NoCalMike 0 Report post Posted July 9, 2004 http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040709_1577.html WASHINGTON July 9, 2004 — Military payroll records that could more fully document President Bush's whereabouts during his service in the Texas Air National Guard were inadvertently destroyed, according to the Pentagon. In a letter responding to a freedom of information request by The Associated Press, the Defense Department said that microfilm containing the pertinent National Guard payroll records was damaged and could not be salvaged. The damaged material included payroll records for the first quarter of 1969 and the third quarter of 1972. "President Bush's payroll records for those two quarters were among the records destroyed," wrote C.Y. Talbott, of the Pentagon's Freedom of Information and Security Review section. "Searches for back-up paper copies of the missing records were unsuccessful." Presidential spokeswoman Claire Buchan said Friday there was nothing new in the letter. "When we put out records in February, we indicated that third-quarter of 1972 records were lost" when the microfilm was destroyed, she said. Bush did not perform Guard duties during the third quarter of 1972 but "fulfilled his obligation to the National Guard in full," Buchan said. "The documents we released months ago make that clear." In February, the White House released some payroll and medical records from Bush's Vietnam-era service to counter Democrats' suggestions that he shirked his duty in the Texas Air National Guard. Bush was in the Texas Air National Guard from 1968 to 1973, much of the time as a pilot, but never went to Vietnam or flew in combat. Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, the Democratic presidential candidate, is a decorated Vietnam veteran, and some Democrats have questioned whether Bush showed up for temporary Guard duty in Alabama while working on a political campaign during a one-year period from May 1972 to May 1973. Bush had asked to be able to transfer temporarily from the Texas Guard to an Alabama base during that time so he could work on the Senate campaign of a family friend. Reports differ on how long he was actually in Alabama, but it's generally believed that he returned to his Texas unit after the November 1972 election. The White House says Bush went back to Alabama again after that. The Pentagon letter was sent in response to an April lawsuit filed by the AP under the federal Freedom of Information Act. That law requires government agencies to make public information not specifically exempted for disclosure. The letter said that in 1996 and 1997, the Pentagon "engaged with limited success in a project to salvage deteriorating microfilm." During the process, "the microfilm payroll records of numerous service members were damaged," the letter said. This process resulted in "the inadvertent destruction of microfilm containing certain National Guard payroll records," including Bush's, the letter said. Trying to calm the political unrest, the White House on Feb. 13 released Bush's Vietnam-era military records to counter suggestions he shirked his duty. But there was no new evidence given at that time to show that he was in Alabama during the period when Democrats questioned whether he performed his service obligation. The records showed that Bush, a pilot, was suspended from flying status beginning Aug. 1, 1972, because of his failure to have an annual medical examination. His last flight exam was on May 15, 1971. There were no new documents, during that February release, to shed any light on Bush's service in Alabama. Inadvertenly destroyed? Come on already....this is bullshit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dangerous A 0 Report post Posted July 9, 2004 I'm listening to Savage right now and even he is questioning what's going on with Bush's records. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob E Dangerously 0 Report post Posted July 9, 2004 You mean he isn't blaming all that on Clinton? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NoCalMike 0 Report post Posted July 9, 2004 You mean he isn't blaming all that on Clinton? wait, give him 30 seconds...... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob E Dangerously 0 Report post Posted July 10, 2004 I'm going to wait awhile on this. Considering that the destruction took place in 1997. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted July 10, 2004 Because, lord, the odds of the records of a National Guard member from 30 years ago possibly being destroyed are SO astronomical. -=Mike ...Who LOVES watching people become unglued... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vyce 0 Report post Posted July 10, 2004 Are we still on this story? Hasn't it sort of been established that the only people who still give a shit about this story are people who hate Bush anyway and thus keep dragging this thing up every so often? Cause most of the moderate people I know don't even fucking care. I find it kind of funny that Clinton's mentioned, because this Bush story is about as relevant as was all of the "controversy" surrounding where Bill was during Vietnam and whether or not he actually inhaled. I just find it silly that of all of the things liberals & Democrats could slam Bush on, they keep trying to bring this one up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snuffbox 0 Report post Posted July 10, 2004 Gotta disagree with you there Vyce... If (and that is a big 'if', I dont know) he was AWOL then obviously he shouldnt be Commander-in-Chief, and shouldnt be sending an American generation off to war. It does warrant speculation and further investigation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Salacious Crumb Report post Posted July 10, 2004 So we can't bash Kerry for something that happened 30 yrs. ago but it's totally ok to bash Bush for the same thing? