Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air is reporting a Bernard Goldberg story where, after a tip, Mr. Goldberg turned to page 130 of CBS’ 234-page report on the Rathergate fiasco and found the following (emphasis Goldberg’s):
Until now, the controversy over the Rather/Mapes story has centered almost entirely on one issue: the legitimacy of the documents – a very important issue, indeed. But it turns out that there was another very important issue, one that goes to the very heart of what the story was about – and one that has gone virtually unnoticed. This is it: Mary Mapes knew before she put the story on the air that George W. Bush, the alleged slacker, had in fact volunteered to go to Vietnam.
Who says? The outside panel CBS brought into to get to the bottom of the so-called “Rathergate” mess says. I recently re-examined the panel’s report after a source, Deep Throat style, told me to “Go to page 130.” When I did, here’s the startling piece of information I found:
Mapes had information prior to the airing of the September 8 [2004] Segment that President Bush, while in the TexANG [Texas Air National Guard] did volunteer for service in Vietnam but was turned down in favor of more experienced pilots. For example, a flight instructor who served in the TexANG with Lieutenant Bush advised Mapes in 1999 that Lieutenant Bush “did want to go to Vietnam but others went first.” Similarly, several others advised Mapes in 1999, and again in 2004 before September 8, that Lieutenant Bush had volunteered to go to Vietnam but did not have enough flight hours to qualify.
This information, despite the fact that it has been available since the CBS report came out four years ago, has remained a secret to almost everybody both in and out of the media — one lonely fact in a 234- page report loaded with thousands of facts, and overshadowed by the controversy surrounding the documents.
A commenter on Hot Air notes that Bush actually volunteered three times and was told to quit asking because he didn’t have enough stick time!
This is stunning. As Mr. Morrissey notes:
It indicts Mapes and by extension Rather (who apparently couldn’t be bothered to check on the documents or story on his own) in a plot to deliberately conduct a character assassination from a broadcast booth, in an explicit attempt to manipulate an election.
I know a guy that still called Bush a coward long after the memos were revealed to be fake because, in his words, “Bush knew by joining the national guard he’d avoid Vietnam.” Telling him that Bush’s unit was as likely to get called into Vietnam as any ANG unit didn’t matter. I think this additional revelation wouldn’t matter either.
Some blinders just won’t come off.
{ 48 comments }
No media bias here.
Move along.
Bush could have said something…
… then again, he’s never really been into defending himself.
Looks like it’s time for someone to ‘move on’.
Or maybe it simply illustrates that BDS is terminal.
OK, playing devil’s advocate here…
First of all, this has been reported before. Nobody cared.
Second of all, Bush is no idiot, I am sure he knew very well that his hours were not enough to qualify for Vietnam, so “volunteering” could well have been a ploy to appear to be willing when there was very little risk to being called.
Third, the airplane Bush flew, the F-102, I believe (called by some the “Thud” because that was the sound it was said to make if you messed up landing it), that airplane was phased out of Vietnam use for several reasons, not the least of which was it was designed to chase down nuclear bombers, not dogfight with Migs.
{UPDATE: I got the “thud” reference wrong, that was a reference used for the F-105, not the F-102. The rest of the description of the F-102 and it’s flight record are accurate.}
I would say that Bush could very well have been aware that his volunteering was mostly a symbolic act.
Now, having said that, I do think that Bush was braver than most, and did his patriotic duty more than most. Anyone who flew a 102 has my enduring respect. That was a dangerous, DANGEROUS airplane to fly. The fact that Bush flew one competently for years is enough to make him a brave and competent man in my book.
But to think this somehow vindicates Bush…. well, not so much.
One other point. By his own admission Bush volunteered to join the ANG to avoid being drafted into the infantry. Anyone who is determined to paint Bush as a coward needs nothing else than that.
… and since virtually every human being on the planet who calls Bush a coward over this has NO PROBLEM with Bill Clinton’s ACTUAL draft evasion, well… it’s pretty clear that facts are not the issue here.
That’s warm and fuzzy and cynical.
So how much military active duty have you, CC ?
McK: I’m really getting sick of your constant picking and pecking from the peanut gallery. You’d think someone of your advanced years would have graduated from middle school by now.
Note that this claim that Bush volunteered to go to Vietnam is based entirely on a few hearsay statements. It is not clear what these statements mean. Did Bush simply casually express an interest in going to Vietnam? I do not believe there is any paper record of Bush ever officially volunteering to go the Vietnam.
None of this changes any of the facts. Rather and Maples were idiots for basing reporting on those documents. Even Michael Moore knew the individual pushing those documents was completely unreliable and the documents were most probably forgeries.
