Another fat-bellied, satiated Republican rat slithers away from the administration’s sinking ship to spend more time with the nest: Dan Bartlett. Ah, memories:
Bartlett handled damage control during the first Bush presidential campaign, particularly on questions regarding Bush’s National Guard service and business dealings. Bartlett collected [destroyed? faked?] documents, interviewed [prepped? intimidated? tampered?] people involved in the stories and confronted Bush with direct and often uncomfortable questions about the various controversies before fielding reporters’ [toothless, lackadaisical] inquiries [if any].
Yeah, you squashed the toothpaste back in the tube on that one, Dan. Good work, and it couldn’t have been easy, even with Unka Karl helping that has-been Dan Rather stumble on the wrong story. When all the time Paul Lukasiak had the goods, based on detailed examination of the actual Guard records:
I think its obvious to any reasonable person who looks at Bush’s military records that the only way to describe his actions was “dereliction of duty.” You don’t need to know what the specific rules and procedures were to recognize that Bush did not, as the White House insists, “fulfill his duty.” Simple common sense tells you that Bush did not have the authority to decide to stop flying, as the White House suggests that he did. Nor is it difficult to conclude that there is something wrong when someone doesn’t show up for over six months.
Je repete: Lukasiak had the goods. Because Lukasiak mastered the Guard’s requirements for duty, which nobody in our very well paid and famously free press* bothered to do:
Bush’s actual minimum participation requirements were far greater than those found in the US Code and CFRs, because his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) was 1125D, that of an F102 pilot, and F102 pilots were required to do far more than the absolute minimum. When one compares Bush’s record against the requirements of his actual job, there is no question that he failed to come anywhere close to meeting his obligations. Bush had two choices, either fulfill the requirements of his AFSC, or request a different job. He did neither.
So, I do wonder what Bartlett’s “direct and uncomfortable questions” were.
I guess we’ll have to wait for Dan’s book deal.
Because nobody did step forward to collect the $10,000 reward for seeing Bush doing Guard duty during his “missing year,” did they?
Don’t let the smear artists define the president. If you personally witnessed George W. Bush reporting for drills at Dannelly Air National Guard Base between the months of May and November of 1972 we want to hear about it.
But no takers. I wonder why.
Say, maybe now that Dan is going to be spending more time with his family, he’ll want to come clean and collect?
NOTE Troll Prophylactic: No, Lukasiak’s work is not CT or foily. It’s solid, scholarly examination of the records—images of the actual, physical, card-punched records—of Bush’s Guard service, supported of the military rules and regulations of the time. The contrast between the coverage given to Lukasiak’s work, and F/Buckhead’s work on fonts and serifs—which made it all the way from an anonymous blog posting to FUX news in a single news cycle, almost, gosh, as if it were planned—couldn’t be more telling. Or leave a more bitter taste in the mouth.
* Except for the Globe’s Walter Robinson, of course.
UPDATE Mike Allen gives Dan Bartlett some tongue. I wonder how long it will take Fred Hiatt to usher Dan through the revolving door and put him on the payroll? With Michael Gerson in there already, it’s almost like the WaPo editorial offices are becoming a branch of the Bush regime in exile!
Front page
It just rolls on
…undaunted by facts. The most recent instance of ’outing a fraudulent document’ was treated with great glee recently here by Glenn Greenwald: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2…
Hint; it’s total fantasy.
Mary Mapes got a big laugh out of this one.
Ruth
Tweety was lavishing love all over Dan yesterday
The consummate asshole licking up Dan all over - not a pretty sight.
Great post - this subject will be prominent in discussions of Bartlett by the SCLM
only by its absence.
The reason that Bush’s checkered history in the Guards never took hold is that there were no mainstream voices, even among so-called liberals, to take it up. Look at the difference with the two new Hillary books. Look how the fact that Hillary failed her first Bar exam in DC, although she passed it in Arkansas, is being treated. That’s how the whole nonsense about Clinton’s dodging the draft took hold, without anyone ever genuinely trying to figure out what actually happened - including magazines like The Nation, who were too conflicted about Clinton to step in an defend him when it might have done some good.
