than he like his godfather friend was pardoned by carter. But it could sway the election for sure but the lefties back clinton and he was a dodger so who knows,
I hope to God you are right. But, I don't want to get caught accusing Kerry of something that could backfire and hurt us. We cannot be like CBS, after all.
Therefore, we have to consider all of the other possible explanations and make sure none of them are possible. In that spirit.
The discrepancy could be explained, I believe, if Kerry was in the IRR (Independent Ready Reserve). You are only allowed in the IRR after you have fully completed your contract. However, you don't receive a discharge until after you resign from the IRR.
I know because I did something like this myself. After returning from the Gulf War I received a DD-214 and went back to reserve status. However, I had 9.5 years in and for personal reasons I went IRR. I stayed IRR for another 6 years (no drilling) and was then discharged.
The evidence presented clearly indicates that it is LIKELY that Kerry got an "Other Than Honorable" discharge. However, we need concrete proof. This is not it, unfortunately.
Has ice formed over the equator yet? I've lost all faith in our media... even FOX ... who could have done a special on this story.
That discrepancy was discussed here on FR shortly after Kerry put his "records" on his website.
I just love how the media "discovers" these nuggets then heartily pats themselves on the back.
No, as a commissioned officer, he could leave active duty, never participate in guards or reserves, and still maintain his commission - meaning there would be no discharge. While it is possible that Kerry resigned his commission in '72 and received a less than honorable discharge, it is also possible (and even likely) that for some reason he waited until '78 to resign his commission. If he had not resigned (or lost) his commission in '78, he would still hold his commission today and would never have been discharged, despite his active duty having ended in '72.
A commission is "indefinite", but not "for life" unless the officer has at least 20 good years of service at retires ... then the officer is entitled to state his rank (with the tag ... USN(ret) or USNR(ret) or as appropriate for the other services.
Kerry got an honorable discharge when he went from enlisted status (Officer Candidate OCUI-2), and was immediately commissioned as an Ensign, USNR.
When he, as a reserve officer, left active duty, his status changed. (Probably USNR-S1 - non-drilling).
Usually, an officer can be S1 for about 2 years before being transferred to S2 status. Then, the Navy typically "cleans house" and will discharge reserve officers who have been in an S2 status for 4 -6 years.
The interesting fine print on on of the Navy's letter to Kerry regarding his Honorable Discharge in 1978 was the paragraph directing him to return his ID card. Now ... if he had been given a less than honorable discharge - he certainly would not have had an ID card.
Having said all that, I still recognize that Kerry's people are quite capable at cutting/pasting/editing and re-Xeroxing stuff to create papers that say what ever looks good, and the bad stuff could have been taken out. Also ... the letter I mentioned (return ID card) could have had some errors ... some sort of "form letter" where paragraphs might have been added.
Bottom line ... don't count on anything .... BUT Kerry should be pressured to sign the SF180!!!
Mike
If you are right, then this only strengthens the story's viability. If an officer is "never" discharged unless he resigns his commission or gets into trouble, then how is that John Kerry DID get a discharge? Why would Kerry resign his commission when he became a U.S. Senator? Better yet, what sort of trouble earned Kerry his 'early' discharge?
the key would be Sen. John Warner coming forward..but that might not happen since he's part of the senate club
Trust me, officers are "discharged" very differently than enlisted men.
Is it just a coincidence that Sen. John Warner amnesia, or may have something to do with the fact that he was mentioned today on the news for a cabinet position in a Kerry administration.
I believe the regulations under which he received the discharge in '78 had something to do with not being involuntarily separated without a hearing or some such thing.
Were you one that suggested that a DD214 wouldn't even have been issued for an officer? I thought I read some 'freepers' suggesting just that.
Perhaps this is why Bush and Rove are so confident in winning. If Kerry happens to get close enough to challenge the vote in court, they trot out this little gem that under the constitution, Kerry cannot become president...game over. The supreme court cannot decide anything other than what is specifically stated in the US Constitution...Kerry will never be president.
I disagree just slightly. You are correct that an Officer can keep his commission after the end of active duty. However, there are limits. An officer has to do something to maintain the commission, at least in the naval services. He has to be either active, active reserve, or IRR (see my post #22). In the IRR, you are still supposed to go to meetings (you get credit for service and retirement points but are not paid). The most leeway they will give you is 5-6 years of doing nothing. Typically it is 5 years but you can get a 1 year extension for a good reason.
We know that Kerry was neither active or active reserve after 1972. We don't know that he wasn't IRR. We do know he didn't participate. So, he could have had a 6 year grace period from 1972 to 1978.
Look, I know it is unlikely, particularly because of all of the other evidence. However, it is simply not conclusive yet. Again, unfortunately.
"This will be breaking hard!!!!! On Nov 3 that is!"
Nov 3 2005 that is
I am praying it won't be that close but that certainly would make a great ace in the hole!!!
---We know that Kerry was neither active or active reserve after 1972. We don't know that he wasn't IRR. We do know he didn't participate. So, he could have had a 6 year grace period from 1972 to 1978.---
I don't think there's a pot of gold here, just some technical BS. Sorry.
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.