Intimidation and racism - fine old Democratic (Party) traditions.
Mood:  irritated
Topic: Democrat Voter Fraud
The DNC sending a memo to its constituent groups to do those "pre-emptive strikes," essentially, "oh, hy the way, be sure to complain about racism and intimidation at the polling place, whether it happened or not, guys" is a little ironic.

You know all those guys with fire hoses, foaming at the mouth police dogs, white housewives turning out every day to hurl unspeakable obscenities at little African-American kids whose only sin was going to a "white" school, cops in riot gear wielding truncheons at protesters, the dirtbags who blew churches up or set them on fire in the 1960s and even the 1970s?

In the South back then, most of them would have been Democrats.

I grew up in the South, and I remember being taught about the two-party system. My teacher: "Yes, there are two parties, and you can join the Republican Party, but you'd just be wasting your vote."

In the school's mock election the next year, I gave the Libertarian candidate's speech and except for the eight wonderful years between 1980 and 1988, have been Libertarian ever since.

We even have a proud veteran of the century-long Democratic tradition of intimidating voters in the name of race serving in the US Senate - why, it's Senator Robert K. Byrd of the great state of West Virginia - longtime Democrat AND Klansman.

That's not just a Southern issue, either - unless you count "South Boston" (as in "the Southie riots") or the Midnight School Bus Burnings in Michigan, where the enthusiasm of northern Democrats for busing and integration (gee, a story of hatred and prejudice Michael Moore seems to have missed - and in his own back yard!) was on full display.

And I wonder how many of those good people in the 8 Mile subdivision Eminem did so much to make famous - the people who actually built a wall through a subdivision to show the bankers and the insurance salesmen where the white people and where the African-Americans lived - voted and registered Democrat? Almost all of them, maybe?

No, the minute the Democrats point the finger at people in other parties for "racism" and "intimidation," immediately three fingers point reflexively back at them - it ought to be more, but you get the idea.

The Democratic Party has forgotten more about strong-arming and intimidating voters, stuffing ballot-boxes and just plain cheating in elections than anyone else knows on the subject. At the very same time the press was going whack-o about "butterfly ballots" in Florida, the Democratic machine in Illinois had counted those very same ballots without a peep from the press.

But I'm sure that there are notes written down somewhere, so Terry McAuliffe can relax about the details of any of those tricks his party might have forgotten.

There's more to this story than the incredible hypocrisy of the DNC, though.

The Drudge memo could foreshadow something really nasty the Democrats have in mind for Election Day - actual intimidation of voters BY DEMOCRATS.

If the Democrats themselves are planning a campaign of intimidation against Republican and other voters, what better way to kick it off than with a timed barrage of accusations about the poor folks at the polling stations or the system at large?

Especially if, as we know is entirely plausible, the Democrats can count on national news coverage that either covers up or minimizes Democrat misconduct ("just public-spirited Americans haranguing or assaulting people who look like Bush voters, no news here, people") while inventing or exaggerating Republican misconduct?

A baaaad moon might be on the rise in November, people.

If we (the people of the United States of America, acting through our elected leaders and our government) are going to be accused of intimidation tactics anyway, this actually EMPOWERS us, ("us" again being the people of the United States of America}.

Having an advance indication that ONE side of the political scene at least envisions falsely accusing us of racism and intimidation on Election Day, is it not reasonable to take precautions which would reduce or eliminate the danger of such intimidation?

We have a National Guard which can be mobilized either by the state's governors or by the President of the United States.

We should consider arming the members of the National Guard not presently deployed in support of national security operations and distributing them to each polling station in the United States to support duly constituted polling station officials.

These Guardsmen should be armed - with loaded firearms in whose use they are trained - and placed at the disposal of the official in charge of each polling station, to prevent acts of intimidation by ANYONE from occurring.

Quick-reaction forces of Guardsmen should be made available to respond to organized violence or acts of racism or intimidation at polling places.

Local police agencies should consider stationing an officer or two at each polling station and making their special weapons and tactics forces available for quick-reaction against any organized acts of intimidation or racism.

If there really is a potential for acts of intimidation or racism at polling places in this country, let's stop them before they start.

But if McAuliffe and the other people leading the Democratic Party are just making accusations up in order to tilt things their way, than that's something else we need to stop before it starts.

