Minamyer backs down

Eric Minamyer has backed off his slander of Ohio House candidate Paul Hackett:

From the internet I learned that Hackett’s CO was Col. John R. Ballard, commander of the Marine 4th Civil Affairs Group. The unit description of personnel is "Total personnel include 38 Marine and 4 Navy officers and 85 Marine and 1 Navy enlisted." http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6453/cag.html gives a complete description of the unit. One could surmise he was one of the lawyers, but I cannot say for sure.

On Channel 12, Hackett stated that he was in command of a convoy on October 21, 2004 that was attacked by two IEDs (impovised explosive devices). He shows a picture of the convoy marines taken after the attack. That counts as combat.

As promised, I will not edit his response. The video can be viewed at (http://www.wkrc.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=96C30F6C-0A12-4F07-A09C-AD1615D9C891)

The questions I asked in my email were:

Did Paul Hackett lead marines in combat?

Yes on October 21, 2004.

Did Paul Hackett command marines at all, if so who?

Yes, at least on that date. The marines are in a picture he shows on the news report.

Was Paul Hackett in combat?

Yes, on October 21, 2004 traveling from Ramadi to Fallujah.


What were Paul Hackett’s duties in Iraq?

While he did not respond completely he did serve in a convoy on that date. From another posting of a news report he interacted with an Arab reporter over the issue of ID badges for people in Fallujah so he had duties involving issuing IDs to civilians or at least talking to the reporter about it. His unit is comprised of among other things lawyers. Since he is a lawyer he may have served in one of those assignments, but I cannot say for certain. As I have said before all marines are also riflemen..

Was he part of Division Staff and to whom did he report?

See above.

I therefore correct my earlier incorrect opinion that he was not in combat, which was based solely on a lack of a reply.

While I'll give Minamyer credit for retracting his slander of Hackett's military service, he's still a putz for questioning it in the first place. Anyone outside of the Green Zone in Iraq is in constant danger, whether in active combat or not. This is no ordinary war, and it's reprehensible for him to be questioning Hackett's service. Minamyer states in his comments that "questioning is not smearing", but he's wrong -- this kind of questioning is the very nature of the Karl Rove methodology of campaign attacks -- attack the opposition's strength. His pleas of innocence mean nothing.

(via Swing State Project)