August 15, 2004

UNHELPFUL:

Kerry's Cambodia account challenged by ex-commander (Scott Canon, 8/15/04, Knight Ridder Newspapers)

John Kerry's repeated claim that he spent Christmas Eve of 1968 upriver in Cambodia — against official United States policy — has drawn harsh criticism from anti-Kerry veterans.

Roy Hoffmann, a retired admiral who was a Navy captain in command of Kerry's unit at the time, said the candidate's Cambodia statements can't be true.

"I think he just outright lied," said Hoffman, a founder of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. "He never was there."


Imprecise. Outright lie. What are a few facts between friends?

Posted by Orrin Judd at August 15, 2004 12:46 PM
Comments

I hope the media makes repeated requests of Kerry to release all of his military records to settle this.

Of course, I suspect the reason Kerry hasn't released his records is because he knows that would settle this....

Posted by: PapayaSF at August 15, 2004 1:33 PM

Of course, Kerry could have gone into Cambodia without the knowledge of his CO, or against his CO's orders. Considered in the context Kerry's other, self-admitted war crimes, that's entirely possible.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at August 15, 2004 2:32 PM

This could be big by the time of the debates. Bottom line is that if he was in Cambodia anytime during his 4 month tour, then no problem, but if he wasn't then the Republicans should repeatedly bring up his "searing" speech in order to make him a laughing stock. (Yes even thru Bush's paid advertisements, because in my opinion this represents a rather crude willingness to lie for political gain)

To my way of thinking, if Bush can legitimately bring up an anti-military vote by Kerry then surely he can bring up outright lying during floor debates on the same issues.

Seems to me the Brinkley statement would indicate that he's telling the truth or he's in the process of digging himself deeper in the hole. By the way, why would Kerry have control of his "military records".

Are they his to release or not release and isn't "Roy Hoffmann, a retired admiral who was a Navy captain in command of Kerry's unit" a walking talking military record. Cannot Hoffmann insist that the assignments he approved and the General and Special orders he gave in that time frame be released to the news media, if his credibility is in question.

Posted by: h-man at August 15, 2004 2:34 PM

Didn't Kerry take any home movies at Angkor Wat? Too bad.

Posted by: jim hamlen at August 15, 2004 3:37 PM

Any chance Kerry is taking a page out of Bush's book and doing a rope-a-dope? i.e. wait for the clamor for releasing his military records gets deafening and then release them showing he's really a hero and deflate the whole thing? I don't think it is in his character but watching him dig himself deeper makes me wonder.

Posted by: AWW at August 15, 2004 9:04 PM

AWW:

Bush went through this all 4/5 years ago, and until this spring, it seemed all was answered. So some more material was released (the pay stubs, the medical visits, etc.), and the issue died (except for the moonbats). But Kerry has never released anything substantive, even after claiming he did. The lies about Cambodia have been foundational for him for so long that it just cannot be a dodge on his part.

Of course, in any "I'll show mine if you show yours" argument, the GOP loses.

The media brought this episode on themselves: it should have been researched and developed and reported last fall and winter. It's not like John O'Neill just arrived from Mars.

Posted by: jim hamlen at August 15, 2004 9:31 PM

AWW:

The real issue is his anti-American peace activism afterwards.

Posted by: oj at August 15, 2004 10:13 PM

True enough - if the entire electorate knew he was meeting with the North Vietnamese while "supposedly" in the Naval Reserve, it would be just devastating.

Posted by: ratbert at August 16, 2004 9:30 AM
« THE EUROWHO'S?: | Main | WESTCHESTER STAND DOWN (via Brian Hoffman): »