The Drudge memo is evidence of a conspiracy to falsely allege electoral code violations in the upcoming elections.

People have been thrown in jail for much, much less. Martha Stewart is in jail for the exact same offense (at the Federal level). If NOBODY went to jail for this, we would know that something is fundamentally wrong with the system of justice in this country.

If this, as the Drudge memo seems to show, is a conspiracy to make numerous false accusations intended to sabotage the election system of our country, then what we have here is an organized attempt by the Democratic National Committee to overthrow the lawful government of the United States of America by unlawful means.

The Internal Security Act of 1950 is all about dealing with THAT, and it was written when the Democratic left wing was just the Ladies' Auxiliary of the Communist Party.

Fortunately, good ideas never die.
___

It's time the Democratic National Committee either accepted a role in the government of the United States of America and stopped trying to subvert and sabotage its operations with their lies

- or declared themselves to be in open and organized opposition to the lawful government of the United States of America, with all that implies - in other words, that they want to overthrow our current government by unlawful means.

The Democratic National Committee themselves have given up on the democratic process, because they can't win and are unworthy of the trust placed in them by the members of their Party.

Why Osama bin Laden Loves Kerry - and VICE VERSA
Topic: Kerry=Chimp with an M-16?
A certain number of Americans will die in Iraq today.

Dan Rather intones this fact on The CBS Evening News, along with footage of John Kerry going on and on about how we should not be in this "W for Wrong" war in the first place, and that the blood of each of those men and women are on the hands of George W. Bush and the Republican Party.

Jim Lehrer will bleat the names of the dead on the PBS News Hour, then run several interviews with antiwar activists and talking heads, and clips from Kerry campaign appearances cut so that Kerry gets more uncut face time for free on PBS than he does in his own paid campaign spots.

Al-Qaeda operatives carefully note what the murder of our troops overseas does to the current President.

Orders go out for more murders.

A certain number of Americans will die in Iraq tomorrow.

Dan Rather will intones this fact on The CBS Evening News....

In college we used to call this a feedback loop.

When I was studying about feedback it was the mid-1980s, and Kerry was attacking everything the Republican president in office back then did.

In college, we called John Kerry a traitor, when we thought about him at all. Kerry was the witless jerk who could usually be seen screaming on the news about what a great guy Nicaraguan dictator Daniel Ortega was and how horrible the CIA was for trying to give Nicaragua back to its people.

John Kerry is STILL a traitor - to the idea of democracy, because he testified in Congress that Communism, "benevolent dictatorship" (his words - and do we need a President who EVER thought a dictatorship could be benevolent?) and democracy were all morally equivalent.

The POWs who were being tortured by the North Vietnamese and hearing Kerry's false accusations about those "war crimes" they supposedly did probably considered Kerry a traitor.

In fact, if Kerry had uttered those words inside a North Vietnamese Army prison instead of a cozy Senate hearing room, he could have been prosecuted for Misconduct While a Prisoner of War.

The depth of the moral cesspit that is John Kerry is too deep to plumb, and no one seems to be paying attention.

If it didn't happen on TV, it didn't happen, right?

And, then as now, John Kerry's friends decide what happens on TV.

Democratic Senate Candidate, State Attorney General Accused of Sitting on Voter Registration Fraud
Mood:  incredulous
Topic: Democrat Voter Fraud
Interesting news about Democrat activism in Colorado: several "progressive" voter registration canvassing groups are implicated in a scandal involving ineligible voters - as many as 6,000 convicted felons may have been registered to vote this way.

Mrs. Donetta Davidson, State Registrar of Voters says that "her office has sent hundreds of questionable voter registration forms to Attorney General Ken Salazar since April, but only one person has been charged. She said that raises questions about how the investigations are being conducted... "

Please note that this is the same Ken Salazar the Democrats are running against Pete Coors for Ben Nighthorse Campbell's empty seat in the US Senate.

Back in the summer, a few hundred questionable voter-registration forms were intercepted in Jefferson County alone - one paid canvasser was charged with forgery in four of those cases.

At that time, Ken Salazar's spokesman said he thought the man's employer (another voter canvassing group which was only paying for voter registration forms in which the "Party" line was not filled in "Republican") was innocent of wrongdoing.

In both this case and the more recent ones, a quota system in which canvassers were paid only when they got 5 new voters or more an hour was identified as a possible motivating factor for the frauds.