Also this does not explain why Bush got such kid glove treatment from the Air National Guard. Approximately 4 years into his 6 year enlistment he stopped showing up for drills. He tried to transfer to a Alabama Air Guard unit that had no planes he could fly. He missed his annual physical and was grounded. He claims to have attended drills in Alabama, but there is no record of that. After returning to Texas, he was given an early honorable discharge so he could go to Harvard Business School. Bush had been regularly flying planes in monthly drills for the first four years, and then for unexplained reasons just stopped flying a few months before going to Alabama. After not reporting regularly for drills, he was given an honorable discharge.
That record does not make sense to some people. They think something has been covered up, although at the time this kind of kid glove treatment for the son of a Congressman and WW II pilot was probably not that uncommon.
See what I mean about facts not meaning anything in this debate?
Ask mike about Clinton’s draft evasion and he’ll explain that Clinton was actually a War Hero.
Somewhere on the spectrum between the extremes of John McCain’s heroic service in Vietnam and Bill Clinton’s avoidance of Vietnam, lies our friend, George W. Bush, who got preferential treatment due to his privileged status, did fly planes, but did not serve abroad.
I never understood why this was an issue in the first place or how it related to the war in Iraq. But, I don’t understand a lot of politics.
-HB
McK: I’m really getting sick of your constant picking and pecking from the peanut gallery. You’d think someone of your advanced years would have graduated from middle school by now.
Thanks.
Of course you and your expertise have a lot more street cred around here, right ?
And you never did answer:
“So how much military active duty have you, CC ?”
If the answer is none, please say so.
Your speculations above have no credence in actual fact.
I served in the military and knew a LOT of 102 pilots from the base commander on down. None of them would agree with your bullsh*t above.
Kindly be careful of the word DANGEROUS and others words when opinionizing.
Of course, mikeca, is always wrong and always lacks facts.
CC,
I never heard the story before. Ed Morrissey never heard the story before. Bernard Goldberg never heard the story before. And while, yes, it was reported, Goldberg, in his story, did some recearch and found it was only carried by a few blogs and such places, and, by and large, ignored by the media itself.
If Hot Air didn’t know about it, I can’t see how widely spread the story was.
Clinton avoid military service through college deferments, political connections and manipulations of the system until the Vietnam war began to wind down and the draft lottery was instituted. He got number 311 in the first draft lottery, which meant he had no chance of being drafted. He did receive a draft notice at one time while at Oxford, but he got the draft notice canceled by getting accepted to an Arkansas ROTC program. He changed his mind and never attended the ROTC program after getting a high number in the draft lottery.
Clinton did “evade” the draft. I was an undergraduate in college at the time, and believe me most men in college were trying to figure out how to avoid being drafted on graduation. Fortunately, the draft lottery was instituted before I graduated and I got number 363 in that same first draft lottery, even better than Clinton’s number.
There was a blogger, who was also at one time a professional journalist in Tennessee, who uncovered this story five years ago. I linked him at the time, but I lack the energy to go through the archives and find his work and when I linked it.
I’ve known this for years: the paper record shows, definitively, that Bush volunteered to serve in a unit that was known to be scheduled to go to Viet Nam. I reported it on this blog when it became known.
It is entirely plausible, as Cosmic notes, that he did this cynically, knowing it wasn’t likely to happen. But the fact is that he did it. You can read whatever you want into that fact, but it is a fact.
Cosmic is also correct that the planes he did fly, the F-102s, were extremely dangerous. Their engines were underpowered and as a result, they crashed and burned on takeoff and landing more than any other plane the military flew in that era. Also, the training for those pilots included training on how to ram your airplane into a bomber, killing yourself in order to take that bomber down.
This does not make the man a war hero. But it does not make him a coward either.
Make of it what you will.
Oh, and Dishman has it right: Bush has generally shown a pattern of not feeling the need to explain or defend himself. You can read that as arrogance or humility, as you please.
Cosmic is also correct that the planes he did fly, the F-102s, were extremely dangerous. Their engines were underpowered and as a result, they crashed and burned on takeoff and landing more than any other plane the military flew in that era.
That’s odd. I spent an entire year on a USAF base with nothing but F 102’s. And none of them crashed and burned on take off or landing.
So you’re just making stuff up by googling crapola or something.
Cosmic is prolly not redeemed at this juncture.
So you said that cosmic said,
“Cosmic is also correct that the planes he ( Bush ?) did fly, the F-102s, were extremely dangerous.”
Is that accurate ?
Oh, and yes, Clinton was a draft-dodger, if by that you mean someone who legally and legitimately gamed the system so he wouldn’t have to serve. Because he didn’t want to.
