Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: rpm on August 06, 2004, 02:53:00 PM
-
Sorry Neo's. Even Dubya is backing away from this failed hack job.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=5899870
BOSTON (Reuters) - John Kerry's commanding officer in Vietnam has backed away from attacks on the Democratic presidential candidate, saying he made a mistake in accusing the U.S. senator of having lied about his wartime record.
George Elliott, who was one of Kerry's superiors in Vietnam when he was awarded medals for heroic actions, had signed an affidavit suggesting Kerry did not deserve the Silver Star.
In the document, Elliott said, "I was never informed that he had simply shot a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back."
But in Friday's Boston Globe, Elliott said: "It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here."
Elliott told the newspaper he thinks Kerry did deserve the medal.
"I still don't think he (Kerry) shot the guy in the back," Elliott is quoted as saying in the Globe.
Kerry used his nominating convention in Boston in July to paint himself as a decorated war hero capable of leading the nation in troubled times and a man better qualified to be commander-in-chief than President Bush.
But Elliott and other members of a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, oppose Kerry.
This week they launched a television advertisement accusing the Democrat of having lied about his service in Vietnam and hurting other veterans by criticizing the war after returning home. Next week the group will publish a book, "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry."
Elliott was not immediately available for comment.
Kerry, arguing his combat experience in Vietnam qualifies him as a strong leader on national security issues, has surrounded himself with other veterans who have said the candidate did heroic deeds to save his own crew mates.
The new attacks on Kerry sparked an angry response from Republican Sen. John McCain, also a Vietnam veteran, who called the attack dishonorable and dishonest and urged the Bush administration to also denounce the ad.
The administration distanced itself from the advertisement on Thursday but did not condemn it.
"We have not and we will not question Sen. Kerry's service in Vietnam," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.
-
This was already posted by Virgil
You use Neo Con to much.
-
So this guy is just like Kerry in the end.
"I signed the affidavit before I didn't sign it"
:D
-
lying to senate is a "hack job"? all but one of your fellow oics saying you are worthless is a "hack job"? who welded the rose tint glasses to your tiny little head?
-
Not quite...
http://www.flyaceshigh.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=126142
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
This was already posted by Virgil
You use Neo Con to much.
I don't see the thread, sorry.
I shortened it to Neo's for ya. What more do ya want?;)
-
Originally posted by Coolridr
So this guy is just like Kerry in the end.
"I signed the affidavit before I didn't sign it"
:D
Money talks, bull**** walks.
-
In today's political environment, it pays to look at the source. The author of that article has a few ties to Kerry, including being his biographer, riding the Kerry Campaign bus, and is the author of the New book, Kerry/Edwards, that lays out their plan of action. The named CO, Elliot has already announced that the article is not true and has reaffirmed his affadavit.
-
As in the case of the Silver Star, it was Elliott who recommended
Kerry for the Bronze Star. According to the recommendation signed by
Elliott, a mine exploded under a boat accompanying Kerry's craft.
''Almost simultaneously, another mine detonated close aboard [Kerry's]
PCF-94, knocking First Lieutenant Rassman [sic] into the water and
wounding Lt. JG Kerry in the right arm."
Elliott then described how Kerry ''managed to pull Lt. Rassman aboard
despite the painful wound in his right arm." Elliott concluded that
Kerry had been ''calm, professional, and highly courageous in the face
of enemy fire."
Elliott, in the interview yesterday, said that based on the affidavits
of the veterans on other boats, he now thinks his assessment about the
Bronze Star and third Purple Heart may have been based on poor
information.
In one affidavit, for example, Van O'Dell, who said he had been in a
boat near Kerry on that day, declared that Kerry had ''lied" about
what happened on that day and said that Rassmann was not under enemy
fire when Kerry pulled him aboard.
Elliott, asked about the contradiction between his recommendation and
his new questioning of Kerry's third Purple Heart, responded, ''It
makes me look kind of silly, to be perfectly honest."
