Bush AWOL: Undesirable Discharge?

[johnfunk]

NOTE TO MODERATORS: Yes, this is from a blog -- Corrente, to be exact -- but this looks to be a big development in what exactly happened to Bush Jr. at the end of his Alabama National Guard "service" , and merits attention as a hueueueueuge break in the story.

---

I'm not certain there is one. The DD214 is called the "Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty ."

HOWEVER I JUST saw this...)

on the order which SUPPOSEDLY gives Bush an "honorable discharge", the following words appear...

"DD FORM 258AF will be furnished"

And I just found this in the Code of Federal regulations, 32 CFR 887.7 {PDF}

(d) If (obsolete form) DD Form 258AF, Undesirable Discharge Certificate, has been issued,

Well, well, well -- there goes the Bush Boy's story about being honorably discharged! Click here.

[RoadRunner]

1. There's a thread in GD also, and here's the actual documents

http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/10-3_2000_Personnel_File.pdf (see page 24)





http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2002/julqtr/pdf/32cfr887.8.pdf

[dweller]

2. please post the graphics

in the GD thread, i've nominated it for front page use.

thanks.
dp

[Rose Siding]

3. It's being debunked in the comments threat at corrente

It all depends on if it's the #6 or the #8 on the form.

256AF is for honorable

258AF is dishonorable

[dweller]

4. from what i'm reading, it's not

'dishonorable', but 'undesirable' in the honorable discharge form.
looks like an 8 to me anyway.
correct me if i'm wrong.
dp

[expatriot]

5. DAMN!!!!! I want so badly to believe its an 8 too!!!!

But it is a 6.

damn it all to hell. I thought we had him.

[On the Road]

27. No -- It's an "8" All Right

Look at it under 400% magnification. The left-hand side has an indentation, which wouldn't happen on a 6 but would on an 8.

At that's how I look at it.

[DrBB]

6. Well, but, I mean... DAMN

So could it really be this obvious and this easy? Nobody ever noticed that DD Form 258AF means "Undesirable Discharge," or "Discharge Under Other Than Honorable Conditions"???

"Other Than Honorable"??? "Undesirable"????

I will say one thing, though: to me, none of this old service shit about the Chimp means all that much in itself. It would have long since been forgiven and forgotten, in and of itself, if he'd simply admitted it and moved on. Former life, irresponsible youth 'n' that.

The issue is lying about himself. Making shit up and having other shit covered up. If "Well, he received an honorable discharge" has to be replaced by, "Well, sure, it was a dubious 'Other than honorable' 'Undesirable' discharge, but hey, it was a long time ago and he's changed since then"--I'm sorry boys but the moment for that treatment is long long loooooonnnnng gone. It's not going to go to the issue of "What did he do 30 years ago," it's going to go to the issue of "Hey, wait a sec, I thought he was a straight shooter, regular ol' cuss, honest cowboy, an look--Turns out he's just a lyin' p.o.s. rich boy after all."

I mean, I'm trying not to be credulous here. My god there have been no shortage of smoking guns and sure-fire, absolute no-question house-o-cards busters, none of which have panned out.

But they have absolutely pinned their fortunes to that "honorable discharge" claim. I just do NOT see how that particular button can come undone and not have the whole set of clownish balloon pants come tumbling down around his ankles.

on edit: hope springs infernal. Looks like a "6" to me too.

[DainBramaged]

7. This is huge, this isn't easily explained away

Someone didn't do a good job of redacting this document.

[liveoaktx]

8. that is a 6, not an 8, this is debunked

[sandnsea]

10. I disagree

I blew the thing up and it does not look like a 6. I don't know what that means in the whole context of military regulations, but that looks like an 8 to me. And I think I'm pretty objective about these things.

[BlueCollar]

14. I agree

Looks damn sure like an 8 to me

[shockingelk]

9. Has the zip code changed?

http://zip4.usps.com/zip4/welcome.htm/

373 broadway
cambridge MA

shows 02139, not 02138 as is typed on the form.

[DrBB]

16. 02139 is Central Square; 02138 is Harvard Square

Broadway runs between the two, and they're not very far apart. So either one would be valid.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

11. You know...

There are people other than... umm... bloggers looking at this stuff. People who get paid to, you know... decipher government documents. Ya. The NY Times, Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, Salon, and several hundred other US and international media outlets have all reviewed it and... nothing. This is the problem I have with using blogs as a primary source for "hard" news. I don't take issue with this stuff being posted in GD or anywhere else, but what the hell is this doing in LBN? This belongs here no more than Drudge's latest "exclusive!" belongs here.

