Apparently Blumenthal is owed an apology

[dsc]

The New York times had 3 examples of Blumenthal mistating his military record. Of those we know one was technically accurate, one was in a speech in which he did say he wasn't a VietNam vet, and one was a case where he over stated. In the same article we heard about how he wasn't on the swim team but said he was captain. Turns out he was on the swim team and didn't say he was captain. Oops.

Now we find out the following.

The Advocate thus seems to have located one new instance in which Blumenthal may have misstated. On the other hand, the Hartford Courant’s Colin McEnroe contacted a wide range of Connecticut political reporters about the Blumenthal matter (click here). McEnroe says he “asked reporters, anchors and columnists” to tell him “whether they could remember Blumenthal ever claiming to have served in Vietnam” and “whether they had been under the impression...that Blumenthal had served in Vietnam.” Again and again, these experienced reporters told McEnroe that they had never seen Blumenthal misstate his record, and that they never believed that he had served in Nam. This tracks the earlier statement by Christopher Keating, the Courant’s Hartford bureau chief. On Tuesday evening’s NewsHour, Keating told Judy Woodruff that he had attended many veterans events at which Blumenthal spoke, but he never heard him misstate his record (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 5/20/10).

One experienced observer after another say that he has never heard Blumenthal misstate his record. If the New York Times was trying to present a full picture of this marginal matter, it’s hard to know why evidence like this was missing from its original, massive front-page hit piece. But then, how awful does that original report by Raymond Hernandez seem to be? This awful:

In our own original treatment of this matter, we cited the peculiar passage in which Hernandez seemed to suggest that Blumenthal had lied about being on the Harvard swim team (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 5/18/10). “Records at the college show that he was never on the team,” Hernandez haplessly wrote. Yesterday, the Hartford Courant quoted a captain of the Harvard swim team saying that Blumenthal was on the team. And not only that! “A photo from the 1964 Harvard College yearbook... shows Blumenthal participating in a Harvard swim meet his freshman year,” the Courant further reported.

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh052110.shtml#GAMBLING

end of quote

It seems that Blumenthal misspoke twice about VietNam and some reporters in CT can't do their jobs. Out of that we get Blumenthal is a big liar. Gee, a anti big business liberal gets taken down. What a shock.

[Demoiselle]

1. God Bless the Daily Howler.

[glitch]

33. Glad to see his work posted here. They really are after Blumenthal aren't they.

Shades of Gore.

To those who think the politicians subjected to these kinds of smears are the same as Republicans, ask yourself why the NYT is willing to damage its own reputation to keep them out of power.

[Demoiselle]

51. That's an excellent point, glitch. The good grey lady does go after Dems, doesn't she?

[Bitwit1234]

2. Goes to show McMahon is just another cheap lying republican

who shows she is doing anything to try to get elected. Because she knows the "liberal" media will repeat her lies verbatim.

[no_hypocrisy]

16. This has the bearings of Karl Rove.

[formercia]

18. Classic Rovian operation.

learned from his mentor:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Segretti

Donald Segretti
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Donald Henry Segretti (born September 17, 1941, in San Marino, California) was a political operative for the Committee to Re-elect the President (Nixon) during the early 1970s. Segretti was hired by friend Dwight L. Chapin to run a campaign of dirty tricks (which he dubbed "ratfucking") against the Democrats, with his work being paid for by Herb Kalmbach, Nixon's lawyer, from presidential campaign re-election funds gathered before an April 7, 1972, law required that contributors be identified. His actions were part of the larger Watergate scandal, and were important indicators for the few members of the press actively investigating the Watergate break in in the earliest stages that what became known as the Watergate scandal involved far more than just a simple break in. Segretti's forged authorship of the "Canuck letter" typifies the tactics Segretti and others working with him used, forging a letter ascribed to Senator Edmund Muskie which maligned the people, language and culture of French Canada and French Canadians, causing the soon to be Democratic presidential candidate Muskie considerable headaches in denying the letter and having to continue dealing with the issue. Many historians have indicated over the years that Muskie's withdrawal from the Presidential primaries, and the disastrous Iowa primary loss to George McGovern that precipitated it, were at least partly the result of Segretti and some of the other "Ratfuckers" creating so much confusion and false accusations that Muskie simply could not respond in any meaningful way.