It is beginning to change…little by little, but that doesn’t mean that the big guys are doing the changing. They went for the bait on Pelosi, again and again - and somehow, this time, it didn’t get a foothold in the public imagination. But they aren’t through yet…
"Mary Mapes"
What’s always ticked me off about the Mary Mapes/Dan Rather story is that it never need have happened.
Mary had interviewed me about the Bush Guard documents during the timeframe in which she interviewed Burkett.
I’d had several runnins with Burkett prior to this. I wish she’d have asked me about Burkett. I’d have certainly advised caution.
Over the years I had several times cautioned others about Burkett on Salon’s Table Talk forum - a site where much of the early research into Bush’s record was coordinated and hashed over. .
Here’s part of an email I sent Bob Somerby in 2004. With a bit from an email in 2003 warning someone about Burkett.
Mapes didn’t do her job.
I'm going to take issue with a couple of things here.
Rather’s not a has-been.
His type of journalism is unfashionable presently, but the man knows his business and does it.
And yes, Lukasiak’s work is a far better set of sources than was Burkett (I’d read about him somewhere six or seven months before the story on CBS, and I remember when I heard his name mentioned thinking, uh, oh, that’s not the best source).
However: Burkett’s nutdom isn’t all just nutdom. Stuff happens with the Guard units in Texas — much of it bizarre, to say the least — based almost entirely on whether one has a good personal rapport with one’s commander (or the commander above that, and remember: when Burkett went off the rails, BUSH was the favorite for the next governor, and was already being groomed for a White House run).
Having said that, let me take issue with the other thing here.
Bush deserted. In a time of war. Period. The lying little cowardly weasel of a motherless b@$t@rd deserves to be shot as a traitor, and nothing on earth will ever change my mind about that. He smirked and whined and stole his way into a pilot slot, and then he deserted (and note: the F102 was NOT an aircraft that saw a lot of use in Viet Nam) — so what was his problem? Could it have been that he was a drunk / cokehead — despite all the hullabaloo celebrating his “getting high without drugs” as a poster boy for the TANG? Did he crash a plane somewhere, and if so, was there some kind of cover up? By 1978, the F-102s and their successor aircraft, the F-106s, both were being used as TOWED TARGETS in gunnery exercises; by now, it would be damned hard to ferret out which, if any, ’destroyed targets’ might really have been augured in by a DUI Lt. George W. Bush. But it’s odd that the Convair delta-wing fighters (Delta Dart and Delta Dagger) were so short-lived in service; the F-100s went to ’Nam, as did the F-101 and RF-101, and the F-105 Thunderchief made its rep in SE Asia. The contemporary bomber, the B-52, remains in service today (some of them are the same aircraft!!). So why were the 102s and 106s disposed of so quickly?
History of lost/destroyed documents.
There is a history building of the documents that never get found, (see: rove emails)
The cabal thinks they will be able to deep-six their history. I don’t agree. They think they can fail to acknowledge reality, and it will disappear. I don’t agree.
Sorry, I have to get off now for another big storm but will check in again later.
Ruth
Excellent foil on the F-!02s, Sarah
And I call it “excellent” because to my knowledge, nobody who knows aircraft has posted on this.
A big “hmm….”
No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.
Our "Fearless" Commander-in-Chief is a Military Deserter
Our President, Our “Fearless” Commander-in-Chief, is a Military Deserter!
by:
Phil Vargas, Ph.D., J.D.
June 03, 2007
I know, I know, it’s all been said before. But maybe it hasn’t!