As Mikeca correctly notes, there were a whole lot of guys just like him.
You can view all that with contempt if you like, but the man broke no law and was pretty up-front about his desire not to serve. That is not a crime and should not disqualify someone from serving office.
McK: I love you man, but you drive me crazy.
No one said that the F-102s were death machines that burst into balls of flame on a daily basis. But so far as military fighters of the era went, they were the most difficult to fly and the most dangerous to get into the cockpit of. Their engines were underpowered and as a result they crashed on takeoff and landing more than most planes of the era.
Google it if you want, or not. I’m not saying that every guy who got into the cockpit of an f-102 was a martyr. I’m saying those were tough planes to fly and you had to be very careful if you were the pilot.
Go ahead and use the intertubes to confirm what I’m saying. Or don’t. I don’t care.
Dean,
The internet version is not the “reality” version only the speculative version used in generalizations by cosmic “pundits” that know not of where they speak except in generalizations from which they proffer expertise presumably unchallengeable by any other commenters.
You do not need to be driven crazy if someone with actual experience, in knowing many of those pilots, challenges those notions.
So your put down (discount) is not accepted at this juncture.
That doesn’t relieve cosmic from an honest reply, however, which you wish to defend and protect apparently because he is unable to defend on his own account because he is:
“getting sick of … constant picking and pecking from the peanut gallery.”
McK: Let me make it clear, you often drive me crazy. You often drive everyone crazy, to be blunt.
But I’m really glad you’re here, and I’m I’m really glad you’re a friend to this blog. You’re these guys, and I love you for it.
FWIW.
Thank you,
I appreciate those sentiments.
My teacher always taught me to not expect “thanks”.
Anyhow,
Thanks.
McK,
far be it from me to defend CC
but here is a source whose reality you might accept:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0185.shtml
note that it has statistics straight from the Air Force Safety Center, noting that the F-102 had an average rate of class A mishaps of 13.69/100,000 hrs. This compares unfavorably to most other aircraft.
Kevin:
I guess I can’t prove it, but I am dead certain I saw an interview of Bush fellow ANG members back in 2003 or so, and one of them made a point to say that Bush had volunteered to go to Vietnam. In fact my recollection is that he REPEATEDLY made that statement. When I saw this linked on Drudge or Instapundit, my first reaction was “duh!. I thought everybody knew that!”
McK:
I have no desire whatsoever to establish any “cred” with you. Your opinion is about as meaningful to me as a frog turd. Seriously, your constant snipping and carping from the edge of serious debate is tiresome and irritating, but nothing more. I suppose on occasion you make a halfway decent point, but at least in my case you have chosen to become an anti-fan and constantly try to nail me on trivial crap. And when push comes to shove, when I CARE to defend anything to your overblown opinion of yourself, as in this case, I am nearly ALWAYS correct.
So keep on pissing into the wind if it makes you feel like a man, I’m probably just going to ignore your adolescent crap from now on.
So did you have ANY active military duty or pay checks ?
And right, you’re an expert on Clinton draft dodging.
On the Clinton draft dodging. I would say he gamed the system more than most, but it was never an issue with me. I only bring it up to lefties when they try to make hay about Bush’s ALLEGED “awol” charges.
This kind of rampant partisan hypocrisy always cracks me up. I don’t think Clinton’s military avoidance or Bush’s ANG service either qualify or disqualify them from being President.
Oh, by the way mikeca, kudos on your apparent rational understanding of Clinton’s record of avoiding military service. Gotta give you credit on that one.
Too bad you seem to have drunk at least some of the “Bush ANG awol” koolaid while laughing at “birthers” today. I consider the two groups to be just about equal in partisan gullibility and irrationality.
Oh well, my memory did fail me on one point, it wasn’t the F-102 that was known as the “Thud” it was the F-105. Oh well.
By the way, the F-102’s problems on takeoff and landing were related to a certain angle of attack which could cause the airplane to invert suddenly on takeoff, and the same thing on landing coupled with it’s poor visibility in part due to its delta wings. These two problems were identified and between increased training and some control “locks” that were put into the plane, the early disastrous crash rate declined sharply, but it was still known as a dangerous fighter to fly. At least that’s what the completely untrustworthy “internets” say about it. But the readers here can believe whomever they want to.
Hey McK, nice job pulling the old “chicken hawk” theme out of mothballs. Of course CC can’t know anything about the military – he didn’t serve.
Whatever you say Einstein.
I never suggested Bush was AWOL. That is nonsense. He was given some preferential treatment, both in getting into the ANG in the first place and in getting out early. There is a lack of paper documentation on Bush ANG record after he stopped flying, but that is probably simply to cover up the preferential treatment he got.