In 1974, Segretti pleaded guilty to three misdemeanor counts of distributing illegal (in fact, forged) campaign literature and was sentenced to six months in prison, actually serving four months. One notable example of his wrong-doing was a faked letter on Democratic presidential candidate Edmund Muskie's letterhead falsely alleging that U.S. Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a fellow Democrat, had had an illegitimate child with a 17-year-old; the Muskie letters accused Senator Hubert H. Humphrey of sexual misconduct as well.<1> After testimony regarding the Muskie letters emerged, Democrats in Florida noted the similarity between these sabotage incidents and others that involved stationery stolen from Humphrey's offices after Muskie dropped out of the race. A false news release on Humphrey's letterhead "accused Rep. Shirley Chisholm (D-N.Y.) of being mentally unbalanced" and a mailing with an unidentified source mischaracterized Humphrey as supporting a controversial environmental measure that he actually opposed.<1>

--snip--

[xxqqqzme]

49. She even admitted her campaign planted the story.

Why has this even bigger underhanded act not been reported?

[skipos]

3. I am surprised a few DUers still rage about this.

I would put this in the same realm as Obama talking about 53 states. If you talk a lot, you are going to misspeak from time to time. I don't see any evidence of "misleading" here at all.

[Dr Morbius]

13. It goes beyond DU. Bill Press has been relentlessly attacking Blumenthal since the story broke.

And being Bill Press, he takes calls from those who disagree, but never changes his tune. I think the damage done by Linda McMahon with this has been substantial, and many of us on the left are playing into her hands.

I hope Mr Blumenthal rebounds from this hit piece. I do NOT want a McMahon in government. I've had about enough of entertainers moving into government, either unable to know the difference between entertainment and politics or cynically blurring the line.

[Dawson Leery]

15. I would not save Bill Press if he was hanging over a cliff.

[harkadog]

19. When you say you were in Vietnam you are not misspeaking

you are lying. And eventually you will be caught if you try for a high profile office. Anyone who has been in the military knows this is lying. You don't "misspeak" about those things.

[skipos]

20. When you say there are 53 states, you are lying too.

And yes, people can "misspeak" about anything, including Vietnam. I don't know why you think there would be some thing unique about war that makes everyone say exactly what they are thinking about it. Frankly, I don't need to know. Go ahead and rage, I have no vote in this.

[harkadog]

22. It is not comparable and nobody who is honest would suggest it is.

When Obama said 53 did he think there really were 50 but he would say 53 in order to get more votes and fortify his resume? That is what lying is. Many, many politicians have lied about service in Vietnam. They think they can get away with it because when they start out in lower offices no one checks out these types of claims. So they keep repeating it until they reach a high profile office where someone checks and then they are caught.

[dsc]

23. except that isn't what he did

He has been in politics for nearly 3 decades and we have a grand total of 3, count them 3, times where he misspoke. Of those 3, one was in a speech where he said it the right way first. That leaves 2. 2 out of a 3 decade long record of public service. That isn't a calculated liar.

[Jennicut]

24. Blumenthal was never a calculated liar, I have observed him since

he was our AG in the early 90's. The NYT and Linda McMahon want people to believe his rep is sleazy, lying, underhanded but some of us in CT know better. At least some people like you get that.

[harkadog]

25. Oh please Blumenthal himself said "several times" in his apology speech

But I guess you know better than him. At this point there are only 2 or 3 times that exist on tape that has been discovered. In Blumenthal's position most speeches he gives are not taped and he has likely said this many many times at rallies and especially in one on one moments. But if the citizens of Conn want a liar as their Senator it is up to them.

[dsc]

26. Then why did every single solitary political reporter the Times asked

state that he didn't make a habit of doing this and that they didn't think he had served in VietNam. A fact the reporter left out of his story, it should be noted. This reporter was so sloppy that he said the man wasn't on the swim team when he was.

