Saturday, July 24, 2004


Via Lambert at Corrente. From Paul Lukasiak at The AWOL Project:

An examination of George W. Bush’s payroll records lead to the conclusion that Bush consciously and deliberately defrauded the United States government for pay and “points” to which he was not entitled. The White House probably doesn’t even know that the payroll records include the data necessary to prove fraud---the proof is found in the “incomprehensible” lines of data at the bottom of the payroll records.

Lieutenant Bush was required to attend scheduled monthly training with his Texas Air National Guard unit., or perform “substitute training” instead. However, under Air Force policy, advance authorization was required for “substitute training”, and this training could be done no more than 15 days before his unit met for the scheduled mandatory training. The payroll records show that, during his last year as a member of the Texas Air National Guard, fraud was involved in over 40% of the pay Bush received that was credited toward mandatory monthly training. Bush was paid for, and received “point credit” for “substitute training” more than 15 days before the corresponding scheduled training for five separate weekends of mandatory training.

Moreover, Without advance authorization, Bush could not be paid or credited with any “training” he claims to have performed in Alabama.

Yet The payroll records are completely inconsistent with Bush having received advance authorization for the “substitute training” supposedly done in Alabama. If training had been authorized, paychecks would have been issued no more than five weeks after the training had been done. Instead, it took an average of seven weeks (and as much as nine weeks) for pay to be processed.

Other documents in the Bush files provide additional evidence that the training that Bush was paid for in Alabama was never properly authorized. And the statements made by officers of the Alabama Air National Guard also confirm that Bush did not get the authorization necessary from Alabama for him to be paid and credited with training.

Finally, the White House has never released any of the paperwork that could show that this training was approved in advance, or that the training was actually accomplished. Additional circumstantial evidence strongly suggests that none of the training done in Alabama was properly authorized. When the evidence is considered as a whole, the obvious conclusion is that this paperwork never existed, and that Bush was paid for training that he never performed.

[. . .]

Among the hundreds of pages of documents released by the White House in February, not one single piece of paper exists that confirms that Bush did any training whatsoever after April 1972. The payroll summaries tell us that Bush got paid, and the data that was entered into the payroll system that generated those payments also generated the “points summaries” released by the White House for that period.

But a considerable amount of paperwork for all of this training should exist. Chief among these documents are the AF Form 40a’s which were used to authorize substitute training in advance, and to certify that the training had been accomplished.

All told, Bush performed “substitute training” on at least 20 days. Thus there should be, at the very least, 20 AF Form 40a’s with the name of the officer who authorized the training in advance, the name and signature the officer who supervised the training, and Bush’s own signature.

(There would probably not be any paperwork showing when Bush trained with his unit at Ellington AFB during scheduled UTAs. An AF Form 40, accompanied by a roster of authorized participants, was used to certify UTA performance itself. These forms would be kept as part of the unit records.)

Bush also supposedly performed 28 days of “active duty training” during the time in question. There should be written orders authorizing all of this duty in Bush’s files, as well as 10 DD Form 220s certifying the periods spent on active duty training.

[. . .]

The evidence that Bush never received the authorization necessary for him to receive pay for training is overwhelming.

1) The “training” for which he was credited could not have been authorized in advance under Air Force policy.

2) If the training had been authorized in advance, Bush would have been paid for the training that was accomplished within five weeks of performing the training. This did not happen for the substitute training that Bush supposedly did in Alabama.

3) Bush trained on weekdays in Alabama, yet the record shows that Alabama went “by the book” when it came to such substitute training, and only authorized Bush to perform “substitute training” for UTAs when the 187th was scheduled for its own UTAs.

4) Except for the training which was authorized but for which Bush never appeared, there is not a single piece of paper that suggests that Bush was authorized to train in Alabama, or that he had completed the training for which he was paid.

5) The commander of the unit where Bush would have trained, who would have had to authorize each day of training, has no recollection of Bush having trained with his unit.

6) The personnel officer who would have had to process the approval of the training, and would have been responsible for the completing and sending out the forms necessary for Bush to be paid for training, has no recollection of Bush having trained with his unit.

Without that authorization, Bush could not be paid. Bush had to have known that advance authorization was required for him to perform any training.

Yet Bush was paid for “training”. That is fraud.

[. . .]

The whole article is long, but worth a read. As I've said before, the government doesn't lose records. I'm sure they still have a timeline of every time I had a bowel movement on Air Force time.

Ol' Paul's bona fides, from Lambert:

Lest this work be dismissed as "tinfoil hat"-style ravings, our attention was first drawn to Paul's work by Orcinus (here). Paul is the kind of guy who works out what the holes in the 1970s payroll punch cards mean. In short, he's the kind of investigative journalist... Sorry, you ask: What does "investigative journalist" mean? Well, back in the days when we had a free press....