[democrank]

12. For what it`s worth......

Using the same magnifying glass I employ to decipher artist`s signatures on old paintings and prints, I`ll add that the number looks like an 8. The upper righthand side of the number extends downward to connect with the bottom portion.

[cerulean_ink]

13. I dunno...

It looks like an eight to me, both lines look pretty consistantly thick coming down to meet the bottom circle:

[DrBB]

18. Looks like a serif to me

That's a heavily serifed typeface, and the joining on the right looks like a serif to me. I've done a lot of manuscript work, and initial impressions at a distance are sometimes more useful than close work with magnification, especially if you're looking at something several generations removed from the original (this is, what, a jpeg screen shot of a pdf of an offprint of a microfilm of a document?). And my initial, at-a-glance impression was a six, not an eight. I think the combination of ink-bleed and/or paper indentation, combined with multiple reproduction and jpeg compression have combined to blob and blur the edges together.

[DrBB]

22. Look at the "F" for comparison

As follow-up to my previous: Look at how the serifs on the "F" of "AF" have completely blobbed together. Those gaps would normally be even bigger than that between the lobe and ascender of a "6". But they look joined in this print.

[hippywife]

25. If you totally disregard the serif

and look at the left edge of the digit in question, it still looks like an 8. A 6 would not have the indention on the left edge but an 8 would.

[Thor_MN]

23. Try focusing on the other side... What "6" bellies in on the left?

Not many type faces have the upper side of a six coming out of the middle of the lower circle - they come out of the left side of the lower circle. The character in question bellies in on the left hand side - absent a better image, I say it's an 8.

[TomNickell]

19. Looks like an 8 to me too, but that't not consistent with....

the rest of the document.

Don't think we've got him yet.

[newyawker99]

20. Hi cerulean_ink!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Moderator]

15. Not LBN

A blog is not considered a source of news.
Moving to General Discussion

[spotbird]

17. kick nt

[ramblin_dave]

21. DEBUNKED - The guy who started this has regrets

Paul Lukasiak who made the mention on Corente now says this in a post at Salon.com:

Damn, am I sorry I mentioned it on Corrente!

I literally had just found the "256/8" reference, while looking up what a 214 was used for.

I found a comment in dailykos from weeks ago that said the form said 258, but the writer could find no information about that form---I did, and posted about in when I responded to the question about the 214.

And within two hours, I had found the reference to 256, but by that time the whole thing had taken on a life of its own...

MEANWHILE...my extensively researched piece on the payroll records data is getting NO attention....

WAAAAHHHHHH

http://tabletalk.salon.com/webx?14@@.7739b7ad/2652

[Fuzz]

24. What about this? Form issued for possible drug use?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/10-3_2000_Personnel_File.pdf

Page 24 shows that a DD form 258AF was issued to Bush.

According to:

http://dont.stanford.edu/regulations/regulation27.pdf


Section 13-31

"13-31. Types of separations. a. Au individual
separated by reason of unfitness will be furnished
an undesirable discharge certificate (DD Form
258A), except that an honorable (DD Form 256A)
or general (DD Form 257A) discharge certificate
may be awarded if the individual has been awarded
a personal decoration or if warranted by the particular
circumstances in a given case. When the
sole reason for separation is drug abuse as specified
in paragraph 13-5a( 3) (b), the individual will be
furnished an honorable or general discharge certificate
as warranted by the particular circumstances
in a given case. The type of discharge will
be directed by the convening authority."


And paragraph 13-5a states

13-5. Applicability. An individual is subject to
separation under this chapter when one or more
of the following conditions exist :
a. Unfitness.
(1) Frequent incidents of a discreditable
nature with civil or military authorities.
(2) Sexual perversion, including but not limited
to-
(a) Lewd and lascivious acts.
(b) Indecent exposure.
(c) Indecent acts with or assault upon a
child.
(d) Other indecent acts or offenses.
(3) Drug abuse, defined as-
(a) Drug dependence, or the unauthorized
use, sale, possession, or transfer of any controlled
substance as defined in AR 600-50, or the introduction of such controlled substance onto any Army installation or other Government property under Army jurisdiction.


What's the deal?

[derby378]

26. So what's the current story?

Is it a 258AF or what? This could be BIG.

[nomatrix]

28. The AWOL story

http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm
Paul's detailed work

http://www.failureisimpossible.com/needtoknow/dubya.htm#awol
Failure is Impossible link to stories

Lots of reading, but it helps to understand how much went into searching out the truth.


Edit to add this link, which explains more about the guard
http://www.glcq.com/intro2.htm