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snuffbox 0 Report post Posted July 10, 2004 Uh... 'Serving' and 'AWOL' are slightly different. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Salacious Crumb Report post Posted July 10, 2004 but..... People constantly defend Kerry with "it happend 30 yrs. ago" and then turn around and bash Bush for something that happened at the same time. There's never been any proof that Bush went AWOL, none, zero, nadda. It's been coming up since the first time he ran for governor of Texas. If someone was going to prove it they've had a hell of a lot of time. And anyway AWOL and draft dodging are on similar grounds and I don't hear a lot of Bush bashers bashing Clinton for that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted July 10, 2004 Because, lord, the odds of the records of a National Guard member from 30 years ago possibly being destroyed are SO astronomical. -=Mike ...Who LOVES watching people become unglued... If you believe that then you are one gullible bastard. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NoCalMike 0 Report post Posted July 10, 2004 This story is just one of those instances where there has never been a clear answer. Everytime a document is released to as "proof" it has been either heavily edited, or just had big chunks blacked out. So finally the request comes for the actual documents that will decide this matter once and for all, and they just happened to have been "inadvertenly destroyed" I understand coincidences do happen, but coincidence after coincidence as to why no information can be provided and no one can seem to remember a damn thing, it kind of becomes suspicious. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted July 11, 2004 Gotta disagree with you there Vyce... If (and that is a big 'if', I dont know) he was AWOL then obviously he shouldnt be Commander-in-Chief, and shouldnt be sending an American generation off to war. It does warrant speculation and further investigation. He didn't go AWOL ever. Until you have SOMETHING --- and some randomly destroyed files, hate to break it to you, aren't something --- this is just simply more of the "Clinton ran drugs out of Arkansas"-level paranoia. Funny, "questionable" service was never an issue between 1993 and 2000. If you believe that then you are one gullible bastard. Yes, because the military SAW Bush getting the White House THIRTY YEARS BEFORE HE DID and conspired to "protect" him from revelations that nobody can explain. Yup, THAT is FAR more logical than my assumption. Just because Mikey Moore (and, yes, his film WAS little more than lies and half-truths) said it definitely does not make it true. This story is just one of those instances where there has never been a clear answer. Everytime a document is released to as "proof" it has been either heavily edited, or just had big chunks blacked out. So finally the request comes for the actual documents that will decide this matter once and for all, and they just happened to have been "inadvertenly destroyed" I understand coincidences do happen, but coincidence after coincidence as to why no information can be provided and no one can seem to remember a damn thing, it kind of becomes suspicious. The ironic part is that those of you obsessing about this bitch and moan about the Clinton "witch hunt". -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vyce 0 Report post Posted July 11, 2004 Gotta disagree with you there Vyce... If (and that is a big 'if', I dont know) he was AWOL then obviously he shouldnt be Commander-in-Chief, and shouldnt be sending an American generation off to war. It does warrant speculation and further investigation. You're wrong, on many levels, but thank you anyway for proving my point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Justice 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2004 So wait, I just want clarafication here: These records have been destroyed since 1996-1997, right? Not recently or anything, correct? If it were recently, yeah, this would smell of all sorts of bullshit from Bush but... I guess since he probably wasn't the biggest forerunner for President (This is right after Dole got crushed, so I doubt they were grooming him for it that long ago), isn't there the possiblity that this did accidentally happen? I also wonder how many other documents were destroy: Was this just limited to him, or just Texas, or much of the National Guard service? I would like some more info because the dates do kinda 'not line up' for a big conservative conspiracy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted July 12, 2004 So wait, I just want clarafication here: These records have been destroyed since 1996-1997, right? Not recently or anything, correct? If it were recently, yeah, this would smell of all sorts of bullshit from Bush but... I guess since he probably wasn't the biggest forerunner for President (This is right after Dole got crushed, so I doubt they were grooming him for it that long ago), isn't there the possiblity that this did accidentally happen? I also wonder how many other documents were destroy: Was this just limited to him, or just Texas, or much of the National Guard service? I would like some more info because the dates do kinda 'not line up' for a big conservative conspiracy. Actually, it likely occurred BEFORE 1996-97, as that was when they attempted to salvage the documents. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted July 12, 2004 Somebody please hit the non-story button.................... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