[harkadog]

28. As the stories have pointed out there were dozens of articles

about Blumenthal that referred to him as a Vietnam vet because that was the impression he wanted to leave. Never once in all these years did he ever try and correct one of these articles. I guess I hold Democrats to higher standards than some do.

[dsc]

36. By your own standards I could accuse you of lying here

I just watched, on Meet The Press, Blumenthal's apology press conference, and he used the word 'few' not 'several'. Unlike you, I will not impune motives.

[harkadog]

38. Ohhhhhh. Terrible mistake!

I said several instead of few! I wonder what Blumenthal's definition of "few" is?

[dsc]

41. actually it is a pretty big mistake in context

I said that Blumenthal misspoke three times (a few) and you said back that even Blumenthal admitted it had been several in his apology. In point of fact, Blumenthal and I are the ones who agree with you odd man out.

[harkadog]

42. What about the dozens of articles over the years that

referred to Blumanthal as a Vietnam vet because that was the impression he gave. He never attempted to make a correction of any of them (which he admitted). But I suppose that is some more "misspeaking" isn't it?

[dsc]

43. what dozens

I have heard of two, not dozens. And why is it incumbent upon him to correct reporter's errors? Maybe, just maybe, reporters should do their jobs.

[harkadog]

44. The reporters were doing their jobs

They were reporting what was told to them.

But the way he speaks about his military service has led to confusion and frequent mischaracterizations of his biography in his home state newspapers. In at least eight newspaper articles published in Connecticut from 2003 to 2009, he is described as having served in Vietnam.

The New Haven Register on July 20, 2006, described him as “a veteran of the Vietnam War,” and on April 6, 2007, said that the attorney general had “served in the Marines in Vietnam.” On May 26, 2009, The Connecticut Post, a Bridgeport newspaper that is the state’s third-largest daily, described Mr. Blumenthal as “a Vietnam veteran.” The Shelton Weekly reported on May 23, 2008, that Mr. Blumenthal “was met with applause when he spoke about his experience as a Marine sergeant in Vietnam.”

And the idea that he served in Vietnam has become such an accepted part of his public biography that when a national outlet, Slate magazine, produced a profile of Mr. Blumenthal in 2000, it said he had “enlisted in the Marines rather than duck the Vietnam draft.” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/nyregion/18blumenthal.html

If this was five deferment Cheney instead of five deferment Blumenthal you would be all over this. I don't have your double standards.

[dsc]

45. 8 isn't dozens and he quotes from two

since the reporter outright lied about whether or not Blumenthal was on the swimteam I don't believe him about the 8 papers. In no case is it dozens as you said. He offical bio, which was available to every single reporter who covered him, stated in clear, unambiguous terms, that he didn't serve in VietNam. One was apparently written about the speech in which he DIRECTLY STATED HE DIDN'T SERVE IN VIETNAM. Sorry but if you watch a speech in which a candidate states he didn't serve in VietNam and then write that he did say that you aren't doing your job.

[harkadog]

46. More

Keep on digging that hole. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/nyregion/22blumenthal.html

[dsc]

47. One of them is a repeat

see my earlier link to the daily howler. Leaving another two. Two plus two is four last I checked. Not dozens. And again, given this mans total sloppiness I don't beleive him without direct quotes and citations. Incidently, has he yet admitted that he was totally wrong about the swimteam?

[harkadog]

48. I don't give damn about the swimteam

I don't think too many voters are going to vote for or against someone based on whether they were on some college swim team. Look the search will go on I'm sure and you can defend him but I just don't have those standards. If someone "misspeaks" about something like this then they will "misspeak" about a bunch of other things.

[dsc]

50. I care about the swim team only because it shows how sloppy and dishonest the reporter was

but evidently only some mistakes count.

[skipos]

27. Oooh rip. I am so hurt that you called me dishonest.

The guy misspoke, and all your froth and rage isn't going to make me change my mind.