Full report of the story from the local CBS-owned television station KCNC (local Ch. 4)

A Flip, A Flop, A Fib and A Dodge - Kerry gets a 9.5, a 9.9... and from the Al-Qaeda judge - a perfect 10!
Topic: Kerry=Chimp with an M-16?
We knew John Kerry had range, but WOW, get this!

Q. "If you are elected, given Paul Bremer's remarks, and deteriorating conditions as you have judged them, would you be prepared to commit more troops."

The question could have been phrased more simply, but the reporter deserves credit for trying to limit the "wiggle room" in the question.

A. "I will do what the generals believe we need to do without having any chilling effect, as the president put in place by firing General Shinseki, and I'll have to wait until January 20th."

Note: We don't HAVE members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who go around thinking "The job really requires 200,000 troops, but the President will fire me if I say so." The gentlemen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff got where they are by ignoring the temptation to think that way.

Those in major line commands who succumb to the temptation to give false answers they think their bosses would like are culled out by the truth-tropic nature of the military, as such lies are exposed when they conflict with the inflexible nature of time, space and resources available to each mission.


Kerry, continued:

"I don't know what I am going to find on January 20th, the way the president is going. If the president just does more of the same every day, and it continues to deteriorate,"

This is Kerry Classic, the way HE went on, and on, after coming home from the Navy in the 1970s.

Tell any lie, exaggerate any problem, spoil morale and do anything you can to destroy our troops' performance in the field, run that butcher's bill up sky-high, as long as it helps you along in your political career.


" ...I may be handed Lebanon, figuratively speaking."

No, if (God forbid) Kerry winds up in the White House with another Lebanon, he won't have been "handed" it - Kerry will have it because he worked so hard to GET it by undermining the President in time of war to make it so... just like last time in Southeast Asia.


"Now, I just don't know."

First and only true statement of the interview.


"I can't tell you. What I'll tell you is, I have a plan."

Masterful choice of words. "What he'll tell us is, he has a plan," in his bags, next to the deeds to some dry land in the Everglades he'd like us to look at later.


"I have laid out my plan to America, and I know that my plan has a better chance of working."

Wait a minute, there! Here's Kerry just a minute ago (imagine tape rewinding noise):

"I don't know what I am going to find on January 20th, the way the president is going. If the president just does more of the same every day, and it continues to deteriorate, now, I just don't know. I can't tell you."

But here he is, anyway, telling us about the plan for a situation he doesn't know anything about, but which will work better than what's being done now.

And which must have been laid out when America was otherwise busy.


"And in the next days I am going to say more about exactly how we are going to do what has been available to this Administration that it has chosen not to do."

Like sending the U.S. Army's 10th (Mountain) Infantry Division into the unmapped rat holes of Tora Bora to be slaughtered as Edwards said he and Kerry would have done in HIS debate?

Who's shaky on the concept of force protection now?


"But I will make certain that our troops are protected."

How? Your boy Edwards just told us the very opposite thing in the debate, that if you and he had been calling the shots in Afghanistan, you would have sent the 10th (Mountain) Division in despite all manner of logistics problems and despite the lack of any good intel about mines, ambush alleys and other surprises waiting in those holes at Tora Bora.

Give us details about this "protection" you say you'll provide, and produce military officers who aren't part of your campaign, no more Bill Burketts, to how us how this "protection" of yours will work in the real world.


"I will hunt down and kill the terrorists,"

No, you won't. A bunch of brave, underpaid men who don't have personal Gulfstream V jet aircraft and multi-million dollar dowries will do that. Let's at least get that right.

" ...and I will make sure that we are successful,"

Please show us how that works, Sparky!

" ...and I know exactly what I am going to do and how to do it."

Kerry, you told us at the beginning of this press conference that you didn't know WHAT you were going to have to do, because Bush was supposedly leaving you such a mess.

John Forbes Kerry, you've done it again - flip-flopped AND outright lied, all in the space of a single press conference.
__

And despite all your attacks on the President's war performance and your hand-waving about that "plan" of yours which we haven't seen and seems to change with each development in the war the way you describe it, you didn't answer the one question you were asked - "would you be prepared to commit more troops."

Flip, flop, fib and dodge the original question - Archetypal John Kerry.

Next chapter:

Lyndon Baines Kerry teaches us a new word - "Escalation!" (Or, "don't tick off a blustering, insecure Democratic President with a raging need to control others unless you want 500,000 guests in your country... ")

Gwen Ifill, incompetent? I don't knowww.......
Mood:  celebratory
Topic: Master debating
Before concluding, as Jonathan V. Last did on the Weekly Standard Web page, that Gwen Ifill was incompetent to discharge the duties of moderator in the debate between Dick Cheney and John Edwards, we need to, as the doctors say, rule out all the other possible causes for the phenomenon:

1 Stage Fright? Please note that Gwen Ifill's day job is with PBS. More people probably watched her Tuesday than had ever seen her on television before. Period.

Ifill's most famous weekly venue, "Washington Week," is going to have to adopt the "jello wrestling for its female panelists" format before its audience expands much beyond the people who watch because their jobs or homework assignments require it of them;

2 Hero Worship? Perhaps it was close proximity to one of her REAL bosses (hint - the big player in the DNC, not Mr. Cheney) for so long that caused her to insist that Edwards take the lead on two questions in a row, OVER HIS OBJECTIONS.

Edwards submitted to Ifill's magisterial authority and led out of turn, anyway - creating an undocumented "Madam Moderator Says" exception to the debate rules from which Bush is unlikely to benefit unless a last-minute change in the moderator rota is made in favor of Karen Hughes or Mary Matalin;

3 Existential Angst? Could it be that, brimming over with inner anger over having to pretend that the Republicans should have an equal right to make their points in HER debate, Gwen Ifill decided to do a little liberal existentialist street theater late in the program, showing the emptiness of the charade she, Edwards and Cheney were doomed to play out?

Probably not, but the Nation might decide to run with that theory for an editorial. Fellas, send the check to....

4 Dead Presidents? This could explaim Jim Lehrer's decision to disgrace himself in front of the nation, as well, and should be carefully considered.

Among the horrible things people will do for money, acting dazed and confused while incidentally giving one candidate for national office in a debate a crucial advantage isn't very demeaning or degrading at all.

In fact, it only metaphorically qualifies as "prostitution"....

All of these differential diagnoses, plus results of a "One's Own Buttocks - A Hole in the Ground Difference Perception Test" should be considered before Gwen Ifill should be unreservedly considered incompetent to moderate a vice-presidential debate.

If only Tim Matheson were available to reprise his deathless role as 'Otter' (during the college honor board trial) in Animal House at this point, he could iron this whole mess out for us right away.

"It isn't Gwen Ifill we're talking about here, it's the debate rules, isn't it? And we've seen those rules get bent here before, haven't we? (winks at us, the stern-faced panel of outraged non-Kerry supporters)

"That these naked violations of the debate rules could happen on national TV, on college campuses, says something about our broadcast and educational systems. Well, I'm not going to stand here and listen while you people talk trash about... the United States of America!"

(Kerry, Edwards, Gwen Ifill, Jim Lehrer, Terry McAuliffe, James Carville and all the dupes of the Kerry campaign march out of the lecture hall while humming the Battle Hymn of the Republic at this point.)

Sleazy Stan Matsunaka Crouches Behind Orphans and Foster Kids to Shoot at Marilyn Musgrave
Mood:  irritated
Topic: Dumb campaign ads STINK
Scene: An American soldier takes up a position in a smoldering nightime Iraqi landscape, firing back at an unseen enemy.

As a woman in the same kind of pink outfit Reese Witherspoon made notorious in "Legally Blonde 2" sneaks up on the soldier and picks his pocket, an indignant, nasal announcer denounces what he says is Marilyn Musgrave's voting record for American soldiers' benefits.

The source of the ad is identified as "Colorado Families First" in print on screen.
____

There really is an outfit here in Denver, Colorado named "Families First," which:
(a) has nothing to do with Stan Matsunaka, the Democratic or Republican parties, Marilyn Musgrave, or politics in general;
(b) is an extremely valuable resource caring for kids with problematic family situations;
(c) thanks to the sleazy maneuvering of the Democrats, now is losing vital support here in Denver as a consequence of a deceptively-named front organization and massive voter reaction to the attack ad.

Gee, thanks, Democrats. The kids who won't be getting help because of your BS ad really appreciate your efforts on their behalf.

In what's nearly an anticlimax, the attack ad's figures are either outright lies or misleading in the extreme.
__

This is 527 bull crap at its worst.

