House to launch the first formal investigation of the October surprise affair, including Bush's role.
Was it a fishing expedition?
Bush: Well, I wouldn't accuse the Speaker of that. The man --he's another one that's-- too much
integrity to be in that mode. I think he's in a difficult position. But let's see the evidence, bring it
forth. If they're still charging that I was in Paris on october 20th, if it's that kind of case, fine. But
the evidence is --what happened-- you knowdown, but as Vice President, the President -- now President - - was supposed to have been in Paris, here's a good case. All this rumor, can't quite pin it (^)
in the month of October, specifically on October 20th. Who's accusing me? Well, nobody's really
accusing you of it, but every paper's got it.
We come forth with evidence which includes almost minute-by- minute certification as to where Iwas, and then they say, well, maybe that's laid to rest, but somebody else is supposed to have been (^)
someplace else. Maybe the way to lay it to rest is through what Foley's talking about. And if he
decides that, look, he'll have full cooperation from me. How long can you keep denying your
knowledge or involvement on something that didn't happen, as far as I know? But maybe he's got
some other evidence. But it just seems a little wierd that it keeps going. You shoot down one thing,and somebody else raises another.
Q: Are you certain that Casey had no dealings that could be interpreted --
Bush: I have no knowinterviews with a dead man. You knowledge of what Casey can do, or di what I mean? Get it? (Laughter). d do. The man's dead. Let's have some more
Q: I think so. (Laughter)
Q: Mr. President, to clear --
Bush: Hey, I've got to go fishing, it's much more important than doing this. Yes, Helen? No.
Q: Mr. President, to clear the air and get everything out in the open, could you order the release of
the CIA telephone conversations?
Bush: I'm leaving all this in the hands of the legal authorities and I am not going to intervene in a
court proceeding. I am not a lawyer. I don't want to have some 22-year old prosecutor jump up and
say that the President has -- (Laughter)-- frustrated the process here. I don't know enough about
that. You've got good lawyers that do. I don'before grand juries work, and I'm disinclined to learn. But I do knowt know enough about scheduling or how a little something about evidence
fairplay. And all I'm trying to say is, let's revert to that standard. Let's use that as the guide here and
not get caught up in some niggling, legal point.
I'm seeing a man's character getting damaged, just as I feel mine was challenged when they said,hey, prove your innocence. You're guilty until innocent. Prove you weren't in Paris on -- whatever (^)
the hell it was -- October 20th. And here he went to the front yard at 10:22. He was at the so-and-so
embassy at 10:27. He was so and so. And finally, well, that one just fades into the sunset and along
comes a bunch of other allegations by unnamed people that you can't find and can't put your -- like
reaching out and touching a handful of whipped cream, you can't get ahold of it. I don't want to --I've been through a little bit-- but I don't want to see Bob Gates, a man of honor and integrity, go
through it anymore. That's all I'm trying to say.
Thank you. Have a neat day. [fn 53]