Awol Bush

strandinthewind · #1 02-10-2004, 01:01 PM

W is releasing is payroll stubs, etc. Here is an article on this.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...ary/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Hoping to quell election-year questions from Democrats about President Bush's Air National Guard service in the 1970s, the White House said it will release payroll records Tuesday that will show he fulfilled his obligations.
_________________________________________________

This is good for W, but why can't the NG find the records at the time?

dissention · #2 02-10-2004, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by strandinthewind
W is releasing is payroll stubs, etc. Here is an article on this.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...ary/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Hoping to quell election-year questions from Democrats about President Bush's Air National Guard service in the 1970s, the White House said it will release payroll records Tuesday that will show he fulfilled his obligations.
_________________________________________________

This is good for W, but why can't the NG find the records at the time?

Quite the turnaround from yesterday when the White House said they didn't exist. Where's his WD form is what I want to know? Every person gets one with their discharge and it lists *everything* that they ever did while servicing.

His answers about his being AWOL on MTP were ridiculous. he flip-flopped constantly.

strandinthewind · #3 02-10-2004, 01:15 PM

According to this article, the records center in Colorado found his payroll records after the MTP interview. Interestingly, I tend to believe them because if they had been available I think someone would have found them by now. I mean this was an issue in the 2000 election. Also, I think this psrt of this issue is dead as the NG would never have given him an honorable discharge if he had not ever shown up for duty. But, we shall see as this unfolds, which it is apprently currently doing in W's favor is these payroll stub say what he says they say.

Having said that, it still does not obviate my disgust at his making an arrangement with the NG for getting released eight months early so he could go to business school. As Max Cleland said last night, "don't you think everybody in combat and being killed or wounded in Nam would have like to make an arrangement with the govt. to come home eight months early?"

Also, I did not get a flip flop on his AWOL anwers. He said, the records have been sought since 1994 and cannot be found. But, he was there and would not have been honorably discharged if he had not

strandinthewind · #4 02-10-2004, 01:20 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,110956,00.html

dissention · #5 02-10-2004, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Also, I did not get a flip flop on his AWOL anwers. He said, the records have been sought since 1994 and cannot be found. But, he was there and would not have been honorably discharged if he had not

He said "all the records" were in Colorado, then he turned around and said there might be no proof or records, but he did show up.

strandinthewind · #6 02-10-2004, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dissention
He said "all the records" were in Colorado, then he turned around and said there might be no proof or records, but he did show up.

I think what he was talking about was that the central location of the records is in Colorado and any records would be there. He then said that all of the records that could be found had been found. Then today, that records location found more records that appear to support W's story that he was there. So, as of now, this part of this issue appears to be dead on the water. I mean if these records and the other available records support W's story, what is the chance the missing ones do not support his story? If the D's were smart, they would concentrate on W's eight month early discharge if at all on this issue IMO.

DeeGeMe · #7 02-10-2004, 03:20 PM

The report on the Washington Post website said that the proof they were supplied with had the name torn off the top and the social security number blacked out. By the White House Press Secretary's own admission, there are gaps in his service record. Why the gaps were there-the White House spokesperson wouldn't say. And why is it so strange that he could get an honorable discharge? Wasn't his dad head of the CIA during this time period? At the very least, he was the grandson of a former Senator, and the son of a very powerful & influential Republican during a Republican administration. Don't tell me that those kind of connections don't allow you to pull a few strings and skip a few days, weeks, and months of Air National Guard training.

strandinthewind · #8 02-10-2004, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DeeGeMe
The report on the Washington Post website said that the proof they were supplied with had the name torn off the top and the social security number blacked out. By the White House Press Secretary's own admission, there are gaps in his service record. Why the gaps were there-the White House spokesperson wouldn't say. And why is it so strange that he could get an honorable discharge? Wasn't his dad head of the CIA during this time period? At the very least, he was the grandson of a former Senator, and the son of a very powerful & influential Republican during a Republican administration. Don't tell me that those kind of connections don't allow you to pull a few strings and skip a few days, weeks, and months of Air National Guard training.

So he pulled strings. If that is the case only fiercely loyal people pulled the strings? I mean certainly someone somewhere would take the money I am sure is out there to spill the beans (think National Enquirer). So, no, I do not think it is possible for a high profile senator's son to completely ignore his entire tour of duty during a controversial time and then get an honorable discharge, esp. when the pay stubs and other evidence in these articles clearly indicate W did not. So, I conclude that although the issue is not beaten to death yet, it is looking more and more like this dog won't hunt

Moreover, if W proves he was there, we should be happy he completed his tour of duty shouldn't we? Or is that too big and bitter a pill to swallow?

dissention · #9 02-10-2004, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Moreover, if W proves he was there, we should be happy he completed his tour of duty shouldn't we? Or is that too big and bitter a pill to swallow?

He hasn't proved it yet; he's only succeeded to shoot himself in the foot.

strandinthewind · #10 02-10-2004, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dissention
He hasn't proved it yet; he's only succeeded to shoot himself in the foot.

By providing more evidence that he was actually there

DeeGeMe · #11 02-10-2004, 03:44 PM

Quote:

[i]: Moreover, if W proves he was there, we should be happy he completed his tour of duty shouldn't we? Or is that too big and bitter a pill to swallow?

[/B]

You're joking about the National Enquirer right? You do know it's owned by a right-wing leaning publishing group? Have you never put together why there are so many negative Clinton stories in the tabloids? Trust me, they aren't going to be the one's to find the smoking gun on this story--but from the behavior of the press corps today during the White House Press Briefing, I'd say that there's blood in the water and the sharks are circling. I think they're motivated enough now to start asking the hard questions and demanding concrete evidence-something this administration has no record of every providing and isn't used to being asked to produce from our press. About damn time!

strandinthewind · #12 02-10-2004, 03:49 PM

Yes - I was joking about the NE. But, certainly even they would publish this breaking story. I mean they are in business to make money

But still, certainly people who hate Bush (Larry Flynt, the moveon.org guy, and every newsperson looking to make a name, would kill to have this information and people often do sell information. Interstingly, people often refuse to sell it and go to jail concealing it a la that McDougal lady in the Clinton Whitewater scandal.

In any event, yes, the WH is srambling, so far successfully. But, if there is a smoking gun out there to be had, it will be found. The press has too much at interestest to just let it slip by.

Note: I am not defending W and saying he was a model person in the NG, I am just saying the evidence is stacking up on his side at the moment and without concrete evidence to refute this, W will win this argument/issue.

dissention · #13 02-10-2004, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by strandinthewind
By providing more evidence that he was actually there

Based on the stuff he's provided so far, nothing backs up his cliam that he was there. The payroll papers that were released had no mention of George Walker Bush.

strandinthewind · #14 02-10-2004, 04:00 PM

On the contrary go to http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/021004_bushmil.pdf and look at the pdf of the actual records. They say Lt. George Bush

dissention · #15 02-10-2004, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by strandinthewind
On the contrary go to http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/021004_bushmil.pdf and look at the pdf of the actual records. They say Lt. George Bush

Touche!

I read an article that said, like DeeGe said, they were all blacked out.

Still, he's going to have to do more to prove he was there; a pay stub ain't swaying this mind. I want records, WD forms, and an answer as to why he didn't get his mandated physical (probably due to his abuse of alcohol and cocaine).