Clark/Kerry campaigns to investigate AWOL claims

[windansea]

DESERTER LINES
Apparently tired of being challenged on supporter Michael Moore's assertion that President Bush was a "deserter," Wesley Clark's campaign is considering hiring a private investigator to look into Bush's activities in Texas and Alabama during his National Guard service way back when.

At least one other campaign is said to be considering sending opposition researchers down south to look into Bush's record.

In the past, campaign staffers for both Clinton and Gore had tried to make hay of the rumors that Bush had somehow taken advantage of his family name during that period. Despite of months of effort, they failed to develop anything substantive.

"We have former Clinton staffers on board who say there's nothing to this," says a Kerry staffer, "but we know it's going to come up again and since nobody has a clear sense of the story right now we have to at least look into it."
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=6076

american spectator is RW source but this seems ok to me

[abburdlen]

1. Thanks Peter Jennings!

[adadem]

2. Finally...Yeah! n/t

[incapsulated]

3. ooo...

Stay Tuned!

[Myra]

4. Is this a joke? A rumor?

(Actually I hope it's true.)

[windansea]

8. McGovern interview on CNBC yesterday

From yesterday's coverage of the New Hampshire primary on CNBC, with John Siegenthaler interviewing George McGovern, himself a decorated veteran:

Siegenthaler: I just want to talk about Wesley Clark for a second . . . because he had a tough time in some cases in New Hampshire. Some people said his endorsement from Michael Moore where he called President Bush a deserter --- and then Wesley Clark refused to distance himself from Michael Moore was really a difficult time for him. And that he stumbled a couple of times up there in New Hampshire. How do you react to that?

McGovern: Well look, I know he was severely criticized for not rebuking the contention that George W. Bush was a deserter.

But what would you call him?

He avoided the war in Viet Nam by signing up for the Texas National Guard -- and then didn't show up.

He missed half of his time by not showing up for the National Guard training.

Maybe there's some kinder word than deserter. But in my book that's not too far from the truth.

And I think General Clark is a man who never backed away from battle -- who volunteered to be a part of the armed forces of this country -- as I did.

People like that are not going to defend George W. Bush on his military record.

Siegenthaler: (Stunned) Issues of war and peace continue to be a controversy -- and a part of this campaign as we head through 2004.

[TopesJunkie]

5. Finally, indeed --

I can't believe they didn't do it right after the debate. They both goofed in the days that followed on this issue. With research, those goofs could have been turned around quite easily.

[robsul82]

6. From the Spectator, who refuses to say "Howard..."

...I wouldn't doubt Clark investigating it, but Kerry? Methinks that's probably hot air.

Later.

RJS

[retyred]

22. I have to agree

Clark could lose the Presidency over this as well as Kerry, but Kerry would still want to remain in politics, he's not about to say * was a deserter or even AWOL, if he doesn't become President he'll have a hard time working with these people if he says what we all know is true, that and the fellow bonesman tie. Clark may do it, but Kerry, not enough stones.


retyred in fla
“Good-Night Paul, Wherever You Are”
So I read this book

[ElementaryPenguin]

7. Fantastic!! AWOL is going to be totally

Fucked when lazy, head up his ass, Joe 6 Pack discovers that this happens to be positively TRUE!!!

:toast:

[windansea]

12. it will be tought to find proof

others have tried..but anything is possible

[Qutzupalotl]

17. link to more info

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=109816

[bearfartinthewoods]

30. and when he finds out it isn't??

there is no proof! up until now we could lay it on cspan callin and anyother outlet we had and it just sat there...perking into the American counsciousness.

now, if it's pushed and they push back and everyone finds out the charge is not much more than smoke...we lose.

some things are better whispered than screamed.

[windansea]

31. could be...n/t

[mikehiggins]

9. Didn't General Clark just pull back from this one?

I thought he had, or was it just Moore's use of "deserter"?

There is some question about Bush, and when he stopped going to his assigned duties and when they started the drug tests, but that's another story. Clark already complimented Bush on his dealing with his drinking problem and saving his troubled marriage (too bad how the kids are turning out, though). I don't know why anyone would think Shrub had a problem with drug tests, though.

Anyway, "deserter" was another mistake that enabled the media whores to attack. A little quicker wit and a little slower tongue seems called for in coming weeks. For a guy as smart as Clark that shouldn't be a problem.

I really think Clark is looking at the media as if they were trying to be fair. He should just think of the media as being on his side as much as Milosevic and Shelton and Cohen are. That should make the situation a little clearer.

[windansea]

10. he was right to back away without proof

all he did in the debate was stick up for free speech and got crucified

[Jerseycoa]

11. Very smart of both campaigns

The RW attack response to Clark's defense of Michael Moore's free speech rights have been rabid. They have left Clark and Kerry, the two veterans, absolutely no choice but to investigate the charges.

