I have been having problems with something that Maureen Dowd talked about the other day in Head Spook Sputters
Only a couple of weeks after the endlessly vacationing President Bush got his Aug. 6, 2001, briefing with the shivery headline "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.," the C.I.A. chief, George Tenet, and other top agency officials received a briefing about the arrest of Zacarias Moussaoui after his suspicious behavior in a Minnesota flight school. And that had another shivery headline: "Islamic Extremist Learns to Fly."
[. . . ] The Man Whose Hair Was Allegedly on Fire told the commissioners that he had not talked to the president at all in August. Mr. Bush was in Texas, and he was in Washington. Or he was on vacation, and the president was in Texas. Quel high alert.
After the hearing, Mr. Tenet had an aide call reporters to say he had misspoken, that he had briefed the president twice in August, in Crawford on Aug. 17 for a morning briefing he deemed unexceptional and again in Washington on Aug. 31.
<tinfoil hat> Is it possible that in fact Tenet did share that Islamic-Extremist-Learns-to-Fly tidbit with Shrub? I know that "possible" does not mean much, but before you all come after me with tranquilizer dart guns, consider all the hard-to-explain things that this explains:
- Why Tenet was not fired even though he assured a hopeful but skeptical Bush that Saddam's having WMD was a "slam dunk" case: Bush, Tenet, and perhaps Cheney too, had a little secret regarding 9/11.
- Why Bush and Tenet had such different reactions:
- Bush, whom many have suggested must have gotten a heads up about a multiple hijack in progress, saw the problem he had missed, and put on a dumber face and said "that's sure some bad pilot".
- Tenet, shocked and with no warning, let something spill "I hope it is not about that guy in flight school".
- Why the administration knew right away for sure it was al Qaeda: the CIA had already asked and had just learned from French intelligence that the FBI's "flying extremist" was strongly linked to al Qaeda.
- Why Tenet just "forgot" about talking with Bush twice in August: if he did not remember he could not be asked under oath what was discussed, and so he could commit no perjury.
- Why Bush and Cheney want to appear together and not under oath at the 9/11 hearing: given what we know about the VP's unique role at almost all of Shrub's DCI briefings, and the picture painted of his role by Woodward, he and Bush may face a need to tell a coordinated cover story if the commission is able to focus its questions in on the right time and place.
So where does this all lead us to? Is there any real way the 9/11 commission can dig this out? Is it their job to do so? Do Kerry or other Democrats want to touch this with a ten foot poll? Is there any way this could come out before the sort of history that Bush is sure will only be written "after we are all dead". Would it even be a good thing for it to come out soon?
And finally, is it time for me to get back on my medication? </tinfoil hat>