"Texans For Truth" Go Insane

The new Bush-bashing 527, "Texans For Truth", got off to a rocky start when CBS debunked their first ad before it aired. Now, they have decided to spend their ad budget juggling dynamite. I am not quite able to believe I am typing this, but they are attacking Bush for failing to fully release his military records. Golly - in a parallel universe, folks are criticizing Kerry for failing to release his military records. Is this really a match these "Texans for Suicide" want to strike? Who are these guys working for?

I will excerpt from their press release:

Texans for Truth will release a new TV ad Thursday calling on President Bush to immediately release all of his military records to the public before the first campaign debate with Democratic candidate John Kerry on September 30, 2004...

"Seven months ago, President Bush promised to release his service records, and he’s yet to honor that commitment," said Glenn Smith of Texans for Truth. "The White House needs to stop delaying... It only takes seven minutes to fill out the military records release form. We’re giving him seven days."

On February 8, 2004, George W. Bush appeared on "Meet the Press" and told Tim Russert and the American people that he would, "Yes, absolutely," release his military records. Bush has yet to sign the legal consent form to release of his records and White House spokespeople continue to dodge reporter questions regarding Bush’s service history."

Well. John Kerry made a similar promise to Tim Russert in April of 2004. John Kerry has yet to sign the Form 180, as noted above. In Kerry's case, we KNOW there are undisclosed records - the Navy recently reviewed Kerry's medals, and assured us that all the documentation was in order. Good news for Kerry, but where is the documentation they reviewed? It's not at Kerry's website. And believe me, just because the documentation is properly signed off, it does not follow that all the questions have been answered.

As to Bush's case, my understanding is that, although he has not signed a Form 180, his order as Commander in Chief to have his records released is a compelling substitute. I realize that new records surface ocassionally. My only regret is that they surface in odd parts of various Pentagon document storage facilities - if Laura Bush would find a missing box of records in the White House residence, no one on the Left would have any complaint at all.

Instead, as new documents are discovered, they are promptly released; the AP has a FOIA request, which I understand the Pentagon is making a good-faith effort to fulfill. Kerry, on the other hand, is not even pretending. We are told, in effect, to take those FOIA requests and "shove it" - if we can't find documents that we know exist by looking at at his website, hard luck.

Well, if the Texans for Truth turn this into a news story, it will surely and truly vindicate Mickey's point about run-amuck 527s.

MORE: Kerry's non-disclosure in the news - the links above are to the Washington Post, Judicial Watch, Don Imus, and yours truly.

Finally, props to Jodi Wilgoren of the NY Times for mentioning the "Texans for Truth" ad and completely missing the point.

And a task for some lefty who is more devoted to the insidious Bush cover-up of his TANG documents than I am (yes, that would be any lefty) - I would be delighted to link to an even vaguely civil post explaining the Bush cover-up to the rest of us. If I am wrong about the AP, the FOIA, and the seeming compliance, let me know.

Comments

[Crank]

That would be "Texans for Half-Truth." To be charitable. Assuming they are Texans, that is.

Next they will ask for Bush's tax and medical records, perhaps? Maybe even his journal from his TANG days.

[Berend de Boer]

For what it's worth, AFAIK, Bush HAS signed 180.

[Berend de Boer]

Quote: "George Bush signed a Form 180 long ago and without hesitation."

http://www.canyon-news.com/artman/publish/article_1621.php

[Fredrik Nyman]

Wouldn't it be fun if, sometime the next six weeks, it turns out that Stuart Buck's theory is right?

By the way: if that theory is right, when would be the best time to make the revelation, and how should it be done?

[Berend de Boer]

Hmmm, according to the Whitehouse it's unclear:

At the White House, press secretary Scott McClellan said he couldn't say specifically whether Mr. Bush signed Standard Form 180, but the president did request and release his own military records in February.
"I don't believe he signed any form, but he did authorize making his military records available publicly," Mr. McClellan said. "We have released all the records, and reporters were allowed to look at his medical records as well."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040818-121345-3874r.htm

[abb1]

Using the Pentagon (not to mention brutal third-world dictators like Allawi) for his re-election bid. Hiding and/or shredding documents. Truly Nixonian stuff.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Months after insisting it could find no more records of President Bush's Air National Guard service, the Defense Department has released more than two dozen pages of files, including Bush's report card for flight training and dates of his flights.
[...]
The Pentagon and Bush's campaign have claimed for months that all records detailing his fighter pilot career have been made public, but defense officials acknowledged Tuesday they had found two dozen new records detailing his training and flight logs after the AP sued and submitted new requests under the public records law.
[...]
The newly released records do not include any from five categories of documents Bush's commanders had been required to keep in response to the gaps in Bush's training in 1972 and 1973. For example, National Guard commanders were required to perform an investigation whenever any pilot skipped a medical exam and forward the results up the Air Force chain of command. No such documents have surfaced.