Stan Matsunaka, Congresswoman Musgrave's opponent is the current election cycle, gets to disavow the work of these horrible people who cruelly and stereotypically attacked his opponent, spending a LOT of money to for ads whose only purpose is to help Matsunaka get elected.

It'd almost be worth going to Hell, just to see all the Democrat campaign strategists turning slowly on spits over the eternal fires there.

Not that GOP strategists are innocent in these matters, but the Democratic National Committee has fine-tuned the art of lying in 15 and 30-second advertising spots, not to mention manipulating Congress to repeal the Constitutional right to free speech when it might be better funded by the political opposition.

Hey, union guys and college students - hope you like what people are doing with the money picked from your pockets by Democratic Party front organizations.

Cheney kills Edwards on issues; Edwards channels Bill Clinton; Gwen Ifill shills for DNC
Mood:  celebratory
Topic: Master debating
This was a much more satisfying debate to watch than Bush-Kerry I.

It was apparent from the outset that Dick Cheney had brought the old golf shoes and was going to do the lambada all over John Edwards. And, except for a few slow spots early on, he did.

Hugh Hewitt and his affiliated bloggers cover this better than I intend to. Click in the link above if you want a thorough analysis.

I just wanted to share one moment - when the Vice-President went over John "Senator Gone" Edwards' record of non-feasance in his current job, then revealed that in four yeats of presiding over the Senate (which is one of the parts of the veep's job) he had NEVER met John Edwards until the debate tonight.

WHOOSH - the wind went right out of John Edwards' sails. Edwards was reduced to rattling a short list of Cheney's alleged misdeeds - and minor ones they were, mainly votes which betrayed Cheney's indifference to political correctness (big news flash, that!).

Did you know Cheney voted AGAINST a resolution demanding the release of Nelson Mandela? Wow!

This stuff wasn't red meat - it barely qualified as old beef jerky. There really IS nothing bad in the DNC file cabinet on Cheney except for the perennial crap - nothing at all true or significant - about Halliburton.

Do Edwards or his writers really think this material is going to make us take up lit torches and march on the Vice-President's Residence? Is their cupboard really that bare? If so, Bush-Cheney may be on their way to an electoral vote landslide if nothing else.

Not even "moderator" Gwen Ifill (we understand that Bill Moyers had prior committments) helping her friends in the DNC out with that question about "Cleveland, the Poor City" is going to give them much traction in Ohio - a crucial state Kerry had better win, but which looks to be turning Republican Red as you read this. If Doogie Kucinich, Boy Mayor, couldn't use Democrat Magic to turn Cleveland into Grosse Pointe while he ran the place, well....

But Edwards' delivery of the litany of Dick Cheney, Prince of Insufficient Light, Spawn of Heck made me wish I'd had a tape in the VCR. Over the top, fake-indignant trial lawyer histrionics contending (unconsciously, I think) with what I can only describe as the Bill Clinton-Elmer Fudd Wheeze.

It was great! Edwards was out-Darrell Hammonding Darrell Hammond... it wsa the quintessence of every "Good Bill" Bill Clinton impression I've ever heard. It is the most eerie thing I've ever seen!

Under stress John Edwards CHANNELS Bill Clinton.

Too bad the poor bastard can't channel somebody worthwhile, like Zell Miller or Russell Long.

Folks, we have a winner!
"...it's five-o-clock in the afternoon, time for the answer to today's Trivia Stumper! Meryl Basingstoke got BOTH answers to today's Stumper...

'Name a American military commander who became disillusioned after early success and actively spoke out against the United States later on... '

and yes, Meryl, you got them both right,

'Benedict Arnold AND John Kerry'!

If you'll hang on during our commercial break, we'll arrange delivery of your handsome prize, a fine New England-style Turn Coat Rack!"

Kerry's Kampf, or Will a Kerry inauguration be
Topic: War Criminal Candidates

The Court Martial of John Forbes Kerry
Mood:  incredulous
Topic: Kerry's Lies and Spin
There are all the charges John Kerry should have had to face from his Vietnam years, when grunts without Kerry's family money and political connections were being jacked up for charges ranging from smuggling in empty rocket launcher tubes as war souvenirs (you can't reload an empty M-72 LAWS rocket launcher unless you have heavy connections with the people who make them - in which case, you can get brand-new ones) to some of the same atrocities Kerry admitted to before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971.