But he said: ''I simply have no reason for these guys to be lying, and
if they are lying in concert, it is one hell of a conspiracy. So, on
the basis of all of the information that has come out, I have chosen
to believe the other men. I absolutely do not know first hand."
Naval documents said that Kerry ''received shrapnel wounds in left
buttocks and contusions on right forearm when a mine detonated close
to PCF 94 while engaged in operations on river. Condition and
prognosis excellent. Result of hostile action."
Rassmann, reached by telephone yesterday, said he has never had any
question that Kerry deserved the Purple Heart. He said there were two
separate events: One was earlier in the day, when he and Kerry blew up
a rice cache, and the explosion caused some of the rice to hit Kerry,
and perhaps some weapon fragments as well. The second involved a mine
explosion as Kerry and Rassmann were on patrol. The explosion,
Rassmann said, knocked him overboard and threw Kerry against the pilot
house, injuring his arm.
Rassmann said that he has always believed that Kerry got the third
Purple Heart solely for the injury to his arm as a result of the
explosion in the water.
''If he got fragments in the buttocks due to the mine, that is new
information to me," Rassmann said.
''I would say there is confusion. Maybe they did lump it together. It
was my understanding he got it for the wound being thrown across the
pilot house."
Either way, Rassmann said, Kerry deserved the third Purple Heart
because such awards are given for injuries incurred in combat, and
Kerry's arm injury qualified. He also stood by his recollection that
he was under fire when rescued by Kerry.
wound from "rice in the face"? give the tard another medal pls ..
"under fire" "not under fire"
purple heart for a bruised foream or sharpnel in his butt??
don't you think the guy he pulled out of the water "under fire" would remember his his bud had taken a shot in the arse??
think it'd been something to laugh about if nothing else ...
skerry is a sham, con artist, double speak master through and through ...
-
wait a lefty liberal media outlet jumped the gun a big story? well ive never heard of that happening before. whats next al gore demanding fifty one recounts of all ss awarded in vn? :)
-
What happens here is the Kerry folks get one of their press buddies to release a an inaccurate story of Elliot recanting, Elliot then comes out and says he never did and ends up looking like a dumb arse stumbling over himself.
This damages Elliot's creditability and diffuses the impact his statements may have made in harming Kerry.
It is just damage control by the left to defend their boy. Its only news to those trads on the left that will run crying "He' s liar"....
-
I suppose none of you noticed Bush has back away from the ad? You know something he does'nt?
-
Yeah, Bush has never said anything about his service, why start now.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
I suppose none of you noticed Bush has back away from the ad? You know something he does'nt?
bush was never near the add. how do you back away from something you were never close to in the first place. next youre gonna say im backing away from hawaii when i cross the street heading east to go get groceries.
-
"bush was never near the add. how do you back away from something you were never close to in the first place."
http://www.intel-dump.com/
-
Originally posted by Wotan
What happens here is the Kerry folks get one of their press buddies to release a an inaccurate story of Elliot recanting, Elliot then comes out and says he never did and ends up looking like a dumb arse stumbling over himself.
This damages Elliot's creditability and diffuses the impact his statements may have made in harming Kerry.
It is just damage control by the left to defend their boy. Its only news to those trads on the left that will run crying "He' s liar"....
So, this story is faked and Elliot never recanted? Bet ya think the moon landings were faked in Kansas, too.:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by rpm371
In the document, Elliott said, "I was never informed that he had simply shot a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back."
News&storyID=5899870[/URL]
Not that Im impressed with Kerry cause Im not.
But So what if he had shot him in the back.
War isnt a hollywood cowboy movie where you live by some sort of half baked code of honor that said you only shoot him if he was facing you.
Hell he's the enemy, you shoot him no matter what direction he's facing
-
I don't have a problem with that either-you put the enemy down, esp when he is still a threat.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
I suppose none of you noticed Bush has back away from the ad? You know something he does'nt?
Bush has more class than that
unlike skerry who is using moore-ons 911 movie as sounds for his campaign speeches and has not told moveon.org to retract its fangs...
skerry still had a great day though - the market down more than 300 points in 2 days
what's bad for America is good for skerry & eddie boy robin - Yeeehaaa!!