[TM]

Great work, abb1!

Now, is there any evidence at all that anyone associated with Bush was delaying the release of these documents?

Was there anything particularly exciting in these documents (I recall people yawned them off)?

Is there any evidence to contradict the perfectly plausible alternative theory, which is that the Pentagonis a big place and records from the '70's TANG may be more broadly dispersed than we realize?

You missed this excerpt from the story:

"Previous requests from other requesters for President Bush’s individual flight records did not lead to the discovery of these records because at the time President Bush left the service, flight records were subject to retention for only 24 months and we understood that neither the Air Force nor the Texas Air National Guard retained such records thereafter," the Pentagon told the AP.

"Out of an abundance of caution," the government "searched a file that had been preserved in spite of this policy" and found the Bush records, the letter said. "The Department of Defense regrets this oversight during the previous search efforts."

Any evidence that that explanation is false?

Anyway, when files are missing its not Nixonian, its Clintonian.

[max]

When reading your posts on nyt reporters/articles I get the impression that they've stopped using the internet as a research tool, and rely only on what is fed to them by their collegues/the DNC/the Kerry campaign/'reliable' (i.e. left-wing partisan) sources etc.

I guess going on-line and using Google runs the risk of being too painful.

[abb1]

Well,

The release marked the second Friday night in a row that the Defense Department has released more of the president's National Guard files. The White House has repeatedly announced this year that all of Bush's records have been released, only to have the Pentagon come up with more files in response to the AP's lawsuit and FOIA requests.

Let's think about this for a moment.

Seems to me that this could mean one of the following two things:

EITHER

- Mr. Bush did give the Pentagon a coherent order to release all the records (btw, where can I see the text of this order?), but he is merely a stooge whose orders are ignored.

OR

- Mr. Bush lied about giving the order to the Pentagon to release all the records.

Which one do you prefer?

[JB]

"Which one do you prefer?"

I'd prefer someone who didn't think that offering false dichotomies was a clever form of persuasion.

"Seems to me that this could mean one of the following two things"

If you can only conceive of these two possibilities, why should anyone else be interested in your opinions on this subject?

Especially when you overlook the possibility that the actual explanation offered by the Pentagon is true - that they released all the records they found, and then, with further searching, they found some more?

If this explanation sounds implausible to you, I can only assume that you have absolutely no experience in dealing with government agencies or large corporations.

[Calliope]

If they're trying to hide them or not release them...why you figure they keep releasing batches when they come across them?

Damn ineffective record suppression effort if you ask me.

Nobody gives a rat about this anyway except people that already hate Bush. Frankly I hope you guys keep it up. Just makes you look weird to normal people.

[abb1]

If they're trying to hide them or not release them...why you figure they keep releasing batches when they come across them?

So, I take it, you picked the second option - he lied. He didn't order the Pentagon to release all the records, just some selected recors. That's what I think too. Otherwise we would've seen the exact 'order' the Pentagon (allegedly) recieved from Bush in the press.

[abb1]

Frankly I hope you guys keep it up.

Hey, I'd prefer to chat about things like Iraq or economy.

It seems that you guys want to keep it up.

[Infidel]

"Hey, I'd prefer to chat about things like Iraq or economy.

It seems that you guys want to keep it up."

No, you don't chat, you spew in true Chomskyite fashion. You violate every rule of logic and discourse and figure yourself so "enlightened".

IOW, you're full of it.

[abb1]

Yeah, I sure am EVIL. I eat Judeo-Christian children for breakfast every morning.

You can call me Dr. Evil.

Now, what do you think about the Bush records, AP lawsuit, FOIA requests: is Mr. Bush a stooge whose orders are ignored by the Pentagon or did he lie about ordering to release all the records?

It could be both, actually.

[Cecil Turner]

"or did he lie about ordering to release all the records? "

Maybe they burned 'em. "Bush lied--records fried." (Yeah, I know, but "burned" doesn't rhyme . . . howzabout a little poetic license here?)