We have now reached a point in a war without end where our invasion and occupation of Iraq is a complete disaster. It is a situation where the American people have lost almost all faith in the President’s and the Vice President’s war leadership. And yet, with a still complicit Congress, the horrifically gruesome situation in Iraq goes on, and on in a “war without end”!
Recent polls show that opposition among the American people is at an all time high: “Americans now view the war in Iraq more negatively than at any time since the war began, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll. 60% say we should have stayed out of Iraq, more than 75% say that things are going badly there, and nearly 50% say things are going very badly.” (May 25, 2007) And those numbers will only continue to increase!
Moreover, it is now undisputable that the war in Iraq was initiated with outright deceptions and lies! In fact, all the reasons put forth by the President and Vice President (and all their cronies!) to defend their criminality have been totally discredited, yet they keep repeating the same lies in the hope that repetition will create reality and deceive the American people.
And it is of the utmost importance it seems to me as a veteran to revisit our Commander-in-Chief’s military record and take a good look at what it means pursuant to the applicable Code of Military Justice
. As well it is also entirely proper to again call attention to our Vice President’s numerous (5) deferments during a time of war, the Vietnam War. This specially appropriate in view of the deaths and maiming of thousands of Americans and the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqis, plus the billions upon billions we are paying daily throwing into the rat hole of Iraq, indeed into Bush and Cheney’s illegal and criminal and immoral war.
It is now more than four years since our country and the world were deceptively led into believing that Iraq presented an imminent threat to our country and its neighbors. The fact is, however, that all the claims made by Bush and Cheney and their subordinates, the highest officials in our government, have proven false. The fact is that everything that they said about the immediacy of the “Iraq threat” has been thoroughly discredited.
That has been confirmed time and time again. And in view of the fact that as of this date (May 25, 2007) 3,441 U.S. soldiers have died in Iraq, 25,549 American soldiers have been maimed according to the latest Department of Defense figures. Moreover, there are 70,471 Iraqis reported killed (source: Iraq Body Count)and, according to The Lancet, 655,000 Iraqis have been killed. And we’re still counting in Bush’s and Cheney’s ignoble, illegal, unnecessary, self-serving and extremely costly war in Iraq. In doing so they clearly violated the US Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and international laws and conventions.
And it is most appropriate to reconsider the following aspects of our Commander-in-Chief’s military record and to again confirm that the Vice President received five (5) deferments during a time of war, the Vietnam War. This is an specially appropriate inquiry since the majority of Americans now know that they were deceived into that war. And lest we forget, Bush and Cheney’s deceptions include the supporting lies of our highest U.S. government officials, viz., Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, the former Secretary of Defense, Ronald Rumsfeld, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Presidential Assistant Karl Rove, and National Security Advisor Steven Hadley, who led us into one of the most egregious and disastrous international relations blunders in the history of our country. This has disgraced our good country and made it the most hated country in the world and us Americans — you and I — the most hated people in the world, and our President and Vice President are the most despised leaders in the world!
As to our Commander-in-Chief’s record, it is as follows: In 1972, Lt. George W. Bush, a commissioned officer in the Texas National Guard, requested a transfer to a unit in the Alabama National Guard. Thereafter “…no one could officially account for [his whereabouts] for a whole year, from May 1, 1972 through April 30, 1973.” (Paul Lukasiak, “Deserter: The Story of George W. Bush After He Quit the Texas Air National Guard,” at: http://glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm )
For that entire year there is no record of Bush ever having reported for duty - DURING A TIME OF WAR! “The only [official] record tying Bush to the Alabama National Guard’s 187th Tactical Reconnaissance Group is a dental exam at the groups’ Montgomery base in January 1973.” (Associated Press, September 05, 2004.)
