Texsox Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 Swift Boat Vet Got $40M Contract From Bush The Bush White House has denied any connection to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth1 - the group that has been airing factually unsupportable smear ads against Sen. John Kerry's war record. But a new report today shows that one of the key accusers in the smear ads was a lobbyist for a company that recently received a massive federal contract from the Bush administration. As the Washington Post reports, Rear Admiral William L. Schachte Jr., the man who claims Kerry was not under fire when he received his first Purple Heart, is a top lobbyist for a defense contractor that recently won a $40 million grant from the Bush administration. According to a March 18 legal filing by Schachte's firm, Blank Rome, Schachte was one of the lobbyists working for FastShip's effort to secure federal contracts.2 On Feb. 2, FastShip announced the Bush administration had awarded it $40 million.3 Schachte has other connections to the Bush administration. The Washington Post notes David Norcross, Schachte's colleague in the Washington office of Blank Rome, is chairman of this week's Republican convention in New York.4 Records show that Schachte gave $1,000 to Bush's 2000 and 2004 campaigns.5 Additionally, Schachte helped organize veterans' efforts against Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and for Bush in the 2000 South Carolina primary.6 This is not the first member of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth who has been revealed to be connected to the President. The Bush-Cheney campaign's top outside lawyer was forced to resign after he admitted providing legal services to the veterans group.7 The Bush-Cheney campaign's veterans adviser was also featured in one of the smear ads.8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonxctf Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 WOW.. I hope that this is all over the news tonight. However with the RNC wrapping up, Clinton in the hospital, Iraq and Russia I think this will take a back seat. And probably rightfully so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juddling Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 So, the Swift Boat Vet didn't really get the contract, a company he worked for did, right? Isn't that headline a bit misleading? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniBob72 Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 That article is just dripping with misleading statements... the group that has been airing factually unsupportable smear ads against Sen. John Kerry's war record. Factually unsupportable? Kerry made statements after the war about soldiers cutting off heads and limbs. With no pictures or video, one could say that Kerry has made many "factually unsupportable" statements. I guess eyewitneeses mean nothing. Schachte has other connections to the Bush administration. The Washington Post notes David Norcross, Schachte's colleague in the Washington office of Blank Rome, is chairman of this week's Republican convention in New York.4 Records show that Schachte gave $1,000 to Bush's 2000 and 2004 campaigns.5 Additionally, Schachte helped organize veterans' efforts against Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and for Bush in the 2000 South Carolina primary $1000?!?! Holy s***!!! And he didn't get a cabinet post for that huge contribution??? Unbef***inglievable! What a joke. I donated money to the policeman's fund...does that mean somehow I have some connection to the police department? If so, I'll have to remember that if I'm pulled over for speeding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 That article is just dripping with misleading statements... Factually unsupportable? Kerry made statements after the war about soldiers cutting off heads and limbs. With no pictures or video, one could say that Kerry has made many "factually unsupportable" statements. I guess eyewitneeses mean nothing. $1000?!?! Holy s***!!! And he didn't get a cabinet post for that huge contribution??? Unbef***inglievable! What a joke. I donated money to the policeman's fund...does that mean somehow I have some connection to the police department? If so, I'll have to remember that if I'm pulled over for speeding. Holys***...I just got a speeding ticket, do you think you could get me out of it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 3, 2004 Author Share Posted September 3, 2004 The guy's job is as a lobbist for a company. The guy doesn't come out against Kerry until he successfully closes a $40,000,000 contract and y'all are fine with it?? Man it smells to high heaven to me. I hate political insider b.s. with my tax money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 How recently is recently? last week? 2 months ago? 6 months? It doesn't say, and with both sides 'massaging' facts to suit their needs, I think that is a timeline you may need first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 4, 2004 Author Share Posted September 4, 2004 How recently is recently? last week? 2 months ago? 6 months? It doesn't say, and with both sides 'massaging' facts to suit their needs, I think that is a timeline you may need first. February. Dring the primaries as Kerry was gaining momentum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 That article is just dripping with misleading statements... Factually unsupportable? Kerry made statements after the war about soldiers cutting off heads and limbs. With no pictures or video, one could say that Kerry has made many "factually unsupportable" statements. I guess eyewitneeses mean nothing. $1000?!?! Holy s***!!! And he didn't get a cabinet post for that huge contribution??? Unbef***inglievable! What a joke. I donated money to the policeman's fund...does that mean somehow I have some connection to the police department? If so, I'll have to remember that if I'm pulled over for speeding. Actually, if you're going to accuse Kerry of factually misrepresenting things before Congress in 1971, you should probably have the context. He accused nobody of doing anything other than what discharged vets admitted to doing themselves. Here's what he said in full context. "I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.... They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country." There are several different histories of what happened in Vietnam. Sadly, many of these back these claims up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 4, 2004 Author Share Posted September 4, 2004 Would this be similar to the exposing the abuses in the Iraqi prison? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 I think its apples and oranges. Kerry served his country faithfully in the war, was disillusioned and angry at what he saw and decided to do something to try to end that war. What's so dishonorable about dissent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniBob72 Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 Actually, if you're going to accuse Kerry of factually misrepresenting things before Congress in 1971, you should probably have the context. I never accused John Kerry of factually misrepresenting anything. What I said was that if eyewitness accounts from the Swift Boat Vets are factually unsupportable, then Kerry's reports of Vietnam vets severing heads and limbs are also factually unsupportable. Sure, people talked about them, but by this definition, it is irrelevant. I haven't seen enough pictures or video or other "factually supportable" evidence to convince me that it happened on a daily basis as Kerry alleged. Without such evidence, would this reporter also call Kerry's statements factually unsupportable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniBob72 Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 The guy's job is as a lobbist for a company. The guy doesn't come out against Kerry until he successfully closes a $40,000,000 contract and y'all are fine with it?? Man it smells to high heaven to me. I hate political insider b.s. with my tax money. The guy was a Rear Admiral, right? Sounds like he was a pretty important guy in the military and just might have secured the contract on his own. Ridiculous, I know, but possible. Or, perhaps the company that actually won the contract does quality work and has done work for the U.S. in the past. I'm sure if the company didn't deserve the contract that would have been plastered all over the article. Did this Rear Admiral, who may have sold out an honorable fellow vet for a few bucks, just take up lobbying and this was his first success? I'm sure if that were the case, again, all over the article. If this guy got a contract for his "smearing" of Kerry, what financial windfalls did the other 200+ get? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 4, 2004 Author Share Posted September 4, 2004 would this reporter also call Kerry's statements factually unsupportable? I'm thinking the Purple Heart and Bronze Star would support Kerry's statement. To say otherwise would indicate our miltary isn't a trustworthy source. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniBob72 Posted September 5, 2004 Share Posted September 5, 2004 I'm thinking the Purple Heart and Bronze Star would support Kerry's statement. To say otherwise would indicate our miltary isn't a trustworthy source. Isn't that one of the main points of the Swift Boat Vets? They are pointing out that much of the evidence that was used to give Kerry the medals was supplied by Kerry himself, often after the people who knew the circumstances better were gone and unable to refute his story. Don't get me wrong. While I haven't seen much pointed out that refutes what the SBV's are saying (all I've seen against these guys are their connections and such, not that what they are saying is untrue), I understand that they aren't doing this solely because they feel Kerry would be a terrible Commander-In-Chief. I'm sure after what he said and did once he came back from Vietnam and their hatred of him because of it is their motivation, and I understand it. s***, the fact that John Kerry is in a Vietnamese museum as a hero for their cause makes it understandable that they despise him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 5, 2004 Author Share Posted September 5, 2004 Isn't that one of the main points of the Swift Boat Vets? They are pointing out that much of the evidence that was used to give Kerry the medals was supplied by Kerry himself, often after the people who knew the circumstances better were gone and unable to refute his story. Don't get me wrong. While I haven't seen much pointed out that refutes what the SBV's are saying (all I've seen against these guys are their connections and such, not that what they are saying is untrue), I understand that they aren't doing this solely because they feel Kerry would be a terrible Commander-In-Chief. I'm sure after what he said and did once he came back from Vietnam and their hatred of him because of it is their motivation, and I understand it. s***, the fact that John Kerry is in a Vietnamese museum as a hero for their cause makes it understandable that they despise him. And the military knew that then, now, and all the time in between. By tearing down Kerry's medals and the system that was used to award them, they are tearing down every medal that was awarded. You cannot tear down the system and the institute without casting into doubt every medal ever awarded. Some guys dispute the events, most of the guys on the boat do not. The only tangible evidence are the medals themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 5, 2004 Share Posted September 5, 2004 Exactly right. The people who were in the boat with him back up his claims. There are many written histories about Vietnam that also back up his claims before the Senate committee in the early 1970s. In fact, the only time Swift Boat Vets for Truth Chief O'Neill served with Kerry was during an appearance on the Dick Cavett show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.