Revised: NYT and Tenet and the "Bush is crazy" story. [View All]

[troublemaker]

(Mods: this is in part duplicative but corrects some petty errors and incorporates new data. Merely appending corrections to a previous post is a poor substitute for getting it right up front so I hope you will let this replace its somewhat flawed predecessor. It's better for quoted material to be error free.)

Early this morning off-beat political news/gossip/speculation website Capitol Hill Blue published a story called Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides about Bush's dangerously erratic behavior. It was sourced to anonymous White House aides.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_4636.shtml

Many liberal blogs and site picked it up, but very cautiously because it didn't have much facial credibility. Within the article it offered a new account of Tenet's departure that defied the official story, the conventional wisdom and even the alternative conventional wisdom. (We need to add ACW to the lexicon) The story said that Bush fired Tenet in a fit of pique without consulting any of the people that most assume really run the WH, including Cheney and Rove. (Of course on paper it was technically a resignation as most high-level firings are.)

The story also alleged that Bush kept Tenet's dismissal to himself and only told the power players about it after his press conference with Australian PM Howard. Then Bush left his shocked cabinet and advisers, went outside to announce Tenet's resignation to the world, and promptly left the country.

When I read that part of the CHB story I had grave reservations about the truth of it. Could Bush really go through all the business involved in a meeting with a Head of State without mentioning to anyone that, "oh, by the way... George Tenet doesn't work for us any more."

I guess it's not entirely implausible. Tenet may have requested that Bush not tell anyone because it was bound to leak and Tenet wanted to tell some people personally himself. The NYT says he called at least two members of Congress Thursday AM, for instance.

But it's still a juicy story... Bush keeping the big boys in the dark like that and then dumping the news on them on his way out the door.

That juicy claim from the CHB story seems to have been confirmed by the NYT in their final edition this morning:

The timing of the announcement appeared to take even senior White House officials by surprise. As one recounted the events, Mr. Bush had just walked back into the Oval Office after finishing a morning news conference in the Rose Garden with Prime Minister John Howard of Australia. At that point, Mr. Bush informed a small group in the Oval Office that Mr. Tenet had resigned. The group included Mr. Cheney; Secretary of State Colin L. Powell; Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser; Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff; and Dan Bartlett, the White House communications director.

Minutes later, Mr. Bush reappeared on the White House lawn to make the short walk to Marine One, the presidential helicopter. En route, he stopped to make the statement about Mr. Tenet's resignation to a group of reporters. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/04/politics/04TENE.html?pagewanted=print&position=

After reading that in the NYT I had to wonder why such a hot little detail was in the NYT and in the CHB story but seemingly not anywhere else. Yes, CHB may have snagged the juicy detail from the NYT but the CHB story claims a posting time of 6:15 and last revision time of 6:30 (presumably EST, since no one disputes it came out early this morning) and the NYT version of the detail in question was a late addition to their previously posted version. I don't know exactly when it was posted but if CHB added that NYT detail to a hoax they were pretty damn efficient about it. (If it was elsewhere *before* the NYT and CHB I just didn't see it. Corrections are desired.)

Perhaps the crazy-ass CHB story had some real sourcing inside the WH and perhaps we ought to take it with one less grain of salt. Not accept every word, mind you, but accept it as having some actual sourcing.

Okay... so what if CHB got it right? The official story is that Tenet requested a private meeting with Bush. He talked briefly to Andy Card on his way to see Bush in the residence part of the WH and told Bush he was resigning. So everyone at least agrees there was a private evening meeting and Tenet left the meeting without a job.

But let's accept the CHB version of Wednesday evening for a moment. Tenet requests a private meeting with Bush or visa versa. (I don't think it's usual for Bush to have meetings in the residence; Clinton was less formal but Bush tries to keep things separated) During that meeting "when the director challenged the President... the President cut him off by saying 'that's it George. I cannot abide disloyalty. I want your resignation and I want it now." Tenet was allowed to resign "voluntarily" and Bush informed his shocked staff of the decision Thursday morning. One aide says the President actually described the decision as "God's will." (yes, I do realize that CHB is quoting from a pretty private meeting and that raises questions itself, but it could be hearsay from any number of WH personnel)

<<<Tinfoil alert>>> But if CHB is right and the firing was a spur of the moment thing that happened during this private meeting then what the hell was the meeting about in the first place? The official rationale for the meeting is that Tenet wanted to resign in person, but if the meeting wasn't set up (by either side) to discuss Tenet's pending unemployment then what was it about? And what did Tenet say that was so disloyal?

Speculate away...