Having re-read all the documents, and noticing AGAIN the "NO" (for number of days!) spoken of above ...
How do these "prove" he "went AWOL" as you somehow believe? And as the democrats claim in their lies?
I SEE the specific paperwork that shows he DID get approval for training out-of-state, and that he DID do it by getting active duty credit for that period.
What's the problem?
Are you claiming (somehow) that "boilerplate" paragraphs (about not missing assignments) "prove" he missed assignments?
Notice that there are the same kind of "boilerplate" paragraphs to Reservists going on active duty about needing ID cards and going to the commisary on base are in his orders to Alabama. Does this mean he tried to sneak in and buy goods on the days he wasn't in training?
Having re-read all the documents, and noticing AGAIN the "NO" (for number of days!) spoken of above ...
I cannot find this in any of the documents. Can you link to it?
I SEE the specific paperwork that shows he DID get approval for training out-of-state, and that he DID do it by getting active duty credit for that period.
Bush's
request for transfer (in May 1972), then the
acceptance of the transfer (also in May 1972), then the
denial of the transfer (suspiciously hard to read date?), then
acceptance of 2nd request, which is not proof that he did the time.
Bush's military history, which makes no mention of AL. Bush
doing his time in 1973, not 1972, and not in AL. What does
this say, except that he certainly wasn’t doing his time in Texas from May 1972 to April 1973?
This says they thought he was in AL, but is still not proof.
Are you claiming (somehow) that "boilerplate" paragraphs (about not missing assignments) "prove" he missed assignments?
As I said earlier, El Gato called the misrepresentation of
that one in an earlier post. Not all articles misrepresented it, however.