Hope I can help settle at least one thing.
Dean is basically right, this was reported 5 years ago during the flurry of facts that came out during Rathergate.
http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/001014.php
This is not new, but was buried in the avalanche of angles that came out at the time. If Goldberg wanted to “ah-ha” an even more significant gotcha from the report, it would be that the determinations of the report’s document examiners basically conclude the documents were forgeries, but the ass-covering weasel document refuses to draw that conclusion up front, protecting CBS from liability.
Rathergate is a frustrating exercise in Rashoman + Big Lie. A lot of facts have been buried by the fact that there were so many of them.
For just one example, Mary Mapes and some on the left still claim the docs being forgeries was disproved with the revelation that a typewriter actually existed that could make superscript “th”, the IBM Selectric. (it was initially said it was an anachronism, at an earlier stage in investigation, hence the logo Rathergate with the superscript ‘th’)
This is repeated in several of her more recent arguments, but no one seems to be on hand to smack her down with the fact that blogger Jeff Harrell actually went out and found a Selectric, had the owner type the exact letter, matched it up with the CBS doc, and found they looked like they’d come from different planets. As if perfect match with MS Word isn’t enough, someone actually tracked down the high-end typesetting machine that could do superscript to disprove that BS.
And yet she still maintains the argument, in her book and in later interviews in salon.com, etc. Mind boggling.
For the record:
The F-102 Delta Dagger was not nicknamed ‘Thud’.
The Republic F-105 Thunderchief was nicknamed the ‘Thud’ I linked the wiki page for reference, but I know this from my time in the USAF from working on the successor to the F-105 Wild Weasel, the F-4G Wild Weasel since a lot of my airmen had been Thud crewmen.
Kristian, thanks for clarifying the “Thud” reference nine hours after I corrected myself. I guess I should have put an “update” note in the original comment. I’ll go do that now.
So, you worked on the Wild Weasel? For it’s day the F-4 Phantom was maybe the most versatile jet in the fleet. Wild Weasels flew long after the Phantom was mostly retired from combat service. Talk about brave crew members and a dangerous job!
That’s pretty cool that you worked on that. I’m impressed.
Sorry, I missed the update.
And, I was an officer, I wasn’t allowed to work on the aircraft. I had to be escorted around them to make sure I didn’t do anything stupid like get sucked into one of the intakes. Mostly, the senior NCOs allowed me to be in charge, as long as I didn’t get in the way of the people trying to work for a living…heh.
While the F-4 was a maintenance pig (it was not designed with maintenance in mind, only performance), it was wonderful jet. Head on, I still think it is the meanest looking jet ever made. Many of the F-4Es and F-4Gs we had in our squadrons joined the air force before I was born. The first squadron on alert coming from the states in Desert Shield was the 561st FS from 35TFW, George AFB, where I was stationed. Given the development time, we had 1950’s era tech aircraft running ops through most of the ’90s, until the F-16 took over the WW missions.
I have to say, of all the fighter pilots I met, the flat out craziest were the WW pilots (I’ve heard test pilots can be odder, but I never met any). I suppose you had to be to go hunting enemies specifically designed to shot you down in 30 year jets. And, to bring it back to the Thuds, the very same thing applied to them, only they were using AGM-45 Shrikes not AGM-88 HARM, and that meant the Thuds had to get into essentially knife range, while the modern AGM-88s are more like sniper rifles.
Heh, I love the look of the F-4 too, the angled wingtips and nose, the twin intakes… head on or from any angle that’s a mean-looking jet.
I guess it’s not technically as “mean-looking” but the most bad-ass jet I ever saw is the SR-71 blackbird. That thing looks like it went way past mean and right into vicious.
I think the F-105 was the “Wild Weasel” before the F-4, and now it’s the F-16, right? Although I’m not sure they still use the designation “Wild Weasel” anymore. I haven’t been nearly as plugged into the USAF stuff since my Dad passed away.
The whole idea of flying a jet airplane directly into a radar signal for the express purpose of getting “lit up” so you can send a missile back down that signal to its source is just un-freaking-believably brave (or foolhardy). It’s like poking a stick at a tyrannosaur so you can shove a rock in its mouth or something.
Brave, brave crews. And doing a job most Americans neither understand nor even know about. Including me, really, my Dad was on the bomber side of things.
Update coming.
F-102’s in Vietnam, Huh ?
Gosh, they actually did send those crappy airplanes to Viet Nam.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0185.shtml
Apparently, THUDLESS.