[harkadog]

39. I'm not trying to change your mind.

If the people of Conn. want someone who got five deferments and then claimed he was in Vietnam that is up to them. All I know is that people who were actually in the military know exactly what "in Vietnam" means and they would not "misspeak" it.

[State the Obvious]

4. Howard Dean referred to it as a "hatchet job".

Dean: Let's be fair about this. This is a New York Times gotcha story planted by the opposition.

[TheKentuckian]

5. Clarified during the same speech, it appears.

I wonder when the majority of the media will report and retract, if ever.

[freddie mertz]

6. Looks like it, more and more.

What do you think will happen in the end?

[rurallib]

7. So how soon will the NYTimes own up?

{{crickets}}

[neildan]

8. You are correct, but the damage is done.

Perception wins in these matters.

[Tarheel_Dem]

14. There's a lifetime between now & Nov. Blumenthal just needs to make

sure that the voters know that McMahon, with the help of a dishonest media, tried to bury his candidacy. If you really want to help, you could send him some money from down there in Midland, TX; that might help him fight this.

Sounds like you've bought into some talking points there. Oh, btw, Welcome to DU. :eyes:

[Radical Activist]

9. He was ACORNed

Time for the NYT to fire that reporter. He obviously has no journalistic integrity. This is why we need to tune out the corporate press and make them obsolete.

[grasswire]

10. also time for Chris Matthews to apologize

He said some pretty awful things about Blumenthal.

[TheKentuckian]

12. Tweety is being a POS about this. This information came to light and he was still flinging shit

last night.

[glitch]

34. And Gored and Kerryed. This is not a new trick, same old from the NYT. nt

[Jennicut]

11. Yesterday, I posted that he only misspoke twice. I am glad more people are picking

up on that. This is turning into a confusing mess of reporting. Poor reporting seems to always win the day...
I am still voting for Blumenthal. McMahon is trying to buy this seat and I will be damned if I let her. I hope fellow Dems in CT follow me on that.

[totodeinhere]

29. Why are you using the term "misspoke" rather than "lied?"

And if it were the GOP candidate in the same circumstances, would you also say she misspoke, or would you say she lied? Lets face it. A lot of people at DU want to give him a pass just because he has a "D" after his name.

[Phx_Dem]

17. I recall Hillary misspeaking about landing in Kosovo under fire, but

the media isn't calling her a liar. And I'm not suggesting that they should.

Blumental should be called out for mistating facts on 2 occassions, but the media doesn't need to be calling anyone a liar, especially the NY Times.. They've mistated facts much more important that Blumental's service record on more than two occasions. Iraw = WMD ring any bells?

[cowman]

31. When you say you served in Vietnam

and you didn't, that is fucking lying, no matter how you gloss is over, that POS lied about serving in Nam and as a Vietnam Vet I find that highly offensive and he should fucking resign. If he had an R before his name rather than a D, everyone here would be calling for his head. e should be apologizing to every Vietnam Vet for lying. What a bunch of hypocrites.

[Phx_Dem]

35. It's not lying when you say in the very same speech that you DID NOT

serve in Vietnam. That's a mispeak.

Are you calling Hillary a liar too?

[Dawson Leery]

21. Kick

[Peacetrain]

30. Don't expect he will get any..

[cowman]

32. And the POS

shouldn't. He should be apologizing to every Vietnam Vet for fucking lying and then he should resign. I don't give a shit how people here try to gloss it over, he still lied about serving in Vietnam, he didn't "misstate or misspeak", he FUCKING LIED.

[CTyankee]

37. Do you live in CT? Do you have the faintest idea of what Blumenthal has

done for the people of CT, especially the veterans here who LOVE him? If they support him who are YOU to tell them what he should be doing to every Vietnam Vet?

You clearly don't know what you are talking about. You should apologize to US because you are maligning us by saying we're glossing over anything. There is NOTHING to gloss over.

Dick Blumenthal has served the people of CT in an honorable way. The only thing you are serving is the Republican cause and you shouldn't be doing that here on DU!

[Uzybone]

40. predictable M$M bullshit... easily swallowed up by some "liberals"

Blumenthal will survive this