-
Originally posted by Westy
"bush was never near the add. how do you back away from something you were never close to in the first place."
http://www.intel-dump.com/
From this link:
In an interview with the Associated Press, McCain called the ad "dishonest and dishonorable." Asked if the White House was behind it, McCain said: "I hope not, but I don't know. But I think the Bush campaign should specifically condemn the ad."
Soon after, White House spokesman Scott McClellan declined to do so and instead criticized the financing of the ad, saying the president "deplores all the unregulated soft-money activity." McClellan said the Bush campaign had nothing to do with the ad or the group behind it. "We have not and we will not question Kerry's service in Vietnam," he said. McClellan used the opportunity to call on Kerry to join Bush in demanding that all soft-money groups quit running ads. The overwhelming majority of such ads have targeted Bush, often harshly. Kerry campaign spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said Kerry will not ask the groups to stop their advertising.
What the Bush administration did was condem all such adds, and challanging Kerry's camp to join the Bush camp in asking these soft-money political groups to stop running these kinds of attacks. You'll notice Kerry's campaign declined.
-
I could have sworn he did that at the convention. This whole "soft money" thing needs to be stopped IMHO.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
So, this story is faked and Elliot never recanted? Bet ya think the moon landings were faked in Kansas, too.:rolleyes:
Are you even following the story?
Sabre posted this in the other thread
From Druge
quote:ANTI-KERRY VETS HANG TOUGH
Fri Aug 06 2004 13:37:12 ET
The following statement from Swift Boat Veterans for Truth concerns an article appearing in morning edition of the BOSTON GLOBE, written by GLOBE reporter and author of the official Kerry-Edwards campaign book, Mike Kranish.
"Captain George Elliott describes an article appearing in today’s edition of the BOSTON GLOBE by Mike Kranish as extremely inaccurate and highly misstating his actual views. He reaffirms his statement in the current advertisement paid for by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, Captain Elliott reaffirms his affidavit in support of that advertisement, and he reaffirms his request that the ad be played.
“Additional documentation will follow.
"The article by Mr. Kranish is particularly surprising given page 102 of Mr. Kranish’s own book quoting John Kerry as acknowledging that he killed a single, wounded, fleeing Viet Cong soldier whom he was afraid would turn around.
"Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has more than 250 supporters who are revealing first hand, eyewitness accounts of numerous incidents concerning John Kerry’s military service record. The organization will continue to discuss much of what John Kerry has reported as fact concerning his four-month tour of duty in Vietnam."
Both the Boston.com report and the Drudge article provide quotes from Captain Elliot. Either both are accurate, in which case Elliot needs to see a neurologist, or one of them miss-quotes him. Hopefully, Captain Elliot will come on one of the major news shows and sets the record straight.
So your stupid moon comment is just that.
There are different accounts of what Eliot said. Both by biased sources. Dredge and Michael Kranish.
Muckmaw posted this
This article was written by Michael Kranish.
Michael Kranish is the same guy who wrote Kerry's biography and who he himself wrote on page 102 that Kerry admitted shooting a young, wounded VC in the back for fear the man might turn around.
Michael Kranish is also the man writing the campaign program book, "Kerry/ Edwards".
Eliiot has said today he recants nothing and he was terribly misrepresented in this article and the article is extremely misleading.
Eliot said he stands firmly by what he said in the commerical.
So how about you spare me your liberal wit and tell the whole story.
-
werd.
-SW
-
Originally posted by rpm371
I don't see the thread, sorry.
I shortened it to Neo's for ya. What more do ya want?;)
You should also note that Reuters simply picked this up from the Boston paper (as usual, without check to see if it was even factual), and that the guy who wrote the article is not only covering the Kerry/Edwards campaign, but he's also being paid to write part of the campaign book for Kerry/Edwards. :eek:
Now THAT is real objective journalism at its best.:rolleyes:
Oh, and Elliott is now quoted as saying that the article in question is full of misquotes, and that he stands by what is in the ad that has the left trying desperately to retrieve their panties from deep in their crotch, and I might add has them sending threatening letters from their lawyers to ever television station that might even consider airing the ad. :eek:
How incredibly surprised everyone must be to know that the DNC is threatening to sue people already, and Kerry hasn't even lost, yet.:rofl
-
Yawn...
