You read it here first

In today's New York Sun, Thomas Lipscomb reports that "Mystery Surrounds Kerry's Navy Discharge":

"An official Navy document on Senator Kerry's campaign Web site listed as Mr. Kerry's 'Honorable Discharge from the Reserves' opens a door on a well kept secret about his military service. ... It describes Mr. Kerry's discharge as being subsequent to the review of 'a board of officers.' ... What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. And it couldn't have been an honorable discharge, or there would have been no point in any review at all. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry's status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge."

And it goes on from there ...

--

I posted this item two weeks ago, on Sept. 30:

Discharge
There is an email circulating which suggests that John Kerry refuses to release his military records not because of questions regarding his Vietnam service, but because they will reveal that he did not receive an honorable discharge from the US Naval Reserve until March 12, 2001, when he was a senior US senator and lots of people were eager to do favors for him.

Also according to this email, Kerry received an unspecified discharge on February 16, 1978, even though his service obligation should have been fulfilled by July 1, 1972.

There are five classes of service discharge; from best to worst, they are:

(1) Honorable; (2) General; (3) Other Than Honorable; (4) Bad Conduct; and (5) Dishonorable.

The disclosure that Kerry received any level of discharge other than "honorable" in 1978 would almost certainly doom his candidacy.

The email also discusses the US Constitution, the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice), and various laws that Kerry allegedly violated in the course of his anti-war activities while he was still in the Naval Reserve.

Is any of it true? All of it? I don't know. Interesting questions, though ...