| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Politix | |
| Secret Bush tapes revealed | |
| 2005-02-20 | |
| WHEN future US President George W. Bush was first moving onto the national political stage, he often turned for advice to an old friend who secretly taped some of their private conversations, The New York Times reported today. The newspaper's website said that in the past several weeks, that friend, Doug Wead, an author and former aide to Mr Bush's father, had disclosed the tapes' existence to a reporter and played about a dozen of them. In those conversations, Mr Bush weighed the political risks and benefits of his religious faith, discussed campaign strategy and commented on rivals, the report said. The president said that his main Republican rival in the 2000 primary campaign, Senator John McCain, "will wear thin", the Times reported. The future president went on to suggest that John Ashcroft would be a "very good Supreme Court pick" or a "fabulous" vice-president, according to the paper. In exchanges about his handling of media questions on his past, Mr Bush appeared to have acknowledged trying marijuana, the Times said. Mr Wead reportedly said he recorded the conversations because he viewed Mr Bush as a historic figure, but knew that the president might regard his actions as a betrayal. As the author of a new book about presidential childhoods, Mr Wead could benefit from any publicity, but he said that was not a motive in disclosing the tapes. The White House did not dispute the authenticity of the tapes or respond to their contents, the paper said. It quoted White House spokesman Trent Duffy as saying: "The governor was having casual conversations with someone he believed was his friend." Asked about drug use, Mr Duffy said: "That has been asked and answered so many times there is nothing more to add."
| |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #18 Wasn't there an incident a while back where some Democratic 'vacationers' (who just happen to have come from some DNC function and just happen to... ) recorded a cell-phone conversation of Newt? I happen to remember because Congressman McDermitt (D-Wa) handed the tape off to the press? What ever happened to those |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2005-02-20 8:08:38 PM |
| #17 His personal honor for a book plug. 30 pieces of silver? |
| Posted by: .com 2005-02-20 7:31:29 PM |
| #16 Fwiw and perhaps I misheard, but I saw an âexclusiveâ interview this morning with Wead on the weekend edition of Good Morning America. The way I understood him was that he originally had written the portion of his book having to do with W crediting anonymous sources. Then his publisher came back to him and said that the NY Times wouldnât review his book (which I assume is a big deal) unless he named his sources. He agreed to play portions of his tapes to prove his points, but once the reporters discovered the tapes they coerced him to reveal the rest. This doesnât absolve him for his betrayal of course (on that score I agree with Frank G), but if true then one could only wish for an alternative universe where the NYT went after Eason Jordan or John Kerry with such zeal. Funny how something so clearly âoff-the-recordâ that itâs borderline illegal to release here is fair game, but âoff-the recordâ in Davos is sacrosanct. For someone willing to pay Real Networks (who I despise), the interview is here: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/story?id=516740&page=1 |
| Posted by: Thraing Glurong8447 2005-02-20 7:25:54 PM |
| #15 No, why would snorting coke be any worse than perjury before Congress? I did it all, at least once - and I mean all of it. We make choices, every single day. Some of my early days, 13-16, I made some extremely stupid choices - I had a lot of help along those lines given who I knew and hung out with. I lucked out when our little family made a major move from Texas to the Mountain states region - the opportunities and enticement changed dramatically. Despite the conventional wisdom which says you can't, I learned from those days and didn't seek out the truly unforgiving stuff, like smack. At age 20, when my ex-wife announced she was pregnant, I had an epiphany. I turned 180 deg and have refused everything except nicotine and caffeine since. I did have 2 beers last Nov 3rd. I'd still have the other 4 in the fridge except that I've pawned 3 of them off on visitors. So there's one lonely Beck's Dark in there - the only German product I've bought in the last 2.5 yrs. Snorting a little coke doesn't impress me much. Doing it after your High School years tells me he never grew up or took responsibility for his actions, basically, he's learned nothing important in life, despite his political successes. Usually people in his situation only get squared away when John Law slaps on the cuffs. Since he's immune from all that (not literally, but effectively), it's likely he destined to keep on doing stupid things. Such is the way of the world, I guess. And no, I'm not an anti-everything zealot - I learned that doesn't serve any purpose. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-02-20 7:11:59 PM |
| #14 Nothing could surprise me about Clinton Like the reason he never released his medical records (deviated septum, from heavily hitting the coke straw while he was AK governor)? |
| Posted by: Raj 2005-02-20 6:50:01 PM |
| #13 I got the same feeling, Mike, when I heard a snippet on Fox. Just imagine how the press would be reacting if these were tapes of Clinton, being sold downriver by some trusted friend. Nothing could surprise me about Clinton so I wouldn't care less, but they'd be going crazy excoriating the leaker. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-02-20 6:46:07 PM |
| #12 ..Just heard part of the tapes on CBS, whose reporter's face was showing barely concealed his glee, and they were harping on the "Bush confessed to using marijuana" meme. The interesting part was that the voice of President Bush didn't sound very much like him... Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2005-02-20 6:41:09 PM |
| #11 Some blogs are picking this up but the story is not spreading as fast as I thought it would. Wait until Monday radio gets their hands on it though. Between Limbaugh on the radio and O'Reilly on TV this jagoff will be exposed everywhere. What the HELL is going on here anyway? These were old tapes from 98, right? And Doug Dickwead claims that they weren't supposed to get out? Well, how the fuck DID they get out after all this time, assmunch??! Answer: YOU PLAYED THEM FOR A FUCKING REPORTER. I'm going to look through this This dickWead jerk just sold his last book. |
| Posted by: Chris W. 2005-02-20 2:27:55 PM |
| #10 Wead was a pastor and a friend. Neither of which should be taping conversations without the other's knowledge. He's worse than scum |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-02-20 11:02:25 AM |
| #9 " the Blogosphere will be checking him out with a carrot peeler over the next few days..." LOL, Mike. There'll be a "Weadwatch" site up by the end of today. |
| Posted by: Matt 2005-02-20 10:55:04 AM |
| #8 ..After reading the whole thing, this is what I believe the MSM is going to run with: *He used drugs!!He's no better than Clinton!! *He's a religious maniac!! *My God, he wanted to make Ashkkkroft a Supreme Court justice!! There are probably some others in there, but I think that is what will be slammed down our throats over the next few days. On the other hand, I sure as hell hope that ol' Mr. Wead considered the fact that the Blogosphere will be checking him out with a carrot peeler over the next few days. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2005-02-20 9:17:27 AM |
| #7 it depends if these were telephone conversations--or he just had a recorder on him--they have to be over the phone to be illegal--if your wearing a wire with the battery pack under your balls-- that's ok |
| Posted by: SON OF TOLUI 2005-02-20 6:04:54 AM |
| #6 With some exceptions: "12 states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington." |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2005-02-20 4:45:07 AM |
| #5 IIUC, recording a conversation is legal provided at least one party has given their consent - it's the same in the UK. |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2005-02-20 4:43:56 AM |
| #4 PF: I would suspect that prosecuting him or suing him would give him credibility he does not deserve. Credibility? This guy taped a private conversation without authorization. I believe that's a felony. Do felons have a lot of credibility? Good question. At the very least, convicting him would subject the earnings from his book to seizure. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-02-20 4:35:42 AM |
| #3 The tape disclosures won't enlighten anybody. Who needs this crap? |
| Posted by: IToldYouSo 2005-02-20 4:01:10 AM |
| #2 I would suspect that prosecuting him or suing him would give him credibility he does not deserve. |
| Posted by: Phil Fraering 2005-02-20 3:39:02 AM |
| #1 Sounds to me like this guy should be prosecuted. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-02-20 2:01:15 AM |