[calex59]

to abb1
Apparently being liberal affects your ability to read. The pentagon gave you the reason the records have been release piece meal. If Bush wanted to really suppress the records one batch(the first one) would have been released. How about Kerry being as open and finally signing a 180? Why does he keep putting it off or refusing to do so? There is real record suppression but of course he is a liberal so he doesn't have to release his records.

[Tim]

Hey, abb1, I'm curious - when did you stop beating your wife and sleeping with your son's best friend? Or haven't you yet? Oh, one more thing - did they ever stop you from exposing yourself to the students at the girls-only high school?

[Patrick]

"Using the Pentagon (not to mention brutal third-world dictators like Allawi) for his re-election bid. "

What a disgusting smear against a man, Allawi, who has been targetted for DEATH by our enemies. This honorable man is risking his life to help make Iraq recover from the trauma of Saddam's reign of terror and begin anew as a democracy.

here's a hint on 'brutal': It's beheading civilian contractors who are there as teachers and construction workers, cooks and helpers; it's setting off car bombs in markets, churchs, mosques and police stations. Allawi the doctor and many others in the Iraqi Govt are bravely building democracy and fighting the terrorists, they are the enemies of brutality.

you, otoh, egg on the terrorists and bash our allies and pro-democracy Iraqis. disgusting. Abb1, you arent even fit to shine Allawi's shoes, you are a disgrace to political debate with your lies and smears of Allawi.

SHAME ON YOU!

[Larry J]

There's a saying that "One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while somehow expecting different results."

By my count, this is at least the 5th time that Democrats have tried the bogus "Bush AWOL" line. They tried it both times when he ran for governor of Texas, back in the 2000 election, earlier this year, and again this month. Maybe they think that if they keep trying a 6th, 8th, or 82nd time, people will suddenly sit up and believe there's actually something to the story. Alas, they have not.

It would seem that many Democrats (and that includes CBS News) are insane. That would explain a lot.

[abb1]

Patrick,
What a disgusting smear against a man, Allawi, who has been targetted for DEATH by our enemies.

Actually, he was targeted for DEATH by our friend and ally Saddam Hussain in 1978.

In any case, this is a very stupid comment: mafia people, for example, target each other for death all the time. It doesn't make those who are targeted good people. Think, man, think.

Allawi the doctor and many others in the Iraqi Govt are bravely building democracy and fighting the terrorists, they are the enemies of brutality.

More kool-aid, anyone?

Abb1, you arent even fit to shine Allawi's shoes..

That's a relief. You are fit, though, and you're doing excellent job.

calex,
The pentagon gave you the reason the records have been release piece meal. If Bush wanted to really suppress the records one batch(the first one) would have been released.

Could you rephrase this, please? It sounds confusing.

How about Kerry being as open and finally signing a 180? Why does he keep putting it off or refusing to do so?

Good question. As much as you would like to present this as an equal 'they both don't release their records' situation, there is no equivalence.

There's a good reason to believe that Mr. Bush was AVOL or deserter - which is a crime. We need to know for sure.

With Kerry you're just on a fishing expedition.

Comprende?

[Greg F]

“In any case, this is a very stupid comment: mafia people, for example, target each other for death all the time. It doesn't make those who are targeted good people.”

Yes abb1, I agree, that is a very stupid comment from you.

“Good question. As much as you would like to present this as an equal 'they both don't release their records' situation, there is no equivalence.”

Abb1 acknowledges it is a good question which he has no rational answer for, so in abb1’s warped world there is “no equivalence”.

“There's a good reason to believe that Mr. Bush was AVOL or deserter - which is a crime. We need to know for sure.”

A statement only a fanatic could write with a straight face.

With Kerry you're just on a fishing expedition.

And the fishing has been good! Warm up the frying pan.

[Cecil Turner]

"There's a good reason to believe that Mr. Bush was AVOL or deserter - which is a crime. We need to know for sure."

There's good reason to believe you can't even spell "AWOL."

And anyone with any knowledge of the UCMJ knows the regulations don't apply to reservists while they're not actively serving. Or you could look up UCMJ article 2 (PERSONS SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER):

Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal Service.

So Lt Bush couldn't be AWOL until after he showed up . . . which ought to seem a bit silly, even to you. Even after the guidelines were made more stringent in 1979, the Senate report stated:

"The new subsection is not intended to affect reservists not performing active service or civilians."

(A good overview is available here, for those interested in the application or case law.)

[abb1]

Whatever. There is a very good reason to believe that Mr. Bush's NG service was full of dereliction of duty and preferential treatment (aka 'cronyism' or 'corruption'). That's why media organizations are trying to get all the relevant records.