I like to call this "The Court Martial of John Forbes Kerry" (in homage to "The Court Martial of George Armstrong Custer")

While as a serving member of Congress, Senator Kerry's person is immune from arrest while Congress is in session; his recall to active duty to stand before an Article 32 hearing to determine whether a court-martial on the following specifications should be convened is therefore probably unlikely.

Unlike the cast of JAG, I don't even play a military lawyer on TV (though I did listen to someone from Air Force JAG talk to my AFROTC class for an hour in 1976), so I can't speak authoritatively, but I understand that Senator Kerry would have to be impeached or lose his Senate seat in some other way (such as a drastic increase in Massachusetts voters' IQ come his next election) before anything judicial or court-martial-like happened to him.

However, it's interesting to ponder just how many ways Kerry and those who served with him say that he screwed the pooch, and what sort of trouble he'd be in if he did what he and others said he did, and was found guilty of it all.

The provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice pertinent to the conduct in which Lt.(jg) John Forbes Kerry, USN has been accused of committing (my notes explaining why I think Kerry ought to be investigated for violating each provision of the UCMJ are given in italics):

SUBCHAPTER X. PUNITIVE ARTICLES

Section 910. ART 110. IMPROPER HAZARDING OF VESSEL

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who willfully and wrongfully hazards or suffers to be hazarded any vessel of the armed forces shall suffer death or such punishment as a court-martial may direct.

(b) Any person subject to this chapter who negligently hazards or suffers to be hazarded any vessel of the armed forces shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(John Kerry has admitted on several occasions, and this has been confirmed by no less an authority than former Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Elmo Zumwalt, to beaching his Swift Boat against enemy-held positions, needlessly exposing his men and innocent civilians - some of whom died as a result - to enemy fire.

Kerry's demeanor on these occasions, according to witnesses, appears to have reflected intent on repeated occasions to "willfully hazard or suffer to be hazarded" his vessel - and innocent people died because of his depraved indifference to their welfare.

Admiral Zumwalt might have saved us all a lot of trouble at this point - instead of pinning a Silver Star on Kerry, he could have jumped on the chance to convene a summary court, find him guilty of Improper Hazarding and execute him right then and there.

But in fairness to the Admiral, who knew that Lt.(jg) Kerry was going to grow up to imperil the freedom of millions, first as a lobbyist for Southeast Asian Communism, then as a political hack, a supporter of two-bit dictators like Daniel Ortega, and a dedicated, tireless foe of American military preparedness?)

Section 926. ART. 126. ARSON

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who willfully and maliciously burns or sets on fire an inhabited dwelling, or any other structure, movable or immovable, wherein to the knowledge of the offender there is at the time a human being, is guilty of aggravated arson and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(b) Any person subject to this chapter who willfully and maliciously burns or sets fire to the property of another, except as provided in subsection (a), is guilty of simple arson and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(John Kerry testified to having committed acts of arson while serving as an officer in the United States Navy before the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.)

Section 907. ART. 107. FALSE STATEMENTS

Any person subject to this chapter who, with intent to deceive, signs any false record, return, regulation, order, or other official document, knowing it to be false, or makes any other false official statement knowing it to be false, shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(Several witnesses have alleged that John Kerry made false statements regarding combat or other action, including statements representing non-combat and self-inflicted injuries as injuries received in combat, or misrepresenting noncombat actions as combat actions in order to receive decorations for valor)

Section 928. ART. 128. ASSAULT

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who attempts or offers with unlawful force or violence to do bodily harm to another person, whether or not the attempt or offer is consummated, is guilty of assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(b) Any person subject to this chapter who--

(1)commits an assault with a dangerous weapon or other means or force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm; or

(2) commits an assault and intentionally inflicts grievous bodily harm with or without a weapon; is guilty of aggravated assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(John Kerry testified to having committed acts of assault while serving as an officer in the United States Navy before the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.)

Section 918. ART. 118. MURDER

Any person subject to this chapter whom without justification or excuse, unlawfully kills a human being, when he--

(1) has a premeditated design to kill;

(2) intends to kill or inflict great bodily harm;

(3) is engaged in an act which is inherently dangerous to others and evinces a wanton disregard of human life; or

(4) is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of burglary, sodomy, rape, robbery, or aggravated arson; is guilty of murder, and shall suffer such punishment as a court-martial may direct, except that if found guilty under clause (1) or (4), he shall suffer death or imprisonment for life as a court-martial may direct.