At age 27
Kerry testifies before senate, fighting for a cause he believes in.
Bush........? Looking for a line that is worthy of his nose and 3 years away from a drunk driving arrest.
its all just spin people! I wonder how many times Nixon attacked Kennedy's service record? Or Kennedy attacked Nixon's.
-
So, this story is faked and Elliot never recanted?
Yep.
A little Grey Poupon w/ your crow? Or are you too immature to admit when you've erred?
-
Originally posted by rpm371
So, this story is faked and Elliot never recanted? Bet ya think the moon landings were faked in Kansas, too.:rolleyes:
Whoops! :)
"Captain George Elliott describes an article appearing in today’s edition of the Boston Globe by Mike Kranish as extremely inaccurate and highly misstating his actual views. He reaffirms his statement in the current advertisement paid for by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, Captain Elliott reaffirms his affidavit [see below] in support of that advertisement, and he reaffirms his request that the ad be played.
“Additional documentation will follow. “The article by Mr. Kranish is particularly surprising given page 102 of Mr. Kranish’s own book quoting John Kerry as acknowledging that he killed a single, wounded, fleeing Viet Cong soldier whom he was afraid would turn around.
it should also be noted that it appears that the guy who ran the story in the Globe has/had been paid by the Kerry campaign to write the official campaign book, in addition to the Kerry biography earlier:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1586483145/qid=1091822115/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-8443872-2245435?v=glance&s=books
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1586482734/qid=1091822205/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-8443872-2245435?v=glance&s=books
Like I said in the other thread, DAMAGE CONTROL!
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Yawn...
At age 27
Kerry testifies before senate, fighting for a cause he believes in.
Bush........? Looking for a line that is worthy of his nose and 3 years away from a drunk driving arrest.
its all just spin people! I wonder how many times Nixon attacked Kennedy's service record? Or Kennedy attacked Nixon's.
kerry blatantly lies to senate. he says he saw things and did things that were total fabrications.
-
I said a CREDIBLE link. Drudge, NewsMax, Nation Enquirer, ect are not CREDIBLE. Show me a USA Today or major news service. I don't use MoveOn links to make my points.
-
Your source is Mr. Kranish. Hardly any more credible then the National Enquirer or Drudge.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
I said a CREDIBLE link. Drudge, NewsMax, Nation Enquirer, ect are not CREDIBLE. Show me a USA Today or major news service. I don't use MoveOn links to make my points.
Oh this IS funny. Drudge is plenty reliable when I quoted from it to say that Elliott was reported to have recanted his story. But oh dear God it isn't nearly so credible when they also report the opposite. Give me a freakin break.:rofl
Considering the fact that YOU are quoting a reporter that WORKS for KERRY/EDWARDS, you have a long way to go before you start piously talking about your sources vs. those of everyone else.:rolleyes:
-
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=5901447
Martin Baron, editor of The Boston Globe, said in a statement: "Regarding George Elliott's statements on John Kerry's military service, which ran in the Globe this morning, the Globe stands by the article. The quotes attributed to Mr. Elliott were on the record and absolutely accurate."
The Bush administration distanced itself from the advertisement on Thursday but did not condemn it. "We have not and we will not question Sen. Kerry's service in Vietnam," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.
Drudge is NOT a credible source. Reuters, UPI, AP and the like are.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
I said a CREDIBLE link. Drudge, NewsMax, Nation Enquirer, ect are not CREDIBLE. Show me a USA Today or major news service. I don't use MoveOn links to make my points.
No you just use somebody who works for the Kerry campaign to make your points...
:rofl :rofl
Amazing!
-
Originally posted by rpm371
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=5901447
Drudge is NOT a credible source. Reuters, UPI, AP and the like are.
Is Reuters a credible source? Right, you said it was...