:bounce:

Those Repubs are such flaming assholes.

[DemSigns]

13. factcheck.org

I heard some rightwing radio wench bring this website up to debunk the awol story. I looked at the website and it looks a little thin. Do you think the awolbush.com info trumps this?

[tishaLA]

16. factcheck.org uses

ONLY secondary sources instead of looking at the primary sources. Some website ahs discussed this--it's bad "fact-checking," for one thing--and I am inclined not to believe factcheck right now.

[bearfartinthewoods]

26. hmmmmfp...sounds like he got an early out...just like Kerry

Kerry will never touch this.

[sangh0]

14. Where's the straight talkin anti-Bush* Dean on this one?

.

[xultar]

15. Hey Peetah Jennings give me a bigg ole' wet one on the back

[Myra]

18. More fuel from Joe Conason: Bush’s War Stories Simply Don’t Fly

"George W. Bush lied about his military service record. The lie can be found in his own 1999 campaign autobiography (as written by Karen Hughes), where he dramatically describes his experience as a pilot in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.

On page 34 of A Charge to Keep, Mr. Bush claims that, after learning to fly the F-102 fighter jet, he was turned down for Vietnam duty because "had not logged enough flight hours" to qualify for a combat assignment. Before going on to recall the "challenging moments" that involved close formation drills at night during poor weather, he adds: "I continued flying with my unit for the next several years."

In light of what journalists and other researchers have learned since the publication of Mr. Bush’s book, his account is unmistakably fraudulent.

The issue is again relevant because Michael Moore, the author and filmmaker who supports Wesley Clark’s Presidential campaign, recently impugned the President as a "deserter." During the final Democratic Presidential debate in New Hampshire, moderator Peter Jennings called Mr. Moore’s statement "a reckless charge not supported by the facts," and demanded that General Clark repudiate his celebrity backer.
..."

http://www2.observer.com/observer/pages/conason.asp

[Jerseycoa]

20. There's a "George" article

I have not read it, but have seen it cited. Apparently, they investigated and could *not* prove Bush was AWOL. Records have been sanitized. It's hard to know where this all goes, but it's going to play in the GE, for sure.

[HootieMcBoob]

19. Alright!

That's the idea! If the media keeps asking the question they have no other option right? The people who ask the questions have the resources to investigate this but apparently are reluctant to do it. So, in order to get to the bottom of it and end the questions they have to hire someone to do it. Nuff said.
:toast:

[krkaufman]

21. Oh, crap..!!

> Clark/Kerry campaigns to investigate AWOL claims

Oh, crap! If Kerry's camp "investigates", no matter what they find Kerry will come back with a safe "There's no evidence of President Bush being a deserter. He received an honorable discharge from the TANG. The issue is closed."

I just have no faith that Kerry will take a controversial stand on this (or anything else!!!).

[sangh0]

24. How many Bush admin people has your candidate convicted?

.

[krkaufman]

28. And how many Bush Admin people has your candidate enabled?

"yes" on IWR.

[windansea]

23. more info on awol

http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/

[Toucano]

25. Is there any indication voters care about this?

In which polls did voters indicate they care about what GWB did during the Vietnam war?

This is a losing, pointless, distraction for us. Regardless of whether Bush was AWOL or not, he's not going to be punished for it. I realize it helps motivate us, but we're already plenty motivated, as indicated by the record turnout in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Of course I hate it. Of course I'd like voters to see through his tough-guy charade. But that's not going to happen because they've already covered the evidence trail.

Voter's care about the future more than the past.

They care about jobs, the economy, health care, and Iraq.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/epolls/NH/index.html

Karl Rove has proven that the best way to derail a candidate is to reinforce what voters already believe *might* be true about him rather than trying to change what they believe to be true about him.

Voters think Bush is tough and patriotic and Christian. Changing their minds about these things is an uphill climb. They also believe he *might* be out of touch with the real world, he *might* care more about his rich corporate friends than he cares about the voters, and he *might* not be captain of the ship.

IMO, we'll be better off reinforcing the doubts about Bush than trying to combat the image people have of him, regardless of how wrong they are to see him that way.

[Jerseycoa]

27. Agree in general

But we have to be up to speed when the GOP starts tearing into Clark and Kerry the way they did Cleland. We have to up to speed when they try to run Bush as commander-in-chief. I say investigate every goddamned minute he ever lived. They will come at the Dems with everything they've got. The more ammunition in our hands, the less in theirs.

[creativelcro]

29. BWAAHAHAHAHA!!

Good one. They're investigating. They've had all the time in the world to investigate and they're doing it now... It's just PR, to justify why they did not say anything when asked about Bush being a deserter....