Section 919. ART. 119. MANSLAUGHTER

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who, with an intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm, unlawfully kills a human being in the heat of sudden passion caused by adequate provocation is guilty of voluntary manslaughter and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(b) Any person subject to this chapter who, without an intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm, unlawfully kills a human being--

(1) by culpable negligence; or

(2) while perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate an offense, other than those named in clause (4) of section 918 of this title (article 118), directly affecting the person; is guilty of involuntary manslaughter and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(John Kerry testified to having killed noncombatant persons protected by the Geneva Convention while serving as an officer in the United States Navy before the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

Whether, if he were found guilty of the acts he claims to have committed, the act or acts he admitted to would constitute murder or manslaughter, and which degreee of manslaughter (if applicable) is properly a matter for the court-martial panel to determine.

The deaths resulting from Kerry's Improper Hazarding of the vessel under his command might also be actionable as manslaughter.)

Section 878. ART. 78. ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT

Any person subject to this chapter who, knowing that an offense punishable by this chapter has been committed, receives, comforts, or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial, or punishment shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(John Kerry testified to possessing knowledge regarding other servicemen's violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, including acts of assault, murder, rape and arson directed at noncombatant persons protected under the Geneva Conventions, while serving as an officer in the United States Navy before the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

Kerry's failure to report such acts to competent military authority in a timely manner could be construed as assisting or attempting to assist them to avoid being arrested, tried or punished for such violations.)

Section 915. ART 115. MALINGERING

Any person subject to this chapter who for the purpose of avoiding work, duty, or service--

(1) feigns illness, physical disablement, mental lapse or derangement; or
(2) intentionally inflects self-injury; shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(the manner in which John Kerry sustained two injuries could reasonably be considered self-inflicted if the testimony of other officers, including Kerry's commander during his training period, is correct.

Kerry is alleged to have attempted to misrepresent the first such injury to his training base commander as a combat wound, despite other crewmen's denial that combat occurred when Kerry was injured, and despite the evidence that the only weapon fired which could have caused the wound to which Kerry referred was the one fired at a river bank by Kerry himself.

After Kerry's commander refused to endorse his application for a Purple Heart for the wound in question, Kerry appears to have obtained the medal by means unknown to his commanding officer at the time the wound was sustained.

The second wound considered under this specification consisted of a bruise to Kerry's buttocks and lodging of rice grains in Kerry's skin after he (according to others who were present) threw a hand grenade in a cache of rice.

Again, according to others who were present, this was not done in combat. It is open to conjecture whether Kerry knowingly inflicted this injury on himself, but he claimed that it occurred in combat and was successfully awarded the Purple Heart on that basis.

The two injuries in question are alleged by other officers not to have occurred in combat, resulted from Kerry's use of antipersonnel grenades outside of combat and not according to doctrine for employment of these devices, and were alleged to have been fraudulently reported as combat injories - with the ultimate result that Kerry's tour of duty in Vietnam was shortened from the usual twelve months to four months.

Again, if the evidence supports these statements, at least one charge of malingering could be brought against Kerry)

Section 880. ART. 80. ATTEMPTS

(a) An act, done with specific intent to commit an offense under this chapter, amounting to more than mere preparation and tending, even though failing, to effect its commission, is an attempt to commit that offense.

(b) Any person subject to this chapter who attempts to commit any offense punishable by this chapter shall be punished as a court-martial may direct, unless otherwise specifically prescribed.

(c) Any person subject to this chapter may be convicted of an attempt to commit an offense although it appears on the trial that the offense was consummated.

(for trying to violate the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice which were mentioned in the allegations made against Kerry and to which he testified having committed while serving as an officer in the United States Navy before the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations; this article applies even though the attempt was successful and resulted in guilt of another offense under the UCMJ.)

Section 933. ART. 133. CONDUCT UNBECOMING AN OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN

Any commissioned officer, cadet, or midshipman who is convicted of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(self-explanatory)

Section 934. ART. 134. GENERAL ARTICLE

Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.

(self-explanatory)

NOTE: recycled from an earlier post on this blog. Since I write everything here, that's OK.