Here is the part you left out of the SAME Reuters article!
Inundated with calls to verify the statement, Elliott grew media shy and said through his wife he would not talk. Earlier in the day, Mrs. Elliott said her husband was playing golf and would call back when he returned in the afternoon.
Elliott later issued another affidavit -- witnessed and notarized -- this time saying he was misquoted by the Globe and reaffirming his belief that Kerry has "not been honest about what happened in Vietnam."
Elliott also wrote: "Had I known the facts, I would not have recommended Kerry for the Silver Star for simply pursuing and dispatching a single wounded, fleeing Viet Cong."
:rofl
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Is Reuters a credible source? Right, you said it was...
Here is the part you left out of the SAME Reuters article!
:rofl
LIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NEOCON LIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
REUTERS IS TEH NEOCON MOUTHPEACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Yes, Reuters is a credible source. Did you want me to Rip-n-Snort the whole 2 page article? The Globe is not retracting their story, that was my point. Elliott changed his story( excuse me, I'll use the proper Republican term...Flip-Flopped).
Sounds to me like his conscience got to him, then Karl Rove did.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
LIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NEOCON LIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
REUTERS IS TEH NEOCON MOUTHPEACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[SIZE=16]NEO CON LIES![/SIZE] [/B] [/FONT]
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Yes, Reuters is a credible source. Did you want me to Rip-n-Snort the whole 2 page article? The Globe is not retracting their story, that was my point. Elliott changed his story( excuse me, I'll use the proper Republican term...Flip-Flopped).
Sounds to me like his conscience got to him, then Karl Rove did.
LOL...
So now you qouting articles very very selectivly is Rip's fault?
Pathetic.
And Karl Rove again.... First you said that Karl Rove was behind this ad. Then you said something like that Bush campaign was "backing away" frim the advertisement - as if he had anything to do with it in the first place. Now you are saying Karl Rove is pressuring the guy...
Maybe, just maybe Ellit was misqouted by the guy. Remember the Boston Globe did not write that article. The guy who wrote the articole and condiucted the interview WORKS FOR JOHN KERRY!
Would you trust an article written by Karl Rove? Didnt think so...
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Yes, Reuters is a credible source. Did you want me to Rip-n-Snort the whole 2 page article? The Globe is not retracting their story, that was my point. Elliott changed his story( excuse me, I'll use the proper Republican term...Flip-Flopped).
Sounds to me like his conscience got to him, then Karl Rove did.
This is all he said to the globe?
In Friday's Boston Globe, Elliott was quoted as saying: "It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here."
So all he's saying is he didnt completly agree with the wording that kerry shot the VC in the back.....but still stands by his convictions that he doesnt rate a silver star?
I'm not sure I see the big deal here.
-
When drudge shows a photocopy of an affidavit by Elliot, signed and notorized TODAY, do you consider that a reliable source?
-
Originally posted by Lizking
When drudge shows a photocopy of an affidavit by Elliot, signed and notorized TODAY, do you consider that a reliable source?
[SIZE=30]NEO CON LIES![/SIZE] [/B] [/FONT]
-
Drudge is NEVER a credible source. Any topic, any story, any time.
Might as well quote The National Enquirer or Weekly World News.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Drudge is NEVER a credible source. Any topic, any story, any time.
Might as well quote The National Enquirer or Weekly World News.
Or rely on an article written by a Kerry campaign publicist...
Anyway you shouldnt worry about Drudge. Reuters reported how Elliot feels that he was grossly misqouted and misrepresented by the Kerry campaign owned writer of that article.
-
I would say rpm deserves the most prestigious award on the UBB.
(http://home.comcast.net/~ripsnort60/owned2.jpg)
-
RPM, let me tell you what reliable source means:
It means any source you trust, but that meaning is valid only on a personal level.
It means any source document, period. Photocopies are all you get until the transporter is patented, sorry.
First person quote. This is the format:
Joe Blow said, "I report for Duty"
These are not the format:
Joe blow was quoted as saying, "I report for Duty".
Un-named anything.
