Part 4: Bushies cover up GW's AWOL status in 1972:
A few years later, Dave Moniz of USA Today spoke with Burkett about allegations that the lieutenant colonel had witnessed a senior official at the Guard removing documents from Bush's military personnel records jacket. Burkett again said the papers bearing Bush's name were being dropped into a wastebasket. Conn, in interviews with Moniz, confirmed Burkett's description of events for the paper. For whatever reason, Moniz's editors chose not to run the story.
The key to proving Burkett's allegations was Conn. I contacted him in Europe via e-mail. He was nonresponsive to my inquiries. Conn did, however, offer a character reference on Burkett to Ralph Blumenthal of the New York Times, which described Burkett as truthful and honorable. Conn wasn't the only one who felt that way. Harvey Gough, another Texas Guard officer, recalled being told about the Bush file incident by Burkett right after it happened, and several others within the Guard attested to Burkett's integrity. Conn, in fact, had stuck by Burkett throughout his Texas senate testimony on Guard malfeasance, in his letter to the state senator, and while serving as a source for USA Today's eventual report. In seven years, Burkett's story has never changed. The only thing new is Conn's failure to support his friend. Why?
Conn is a civilian employee of the U.S. Army in Germany. The White House can pull any number of levels to influence his comments. Conn, undoubtedly, had reason to worry about his employment if he stuck by Burkett. Burkett, however, understands what he is confronting. He still considers Conn a friend. "But I can't expect him to give up his life for me over this," Burkett told me.
In an interview with the Boston Globe, Conn said Burkett's memory was inaccurate and no such encounter had ever happened. Reporter Michael Rezendes failed to explore why Conn may have decided not to back up Burkett. In a half hour conversation with me, Rezendes ended up using one terse quote in his piece where I described the standoff as a classic "he said, she said." He did not tell his readers all of the people I interviewed about Burkett's claims. Rezendes' piece was ultimately posted on the Bush/Cheney campaign Web site because it did such an effective job of discrediting Burkett.
A writer's job includes connecting the pieces. I told Rezendes that a combination of facts made Burkett's story believable. Reporters had discovered there were documents missing from the Bush file in Austin. Combine that fact with Karl Rove's history of deceptive political tactics, Burkett's impeccable reputation as an officer and a man, and his story is worth telling, even after Conn withdrew his affirmation of events. The information speaks for itself, and rather loudly. Burkett is in poor health, living on the edge of the desert in West Texas, and trying to enjoy his retirement after 28 years of service in the National Guard. His wife was an organizer in the state for Republican presidential candidate John McCain. Burkett is uncomfortable on camera, and, as a result of a virus contracted while on duty in Panama, is subject to physical collapse. This is hardly the profile of a man who would choose to make up a story and take on the White House.
Burkett's story about the manipulation of Bush's "retained record" has never changed nor has he ever wavered in its retelling. And the "retained record" of Bush's time in the Texas National Guard is what reporters were using to write their first stories on the presidential candidate. If it had been cleaned up, as Burkett alleged, the only place to find the complete file would be on the microfiche. This is undoubtedly why the president has not simply ordered the entire file printed out and released without restriction to news media outlets. The paper records, which may explain the grounding and prove the president did not serve sufficient time to meet his legal obligation to the Guard, have likely been removed from the Austin files. But the microfiche has the whole truth, and that's why its dissemination is being controlled.
The irony in all of this is that I am largely responsible for reducing access to those records. During the 1994 Texas gubernatorial race between Ann Richards and George W. Bush, I was a panelist on the only televised debate between the two candidates. The question I chose to ask Bush first was about the National Guard. I had lost friends in Vietnam, and many of them had tried to get into the Guard. We were all told that there was a waiting list of up to five years. The Guard was the best method for getting out of combat in Vietnam. You needed connections. George W. Bush had them.
"Mr. Bush," I said. "How did you get into the Guard so easily? One hundred thousand guys our age were on the waiting list, and you say you walked in and signed up to become a pilot. Did your congressman father exercise any influence on your behalf?"
"Not that I know of, Jim," the future president told me. "I certainly didn't ask for any. And I'm sure my father didn't either. They just had an opening for a pilot and I was there at the right time."
Maybe. But it's more likely he was there at the right time with the right name. Col. Buck Staudt, who ran the air wing in which Bush served, had filled his "champagne unit" with the politically connected and wealthy. The sons of U.S. Sens. Lloyd Bentsen and John Tower of Texas were in that unit, along with the son of Texas Gov. John Connally and the two sons of Sidney Adger, George H.W. Bush's closest friend in Houston. I should have let that speak for itself.
"As soon as you asked that question," one Guard officer told me, "they went about the business of building their alternative story. They contacted all of Bush's commanders and friends from that time to make sure they would all stand by Bush."
And, undoubtedly, Rove and company went to work on cleaning up the files. The stonewalling on this is still succeeding. Reporters calling the National Guard offices in Arlington and the Pentagon are being told the staff is no longer authorized to speak about the president and his time in the Guard. One national reporter, who is still trying to get to the bottom of the controversy, told me the White House said they were not going to talk about the Guard matter any further.
And, sadly, the questions have stopped. |