In Mr. Lukasiak’s conclusion to a chapter titled: “Bush, the Air National Guard and the Air Force, the Records of a Deserter,” he wrote wrote:
“When you compare the Bush records to the United States Statutes, Department of Defense Regulations, and Air Force Policies of the 1970’s, only one conclusion can be reached: that 30 years ago, George W. Bush shirked his sworn duty as a member of the United States Armed Forces to [defend] the national security of the United States of America. However, Bush’s DESERTION from the Armed Forces thirty years ago is not terribly relevant [I, of course, totally disagree!]. Lots of people make mistakes in their early twenties, and those mistakes do not necessarily reflect on the character of individuals when they are in their fifties. What are relevant are Bush’s continued lies about his service, and his insistence upon presenting his service in the United States military as ‘honorable’: It was not. Bush simply blew off his last two years of required service, and was able to get away with it because he came from a politically prominent family. There is no other explanation for Bush’s records. None!” (P. Lukasiak, DESERTER, at pp. 16-17.) (My emphasis.)
In his exhaustive examination of Bush’s military records and the applicable regulations, Mr. Lukasiak reached a single conclusion: “George W. Bush was considered A DESERTER BY THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE.” (My emphasis.)
But of critical importance is that whatever Lt. Bush did at that time was during a time of war, the Vietnam War. Accordingly the United States Uniform Code of Military Justice (USCMJ, 1972) applies to his conduct and actions, and it holds as follows:
“SUBCHAPTER X, SECTION 886, ARTICLE 86. ABSENCE WITHOUT LEAVE: Any member of the armed forces who without authority - (1) fails to go to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed; [or] (3) absents himself or remains absent from his unit, organization, or place of duty at which he is required to to be at the time prescribed, shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
“SUBCHAPTER X, SECTION 885, ARTICLE 85. DESERTION: Any member of the armed forces who - (1) without authority goes or remains absent from his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to remain away there from permanently; … [and] … (2) quits his unit, organization, or place of duty, with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service, or (3) without being regularly separated … from the armed forces … [and] … without fully disclosing the fact that he has not been regularly separated … except with authorized by the United States; is guilty of desertion. [And] (b) Any commissioned officer … who … quits his post of proper duties without leave and with intent to remain away there from permanently is guilty of desertion… [and] … (c) Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed IN TIME OF WAR, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct….’ (My emphasis.)
Without question, had the applicable military laws and regulations been applied, as required, to the conduct and actions of Lt. George W. Bush, as they should have been, and had he been charged for his long absence, as he should have been, he would have been charged for DESERTION, for his long absence occurred DURING A TIME OF WAR! (My emphasis.)
Pursuant to the above applicable military laws and regulations, Bush is a deserter in fact - a de facto deserter - for he was absent without leave and without proper authorization for lengthy periods of time. And Bush is, by that very fact, a deserter from the Armed Forces of the United States DURING A TIME OF WAR!
From all the information that is available in the public domain, Lt. Bush did fail to report to his post at the appointed time and he further failed to serve at his appointed place of duty and at the time prescribed for quite a long period of time — DURING A TIME OF WAR! Bush thereby dishonored his military obligations and his solemn oath “to preserve, protect, and defend the United States Constitution and our country during a time of war and against all enemies.”
As the evidence shows then, in the case of Lt. George W. Bush the controlling military laws and regulations were deliberately ignored by his superiors. From the evidence available it is amply clear that his privileged status has indeed been a powerful means for his circumventing laws and avoiding hazardous military service. Without question, Bush Jr., has been the recipient of favored treatment throughout his life, first in getting into an elite unit in the Texas National Guard to avoid serving in Vietnam, and secondly, in avoiding his basic responsibilities as a commissioned officer of the United States Armed Forces. And now, as our Commander-in-Chief, he continues his gross transgressions and violations of the laws of our country, most especially the Constitution the United States which he has sworn to uphold and to see that all the laws be faithfully executed. (see: Charlie Savage, “Bush challenges hundreds of laws,” Boston Globe, April 30, 2006 at: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articl…
At this critical time when our country has illegally invaded and occupied another country, and when American soldiers and marines and airmen are dying there daily, President Bush must be held accountable for his past conduct. Most especially because he continues to send thousands of young men and women to risk their lives and limbs in an illegal, unnecessary, and arbitrary war! On that basis, plus the fact that he is our Commander-in-Chief, it is imperative that President Bush be held accountable for his past and present conduct to our country and the American and Iraqi people and most specially to all those who have served honorably and have sacrificed so much for our country based on Bush and Cheney’s deceptions and lies.