-
Lol, the question I asked about him being mature enough was rhetorical really. As a liberal(same as misguided and misinformed) I knew he was incapapble of admitting a mistake.
-
The reason kennedy didnt attack nixons, and visa-verse-a, is because there use to be a thing called Charecter...Somethink the left has lost their grip on, since they decided they didnt know the meaning of IS.
-
Why is this news? The Boston Globe couldnt have reported any less of the anti-Kerry statements made by the swift boat vets.
Suddenly one guy decides he doesnt want any part of this and its newsworthy?
PS: The title of your thread, "Kerry's CO: "I was lying."" is rather misleading considering Kerry's CO never said that anywhere in the article that I can find.
-
Liz, a credible source is one with ethics and integrity in reporting. They use multiple sources for fact checking. They do not post stories about BatBoy, 300lb babies, or try to pass op-ed as hard news.
Michael Kranish is a member of the Globe staff, not a freelancer. Yes, he is one of the writers of Kerry's biography. The Globe stands behind the quotes as being on the record and accurate. If they are inaccurate why does'nt George Elliot sue?
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Liz, a credible source is one with ethics and integrity in reporting. They use multiple sources for fact checking. They do not post stories about BatBoy, 300lb babies, or try to pass op-ed as hard news.
Michael Kranish is a member of the Globe staff, not a freelancer. Yes, he is one of the writers of Kerry's biography. The Globe stands behind the quotes as being on the record and accurate. If they are inaccurate why does'nt George Elliot sue?
The author of the article works for Kerry. Imagine how much credibilty you would give to an article written by somebody who works for Bush....
-
That's like saying Woodward works for Bush.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Liz, a credible source is one with ethics and integrity in reporting. They use multiple sources for fact checking. They do not post stories about BatBoy, 300lb babies, or try to pass op-ed as hard news.
Michael Kranish is a member of the Globe staff, not a freelancer. Yes, he is one of the writers of Kerry's biography. The Globe stands behind the quotes as being on the record and accurate. If they are inaccurate why does'nt George Elliot sue?
Evidently they aren't using multiple sources to check those facts. But they are using a reporter that works for Kerry to cover Kerry. Out here in the real world we call that bias. :eek:
You call having a reporter cover a guy he works for ethics and integrity? :rofl
In fact, if you have a reporter who works for a candidate covering that race, I'd say that was pretty much passing op-ed for news, bias, and piss poor journalism. I'm sure at some point the editors of the clown who was busted last year for making up his news and plagarism stood behind his stories too. :rolleyes:
Not everyone threatens to sue about everything that someone says. It does however seem to be a constantly recurring theme from the Kerry camp though. But I wouldn't expect less from someone backed by the DNC.:aok
-
Originally posted by Nash
That's like saying Woodward works for Bush.
The "reporter" in question is not only writing the campaign book for Kerry/Edwards, but he also helped write a previous book for/about Kerry.:eek:
I'd call that working for Kerry. He was and is paid to produce text to suit Kerry/Edwards. Last I looked, when you get paid by someone to do something for them, they called that working for them.
-
All I can say is that I have seen an affidavit signed by Mr Elliot, dated tody, that states plainly what his opinion of the matter is. If that is not good enough for you, then nothing is.
-
Originally posted by Lizking
All I can say is that I have seen an affidavit signed by Mr Elliot, dated tody, that states plainly what his opinion of the matter is. If that is not good enough for you, then nothing is.
Yes, but if Kerry's paper, the Boston Globe, is not reporting it, it simply cannot be true. After all, RPM said so. And he knows.
-
Elliot signs a statement. Later says he regrets the wording to a reporter. Story comes out, he realises his fauxpah and makes another affadavit.
That alone does not make the story false. If it is, he should prove it in court.
-
The story in the BG is not the story. What the story says is what counts, and the person named in the story repudiated it with a legal document.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Elliot signs a statement. Later says he regrets the wording to a reporter. Story comes out, he realises his fauxpah and makes another affadavit.
That alone does not make the story false. If it is, he should prove it in court.
