"JOHN KERRY'S BODYGUARD OF LIES"

This guy is just incredible.



Kerry Falsely Claims His 1994 Intelligence Cuts Were Targeted At National Reconnaissance Office
______________________________________________________________________
KERRY SAYS CUTS WERE TARGETED AT NRO BUT THE RECORD SAYS IT ISN’T SO

Specter’s Amendment Specifically Referred To Cutting Funds From The National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). “The total amount authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 1996 for the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) shall be reduced by an amount equal to the amount by which appropriations for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 1996 are reduced to reflect the availability of funds appropriated prior to fiscal year 1996 that have accumulated in the carry forward accounts for that Office.” (S. Amdt. 2881, Introduced 9/29/95, Agreed To In Senate By Voice Vote 9/29/03)

Kerry Was Not A Co-Sponsor Of The Specter-Kerrey Amendment. (S. Amdt. 2881, Introduced 9/29/95, Agreed To In Senate By Voice Vote 9/29/03)
Sen. Kerry’s S. 1290 Doesn’t Mention National Reconnaissance Office At All. Kerry’s cut was across the board. The entire text relevant to Intelligence funding in the bill reads: “Reduce the Intelligence budget by $300 million in each of fiscal years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000.” (S. 1290, Introduced 9/29/95)

Kerry’s Proposal Did Not Target “Pet Projects And Pork,” It Simply Cut The Top Line Of The Intelligence Budget. The entire proposal was one line in his “Budget Buster bill,” which read: “Reduce the Intelligence budget by $300 million in each of fiscal years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000.” (S. 1290, Introduced 9/29/95)
Not Even The Washington Post Could Find Evidence Kerry’s Proposal Was Specifically Targeted At The NRO. “[T]he legislation and Kerry’s floor statement, inserted in the Congressional Record that day, did not specify the reason for the proposed cuts.” (Walter Pincus and Dana Milbank, “Bush Exaggerates Kerry’s Position On Intelligence Budget,” The Washington Post, 3/12/04)
Specter’s Amendment Passed Senate Unanimously By Voice Vote. (S. Amdt. 2881, Introduced 9/29/95, Agreed To In Senate By Voice Vote 9/29/03)

Kerry’s S. 1290 Never Came To Vote. (S. 1290, Introduced 9/29/95)
Just Months Before Proposing S. 1290, Kerry Suggested Need To “Rein In” Intelligence Funding. “Now, with respect to that issue of reinvention, that can carry with it a duality - a negative as well as a positive - and the negative can be that there is an effort to reinvent for the sake of it in order to create a purpose where there may not be one. Many people are suggesting that without a Soviet Union to focus on, without the kind of insurgencies that were being spread throughout the world, and without the need to break codes and do the other things, that we really need to rein in and direct of intelligence gathering in a whole new way. I suppose less expensive is the bottom line.” (Sen. John Kerry, Select Committee On Intelligence, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 4/26/95)

THIS WASN’T FIRST TIME KERRY TRIED TO CUT INTEL BUDGET

In 1994, Kerry Proposed Amendment To Gut Intelligence Budget By $6 Billion Across The Board. The amendment cut $1 billion from FY 1994 and $5 billion for FY 1995 through 1998. 75 Senators, including Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) voted against Kerry’s amendment. (Amdt. To H.R. 3759, CQ Vote #39: Rejected 20-75: R 3-37; D 17-38, 2/10/94, Kerry Voted Yea; Kennedy Voted Nay)

Kerry’s 1994 Bill Had Nothing To Do With National Reconnaissance Office, Which Is Not Even Mentioned In The Bill. In fact, despite specifics on little-known but important programs like the Uniformed Services University and the National Aerospace Plane Program, the portion addressing Intelligence is across the board. (S. 1826, Introduced 2/3/94)

Bill Text Says Intel Cut Is From “National Foreign Intelligence Program” And “Tactical Intelligence And Related Activities,” Which Are The Two Things That Make Up The Entire Intel Budget. (S. 1826, Introduced 2/3/94)
Democrats On Kerry’s 1994 Cut:

Then-Senate Intel Chair Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ) Said Previous Cuts Were “As Deep As The Intelligence Community Can Withstand,” And Kerry’s Proposal Ignored Terrorism, Imperiled National Security. (Sen. Dennis DeConcini, Congressional Record, 2/10/94, p. S1360)
Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI) Warned Kerry’s Cut “Would Severely Hamper” Intel Efforts And Ignored Threats Of North Korean Nukes And Terrorism. (Sen. Daniel Inouye, Congressional Record, 2/10/94, pp. S1330-S1332)
DeConcini Claimed Kerry Would Cut Intel By $5 Billion Over 5 Years: “Mr. President, the Kerry amendment includes a $1 billion cut in fiscal year 1994 and $5 billion over the next 5 years from intelligence activities.” (Sen. Dennis DeConcini, Congressional Record, 2/10/94, p. S1360)

http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc93.htm

About that second link from Drudge
http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc93.htm, it's "par for the course" as to Kerry's continuous and continued "revision of history."

We could all, each and every one of us, continue to qualify and rephrase whatever and everything about the past, present and possible future, as does Kerry, apparently (which is why he can't ever say anything directly, actually mean anything succinctly and effectively, but continually phrase, rephrase, frame and reframe and then reframe again just about everything)...but, I really am not surprised that he would, AGAIN, turn to "the press" and/or use of media to assist in his ongoing "intelligence operations" with American history and his place in it.

I honestly, without a doubt, at this point, think Kerry has devoted his life to a continued plan to undermine U.S. military and government. I also think that's why he has remained quite so noticably "silent" or absent from the spotlight for most of his years in the Senate, while doing what he's apparently been doing (first link you provided, an astoundingly terrible legacy for John Kerry, given the developments of today as consequence to Kerry's ongoing "work" in the Senate).

I have here a letter from the Kerry campaign, appealing for funds, and the language reads like some foreign foe proposing a military coup of the U.S....given the money available to Kerry and the obvious influence his wife's money has had on media over the years, Kerry seems to assume that the extremism of his negative perspectives about the United States is now "progressive" and therefore, "middle" as to opinion, etc.

On the other hand, he's vulnerable because of that cloistering and disconnect from the reality of the U.S., and that is, that he and his helpers appear even farther to the extreme than ever before to Middle America. Sad that so many in Unions have opted to throw themselves behind Kerry, but it's also no surprise there that they have.

That first link/article...astounding. Just horrifying.
--------