“Thanks to you for the excellent information you have provided to help us improve this article. Furthermore, we are pleased to provide an accurate assessment of the F-102 no matter where or how it served. It is unfortunate that the political opponents of George Bush have chosen to attack him by denigrating the plane he flew and service in the Air National Guard. We have done our best to contact former pilots and ground crew of the F-102 during the course of our research. Most feel that they and their plane have been criticized unfairly, and we are happy to do what we can to educate readers about the true legacy of this aircraft.”
-answer by Greg Alexander
“By the way, please tell cosmic somebody to go have a few after-burners. ”
They’re easy. Just swallow a couple of shots of Lemonhart (proof 180) light a match and blow.
Sorry, I just made the last part up. Do not try this at home.
Wait a second Mc K, you’re going to trash people for info found on the Internet and then turn around and use it your self? That’s BS. Bush “asked” about joining a program that had ANG units serving under the Air Force. This was in early 72. He had 360 hours or so. To qualify for the program he needed 500 and the 102 was not one of the planes that qualified. So to go he would of needed to switch to a different plane and get 500 hours. A practical impossibility
“Regardless, the F-102 was still far more dangerous to fly than today’s combat aircraft. Compared to the F-102’s lifetime accident rate of 13.69, today’s planes generally average around 4 mishaps per 100,000 hours. For example, compare the F-16 at 4.14, the F-15 at 2.47, the F-117 at 4.07, the S-3 at 2.6, and the F-18 at 4.9. Even the Marine Corps’ AV-8B, regarded as the most dangerous aircraft in US service today, has a lifetime accident rate of only 11.44 mishaps per 100,000 flight hours. The F-102 claimed the lives of many pilots, including a number stationed at Ellington during Bush’s tenure. Of the 875 F-102A production models that entered service, 259 were lost in accidents that killed 70 Air Force and ANG pilots. ”
and
“Fred Bradley, a friend of Bush’s who was also serving in the Texas ANG, reported that he and Bush inquired about participating in Palace Alert. However, the two were told by their flight instructor, Maj. Maurice Udell, that they were not yet qualified since they were still in training and did not have the 500 hours of flight experience required. Furthermore, ANG veteran Col. William Campenni, who was a fellow pilot in the 111th FIS at the time, told the Washington Times that Palace Alert had stopped accepting new applicants before Bush would have been eligible.”
That was from your source so it must be right. So what have you been going on about?
Bones,
You’ll find that in none of my comments # 5, 10, 15, 18, 24, or 36 or 37 did I ever invoke the name of George Bush. Bush isn’t the issue except for cc.
If you found Bush’s name on a link, it still isn’t the issue except for cc for his proposed adversarial reasons, about which he is bul*lshipp**ng.
All fighter planes are dangerous as well as some of the pilots.
So who is ANG veteran Col. William Campenni ?
Kindly reference comment # 4 for the start of the b*s.
Specifically check out:
“That was a dangerous, DANGEROUS airplane to fly. The fact that Bush flew one competently for years is enough to make HIM a brave and competent man in my book.
BUT to think this somehow VINDICATES Bush…. well, not so much.”
Think “thud”.
Sigh…. keep it up McK…. I’m sure it makes you feel better somehow.
McKiernan’s worst habit by far–and it’s one that he’s had for as long as I’ve seen him online–is to savagely mock the internet as a medium to be used for fact-gathering or useful analysis. Attacking the internet, and online discourse, is just something he likes to do.
I wouldn’t let it get under your skin.
The dialogue was functionally over when Bones asked his question.
And all McK did in #39 was answer him.
Too bad you gave such a scitsofrenic answer. You insulted anyone who said the 102 was dangerous and then posted a link showing that it was indeed more dangerous than any jet in service today. After mocking people for using the internet. Hey if your whole purpose is just to be an ass then so be it. If you in anyway wanted to have honest discussions or take part in a round table about current events then you are going about it in the wrong way. Obviously it’s your choice.
Bones,
You are not being nice.
And being insulted after a mere 135 words even given another 18 has got to be a record in biased judgement.
You have got to be joking……….. or just nuts.
Bones,
Dude, buddy, I don’t recall you commenting before (it’s something I could have missed) but don’t even try to engage McK. I’d call it an exercise in futility but I don’t want exercises in futility to get a bad name.
You said your piece. We all saw it. Now find something more productive to do with your time lest you look into the abyss too deeply. Go watch paint dry. Or teach a one-handed man how to clap. Perhaps do a stage production of Hamlet using only baked goods.
I’m partial to pies for the main cast. But that’s just me.
Muffins are more my thing
Never mind.
Comments on this entry are closed.