There are no reasonable similar allegations about Mr. Kerry's service.

The best you can do is to cast doubts over his recollection of the exact date he was in Cambodia or something. That's not very interesting for anyone except you, folks. As I mentioned before, Mr. Reagan remembered (and bragged about) liberating Nazi death camps in Europe while he, in fact, never left the US during that period. You still belive he was a decent president, don't you?

[Cecil Turner]

"Whatever. There is a very good reason to believe that Mr. Bush's NG service was full of dereliction of duty and preferential treatment (aka 'cronyism' or 'corruption')."

Ah, dereliction of duty (article 92):

Any person subject to this chapter who-- [. . .] (3)is derelict in the performance of his duties;

Except, as we've already determined, Lt Bush wasn't "subject to this chapter." And as preferential treatment isn't likely to be part of a military record, you're again on a wild goose chase for records that appear to be both non-existent and irrelevant.

"There are no reasonable similar allegations about Mr. Kerry's service."

There are very reasonable allegations that Senator Kerry didn't deserve two of his Purple Hearts--which he then used to cut short a combat assignment. And of course he was "subject to this chapter" and reportedly has nearly 100 pages of military records that haven't been disclosed, some of which bear directly on the issue. Riiigght . . . move along, nothing to see here.

[abb1]

There are very reasonable allegations that Senator Kerry didn't deserve two of his Purple Hearts

Not anymore:

Navy: Kerry medals approved properly

Monday, September 20, 2004 Posted: 11:26 AM EDT (1526 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Navy's chief investigator concluded Friday that procedures were followed properly in the approval of Sen. John Kerry's Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Heart medals, according to an internal Navy memo.

Where's the Bush service investigation?

[abb1]

BTW, the fact that a significant number of Bush's service records are missing is in itself a pretty convicing proof of corruption and coverup. Very similar to Nixon's '18-Minute Gap'.

[capt joe]

So then why won't Kerry release his records if everything is on board. He has all the documents ready but he will only release 6 out of 100 pages. Why is that, do you suppose? Something to hide definitely.

And it isn't a matter of not being in Cambodia on an exact date. He lied, period. He is a serial liar. Oh, his lies are used for whatever is politically expedient, no matter what it costs in the long run.

In Bush's case, the records are released as discovered. No one is holding anything back. That is the gist of the references you link.

I guess that is how English comprehension works in your part of Europe. I have always found it hilarious that a continential European would dine to lecture anyone on morality. Look throughout the history of European colonialism. What to know why the world is so screwed up. Look there. That's your answer. Where else would they view Jerry Lewis, Mikey Moore, Noam Chumpsky and Zinn as important cultural leaders.

Still peddling the old bs that Saddam was a friend of the US. The old "the US armed Saddam" meme. Sorry, that job was France, Russia, China, and Germany respectively. The US places down pretty low on that list, close to Canada.

Also, still peddling the "Allawi is a murderer" meme. Sorry, that has been debunked too.

But, you know all that, but you don't have an argument, so you figure if you keep telling stories, people will believe them.

[capt joe]

abb1, You didn't answer tim's question, " when did you stop beating your wife and sleeping with your son's best friend?"

In essence, he captured the totality of your arguments.

Borinnnggg!

[Cecil Turner]

"The Navy's chief investigator concluded Friday that procedures were followed properly . . ."

You might want to read the rest of the story:

"Conducting any additional review regarding events that took place over 30 years ago would not be productive. The passage of time would make reconstruction of the facts and circumstances unreliable, and would not allow the information gathered to be considered in the context of the time in which the events took place."

But finding out who signed them and what the witnesses said, especially concerning the Purple Hearts, would be quite illuminating. Particularly since his commander is on record saying he denied the first one.

"BTW, the fact that a significant number of Bush's service records are missing . . ."

On the contrary, several of those present were supposed to've been destroyed--as most military records are only kept for a couple of years.

[abb1]

Something to hide definitely.

Right, a fishing expedition, like I said. So, why does he have to help you?

And it isn't a matter of not being in Cambodia on an exact date. He lied, period.

No he didn't. He said he remembered being in Cambodia on Christmas. You can't prove that he lied. Reagan sure lied about the Nazi camps he said he liberated. He lied about Iran-contra too. That's a fact. Kerry said he remembered something. That's never a lie.

In Bush's case, the records are released as discovered. No one is holding anything back.

That's what you believe. But every time the judge tells them to release more records they do. Stay tuned.

Look throughout the history of European colonialism. What to know why the world is so screwed up.