For crying out loud, must we go to court for everything?:rolleyes:
What are you, president of the trial lawyers association?
What is with the liberal left and freakin lawsuits?
-
Originally posted by Wotan
What happens here is the Kerry folks get one of their press buddies to release a an inaccurate story of Elliot recanting, Elliot then comes out and says he never did and ends up looking like a dumb arse stumbling over himself.
This damages Elliot's creditability and diffuses the impact his statements may have made in harming Kerry.
It is just damage control by the left to defend their boy. Its only news to those trads on the left that will run crying "He' s liar"....
Originally posted by Kerry Apologist
Elliot signs a statement. Later says he regrets the wording to a reporter. Story comes out, he realises his fauxpah and makes another affadavit.
That alone does not make the story false. If it is, he should prove it in court.
Actually it’s probably just as I described it above.
Who are going to believe? Kerry? He is either a liar or a War Criminal. Beyond all doubt he's a liar except to you liberals. He either lied about being a War Criminal or he is a War Criminal. Either way he is still a POS.
Tough choice, what its going to be War Criminal? or Liar?
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Oh this IS funny. Drudge is plenty reliable when I quoted from it to say that Elliott was reported to have recanted his story. But oh dear God it isn't nearly so credible when they also report the opposite. Give me a freakin break.:rofl
Considering the fact that YOU are quoting a reporter that WORKS for KERRY/EDWARDS, you have a long way to go before you start piously talking about your sources vs. those of everyone else.:rolleyes:
I tried to warn you, but you wouldn't listen. Drudge blew it. The reporter was NOT working for Kerry.
From The Boston Globe. (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2004/08/07/veteran_claims_misquote_on_kerry_globe_stands_by_its_story/)
At the same time, Drudge also erroneously reported that Kranish, a 20-year Globe veteran, had written the introduction to a Kerry-authorized campaign book, "Our Plan for America: Stronger at Home, Respected in the World."
In fact, Baron said, Kranish had no connection to the Kerry campaign book and did not write its introduction.
Baron noted that earlier this summer Kranish worked with PublicAffairs -- the publisher of the Boston Globe biography of Kerry, "John F. Kerry: The Complete Biography by the Boston Globe Reporters Who Know Him Best" -- to write a short introduction to a second project: an independent, unauthorized review of publicly available documents dealing with the platform and policy statements of Kerry and Edwards. That project was in no way connected with the Kerry-Edwards campaign, Baron said.
"When PublicAffairs subsequently struck an agreement with the Kerry campaign to do an official campaign book, Kranish's relationship with the project immediately ended," Baron said.
Peter Osnos, publisher of PublicAffairs, said both Drudge and Amazon, the online bookseller peddling the upcoming Kerry-Edwards book, had made a mistake in suggesting Kranish had written its introduction.
"As far as I can tell, if there's any malign intent here, it was someone making Drudge think Michael was somehow doing something for [Kerry's] campaign," Osnos said.
The Globe book, "John F. Kerry: The Complete Biography," is an unauthorized biography. The work draws on extensive interviews with the candidate, all conducted before 2004. After he emerged as the presumptive Democratic nominee, Kerry declined to cooperate with further interviews.
Amazon, the online bookseller, apparently contributed to the confusion with a listing for the Kerry-approved campaign book indicating Kranish as the author. PublicAffairs' officials said yesterday that Amazon had agreed to revise the listing immediately.
Kerry campaign spokesman Michael Meehan said Kranish had no connection to the campaign.
This is a perfect example of why Drudge is not a credible news source.
BTW, In 1996, when Kerry was running for Senate reelection and faced the same questions about the circumstances in which he shot the VC, Elliott came to Boston and defended Kerry, saying he deserved the Silver Star. So either he was lying then or he is lying now.
So Rip, Virgil, Groinhurt and friends, this most prestigious award on the UBB is for you.
(http://home.comcast.net/~ripsnort60/owned2.jpg)
-
More Boston Globe articles, might as well cite the National Enquierer...
And how could I forget, NEO-CON something or other!!!!! Bwaagghhhahlrghhthh!