This guy knows what he's reading and commenting on. Youll see that when you read his article. Bush is a fraud and deserves to be in jail. Not just for this, but for the fraud he's perpetrated on the American public over the last four years.

Update 19:05: Lambert has more from Ol' Paul, about the form I spoke of a while back, one document that would put this all to rest.

I really don't care, but there's one document that I haven't seen that would put this all to rest. It's called a DD Form 214. Ask any veteran about it and he (or she, you PC busybodies) will explain it.

I say ha!

Asked, "Where is the DD214?!" alert reader and AWOL Payroll Records Jedi Master Paul Lukasiak adds in comments:

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,

Aargh! On "the order" where? Which document? Don't keep us in suspense!

Heh. One more Saturday Night, eh?

I looked up into heaven, lord I saw a mighty sign
Writ in fire across the heaven, plain as black and white
Get prepared, there's gonna be a party tonight

Bunch of bloggers poring over documents, timelines, the US Code, and lots of archives ... I love it!

As that dope Drudge says, developing . . .

Update 19:55: I asked Paul in the comments section at Corrente:

What I want to know is why NOT the DD Form 214?

And he replied:

because that form was a release/discharge from Active Duty, and Bush was not on active duty at the time he was discharged...[my emphasis]

that is not to say that your concerns are unwarranted. We SHOULD have some kind of form (either a 214 or a 256AF or a 258AF ) that we do not have....and one suspects that there is a reason we don't have this rather essential form that would be part of any personnel file....

So, ladies and germs, where is the one document that could lay this all to rest? Only President Nitwit and his puppeteers know . . . for now.

Update 06:00 Sunday: Yeah, I'm still at it. I added this in comments at Corrente last night:

I got a deal with why there was no disciplinary action for this nitwit letting his flight status lapse. By golly, the Air Force spent how much training him to fly fighters? Do you think they'd just let him off that easy? Why wasn't the flight physical rescheduled and why wasn't his weenie whacked for missing the first one?

And then I went to sleep. This morning, from Lambert:

[. . .]

As Paul notes:

It turns out that there is also a DD Form 256AF, which was used for honorable discharges from the reserves. (this is probably the form that was used under normal circumstances instead of a DD214.)

So, is it a DD258 or a DD256? If the latter, that's the honoranble discharge form. Still, it looks like an "8" to my eye. And, to be fair to Bush, both letters do use the word "honorably" (apparently, you can commit payroll fraud and not show up for a medical exam, and still be discharged honorably. Oh-ka-a-a-a-y....)

Of course, all this could be solved very simply: Bush could simply authorize release of all the files, as he promised (back) he would do, but has not done. I wonder why?

And this from Corrente reader Bryan in comments:

The form 256AF is the fancy, for display, form that is issued. It is printed in color and has the seal. I have three of them, two for my regular AF enlistments and one for the end of my reserve commitment.

There still has to be a DD-214 issued at the end of your enlistment. It is the summary of your service and is the single accepted proof of military service for benefits of any kind. It also has a code on it that characterizes an individual's service and whether they are eligible for re-enlistment.

And then Farmer asks a good question:

If as Bryan above says, the 256-A is the fancy for display version of the DD214 shouldn't Bar or Poppy have a nice framed original hangin' in the rumpus room at Kenne-bunk-port? With GW's rugby trophies and stuffed pet goat?

Or something like that. They strike me as the types that would keep a keepsake trophy wall laying around somewhere. Maybe they'd like to show it off too us?

And what about a Meretorious Service Medal and/or a Good Conduct Medal. Would Bush have been eligible for one of those if he received an hon. discharge? - or wouldn't that apply in his case even with a DD214 or DD256. (?)

Let's face it, folks. Bush used his daddy's contacts in the Guard heirarchy to get out of service and get an honorable discharge to boot. If he didn't, we'd have all the records. I mean, we KNOW of every time John Kerry took a leak on a Vietnamese tree, don't we? Bush's records are buried so deeply by now that a guy like Paul Lukasiak will find them 50 years from now.

And lastly, because I've had it with talking about this asshole's service, or non-service. From Where Was Bush?:

Five Facts to Remember About Bush's National Guard Record

  • FACT #1: Questioning Bush's Record Does Not Denigrate Guard

  • FACT #2: Bush Received Special Treatment in National Guard

  • FACT #3: Bush's Whereabouts Unclear During 1972-1973

  • FACT #4: Bush Should Have Done More During 1972-1973

  • FACT #5: Bush Has Yet to Explain Missing Records

  • Now I'm done.

    No comments: