Category Archives: Politics: US: GW Bush Scandals

AP suing the Pentagon to get 100% of GW Bush's service records. It has always seemed odd to me that (1) Bush did not in fact ever make all his records available, and indeed reneged on his pledge to do so; (2) requests for the records now go through the White House; (3) there are things missing that have no right to be missing, notably the discharge papers with their separation codes; (4) no one in the press seemed to care about the loose ends in the story.

Is it a coincidence that this law suit comes just after Bush starts falling in the polls? I would hate to think the press corps was so craven that they only dare ask hard questions when they smell blood. But how else to explain the timing?

Shorter Eric Soskin, Harvard Federalist Society, writing in Ex Parte:

Given that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, Bush's official statement to Congress (a certification required by law as a precondition for force), that invading Iraq was “consistent with” a resolution that authorized force against “international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001” wasn't “unambiguously false” but just legalistic and misleading—so why is everyone getting so worked up about it?

I think the guy has a future in the OLC if Bush is re-elected.

[Update (6/22): A read writes to complaint about the "re-". Point taken.]

Finally. The Bush records story is getting new traction, probably because Kerry himself is making an issue of it. Helpfully, Salon has published a child's guide (suitable for busy reporters) to some (only some) of the major gaps in the record. And the thoughtful and much-read Joshua Micah Marshall has endorsed this as an issue, going so far as to say that, aw shucks, he doesn't quite follow all the complicated details, but, it sounds important:

I just don't know the details of all this well enough any more to make a judgment about these various claims and accusations.

But why exactly can't the president just release his records the way McCain did?

And, is that story about [Maj. Gen. Danny] James[, commander of the Air National Guard Bureau in Arlington, Va.] getting a chance to go over these files true? If it is, I'd say some scribblers in town got suckered.

Big time, as the vice president would say.

So maybe the issue is not dead yet. When will a reporter stand up the press gaggle with a release from and ask if the President will sign it? Or, how about at a press conference if there ever is another one?

Long ago I asked why on earth no one seemed to care any more about the missing Bush Military records. Now comes CJR Campaign Desk: Spin Buster to ask that question again.

Campaign Desk has been curious for a while now about what happened to the story of President Bush's Vietnam-era service in the Texas Air National Guard. After the White House's February 13 Friday night data dump of all assembled records, there was little press follow-up. We never read anything that sorted through the details of the over 300 documents released to figure out what, exactly, happened back then; all we ever got was a few pieces noting that little of the information was new, and listing still-unanswered questions.

Why, exactly, did the media drop the matter?

Campaign Desk thinks it has part of the answer,

In part, no doubt, it's because some of the details seem to come down to personal memories. But that doesn't strike us as an excuse for throwing in the towel and failing to clarify a controversial story that the press had resuscitated itself (largely courtesy of Bush's “Meet the Press” interview on February 8).

In other words, Campaign Desk is mystified.

I'm not mystified. Stupefied. Incredulous. But not mystified. See, there's no Democrat banging the gong on this (and if there were s/he'd be attacked by the press for being shrill). And the press is just not up to doing the hard work itself. Haven't been since they became 'professionals' instead of working stiffs.

Plus, who's got the story for the agenda-setting New York Times? Why none other than Katherine Seeyle.