Agreed. But that's in the past. Now it's American colonialism and imperialism that's the problem.

Still peddling the old bs that Saddam was a friend of the US.

It's the truth, though. Turn off your Rush Limbaugh show and read a newspaper.

Also, still peddling the "Allawi is a murderer" meme. Sorry, that has been debunked too.

Do you have a link or you heard it from Rush?

Thanks.

[Brian Duffy]

Movie:

http://homepage.mac.com/duffyb/nobush/iMovieTheater211.html

[maggie katzen]

I'd just like to add something about NG record keeping. My husband has been in the Ok Army NG for 10 years, he spent the last year in Afghanistan. He originally volunteered to go a year earlier, however the WEEKEND before he was scheduled to leave he got a call that they didn't have his medical records and unless he could produce them the next day he was not going anywhere and would probably be discharged. He'd already turned them in recently, so he collected them all again and made copies just in case they disappeared again. Then as he was preparing for the Afghanistan deployment they found out that he had profile that had been in his file for a year that noone knew about. (profile was about his knee, he can't run for PT, so instead he can bike,swim or walk) Anyway, to wrap up, they can't keep track of someone who is currently in the National Guard so why is it surprising they can't find records from 30 years ago?

[abb1]

It's not. Nothing is surprising here.

The only point I have is that they release more and more records every time they get an order from a judge.

Well, why didn't they find and release everything as soon as they got (allegedly) the order from Bush - long time ago? Either they didn't look hard enough or that wasn't in the (alleged) Bush's order. Any other possibility?

[Calliope]

It is amazing to me that people that apparently know nothing of guard service make comments like "Bush was AWOL". Guard service is based on points because the National Guard recognizes that people will have other commitments and may not be able to serve every single dril sequentially. Bush was required to accumulate 50 points per year for 6 years. Here is what he actually accumulated:

253 points in 1968-1969

340 points in 1969-1970

137 points in 1970-1971

112 points in 1971-1972

56 points in 1972 to 1973

56 points in 1973-1974

50 points per year required, 50 points or more per year served. That's how guard service is measured. He actually accumulated more than 3 times the amount of drill credit required - 954 vs the 300 point requirement for a 6 year term - for him to have fulfilled his service requirement for 6 years. His records show - beyond any doubt except to the deeply partisan Bush haters - that he fulfilled his requirements. Moreover, Bush has not made his guard service a centerpiece of his campaign.

There is nothing missing. There is no "good reason" to suspect anything. Just a perfectly normal service record for guard service.

He fulfilled his responsibilty and received an honorable discharge - full stop.

[triticale]

Well, why didn't they find and release everything as soon as they got (allegedly) the order from Bush - long time ago? Either they didn't look hard enough or that wasn't in the (alleged) Bush's order. Any other possibility?

That said documents were in the same warehouse where you saw the Ark of the Covenant being stored at the end of that Indiana Jones movie. Simple fact, paperwork gets misfiled, mishandled and lost. Do you have any notion of how many sheets of paper the U.S. miltary posesses which contain data not worth transferring to modern searchable storage?

While we are looking for worst possible explanations for things, why is Kerry's honorable discharge dated 1991? Could it have something to do with Clinton's pardon of draft dodgers and deserters?

[John Bigenwald]

You know abb1 has a point. I'm shocked that the Pentagon didn't go directly to the Bush, George W. file and publish everything! So many people did so many favors for him I'm sure that file was in the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff's lower right hand desk drawer. In fact I heard that they held a special cermony every time there was a new Chairman to pass the file from the old to the new. What else could possibly explain the reticence of the Pentagon to release these records??? It can't be that the records are paper, 30 years old an largely irrelevant to anything happening today....

[TM]

The Times has a correction to this story, which I will clip in here:

A news analysis article yesterday about the effect of the Vietnam issue on the candidacies of President Bush and Senator John Kerry misstated the amount of a reward offered by Texans for Truth to anyone who can document having seen Mr. Bush fulfill his National Guard duty in Alabama, and misstated the amount the group is spending on a television campaign in five markets. The reward is $50,000, not $10,000; the ad spending is $100,000, not $10,000.

[Toxitoxit]

As a taxpayer, I'm annoyed that any of these files still exist. Dental records from 30 years ago? Redundant proof of what days somebody came to work? How much money are they spending keeping old useless documents around? How many people have jobs devoted to shuffling and searching those old useless documents? How many times have papers like these been moved? How much is kept in rented space? For confidential documents, how much effort has gone into documenting their status and proper handling procedures? That would be a better story.