It is further of importance to consider the evidence available which goes directly to the fact that President Bush had wanted to invade Iraq as early as 1999, when he was still the Governor of Texas and was contemplating a run for the US presidency. In interviews conducted with the Houston Chronicle journalist, Mickey Herskowitz, the biographer of the Bush family who was working with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir, “…an Iraq war was always on Bush’s brain. … It was on his mind. He said, “One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief. And he said, “My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.” He went on, “If I have a chance to invade,…if I had that much capital, I’m not going to waste it. I’m going to get everything that I want to get passed and I’m going to have a successful presidency.” (Russ Baker, “Why George Bush Went to War,” in Tompaine.com, June 20, 2005.)
According to Baker: “Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz…, says was a common sentiment that no president could be considered truly successful without one military ‘win’ under his belt…. Herskowitz’s revelations illuminate Bush’s personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends.”
In those Herskowitz interviews there are also “these revelations” about his military responsibilities, by Bush himself: “Bush admitted that he failed to fulfill his Vietnam-era National Guard service obligations, but claimed that he has been ’excused’.” Hence, by his own admission Bush confirms that he was ABSENT WITHOUT LEAVE in 1972, and by that very fact admits that he is a military deserter DURING A TIME OF WAR! (My emphasis.)
All this deceptions have been backed up by the Downing Street Memorandums, which two brave British public servants (who have been recently convicted of violating the United Kingdom State Secrets Act) released the memoranda to The London Times. Those ‘Top Secret’ documents make clear that the leaders of the United States and the UK carried out a great deception. According to those secret docments “Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.” Put plainly, all the intelligence they were getting was being tailored/changed to fit their invasion agenda.
Again, it is now amply clear that the invasion of Iraq was based on outright lies and deceptions and, concomitantly, to aggrandize Bush’s power and to advance the political ambitions, including delusions of grandeur, and not to bring democracy to the people of Iraq! Or, for that matter, any other additional reason he has put forth to cover his you know what. What could be more criminal? I know, lying about having sex with an intern.
Finally, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and all their cronies are ipso facto war criminals for through their illegal and criminal invasion and occupation of Iraq “are heading towards their own judgment at Nuremberg whose sixtieth anniversary the rest of the world gratefully but wistfully commemorated last year!” http://www.afterfowningstreet/org/?q=nod…
With leaders like we currently have, may God help our good country!
Bio: My family sacrificed three sons during the Vietnam War and I spent my 18th year in the Korean War, following my compatriots from the villages and pueblos of New Mexico who have fought and died in many battlefields for our great nation. A relative, Joe Martinez, a native of Taos, New Mexico was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor during World War II.
Lambert, the 102 and 106 were famous planes, along with
Convair’s B-58 Hustler. These were some of the most incredibly beautiful aircraft, from the POV of engineering as art, ever to see service with the US (or any allied) military.
The Soviets were still using their delta-wing jets as late as Afghanistan.
So, again, I ask: what was the motivation for turning the delta-wing fighters into towed targets? A little hunting on Google (Steve Pace’s article is excellent, by the way) shows that the “Pave Deuce” program actually started in March 1974.
March. 1974. Two months before W should have finished his TANG service. The birds were being actively phased out of service with the ANG in 1973-74-75. Lt. Bush would in all likelihood NEVER have been called on to spin a jet in anger, let alone line up a gunsight or a bombsight. So why did he quit — and why was it so damn important to destroy all the 102 and 106 aircraft so quickly?