Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Proof that John Kerry is Unfit for Command -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Selectric II who wrote (2682)	8/25/2004 8:23:42 AM
From: cirrus	Respond to of 27181

You asked what the difference was between French's sworn Swiftboat affidavit and Kerry's sworn Senate testimony. I posted Kerry's exact testimony to the Senate and explained the difference. Kerry's testimony is precise and clear. He tells you what he knows, how he knows it, how he obtained it, who told him and the backgrounds of those who told him their stories. It's compelling. Kerry has every reason to believe it's true, and he provides the background to weigh his testimony. French says under oath that Kerry "lied". Only later does he admit that he swore under oath to something he had only heard informally - and failed to reveal that little detail in his affidavit. I don't know how many Swifites submitted affidavits, but ...IF... 25 are like French's, one would think 25 good and brave men had direct knowledge that Kerry lied. Impressive? Not so. What we have is one person who claimed Kerry lied and 25 dummies repeating that. I'm not retracting anything. If you don't see or understand the difference between Kerry and French's testimony it's simply because you gloss over the details to arrive at the conclusion you want, regardless of the facts. Now, you want to retract his statements and give him an out?? You are crying that he was just passing along what he heard??