Bush was asked about Gates: was his story credible that he knew nothing of illegal funds
transfer when those above and below him in the chain of command knew all about it?
Bush's first comment was moderate in tone:
Doesn't stretch my credibility because I believe firmly in Bob Gates's word. And he's a
man of total honor, and he should be confirmed as Director of Central Intelligence. And
when you have behind-doors, closed-door allegations that nobody really knows anything
about, I'm not sure where the fairness element comes in on that one, Jim.
The next day, July 12, Bush engaged in a question and answer session with reporters.
Bush was dressed in sporting togs, but today he was out of control. His first impulse was
to escape from the reporters:
Hey, listen. I've got to go now. Heavy recreation coming up before we go abroad, so I've
got to keep going.
He fought off some questions about Clarence Thomas allegedly smoking marijuana,
commenting that this was not disqualifying. Then, there was a mention of Gates:
Q: Has Gates told you about-
That touched Bush's obsession of the day. Gates had been accused of complicity in Iran-
contra gun-running and drug running; but Bush himself had once again come under
attack for his role in the October surprise conspiracy to delay the release of US hostages
held in Teheran. Several days before, the former director of Central American affairs for
the CIA, Alan Fiers, had admitted lying to Congress. Special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh
was continuing his investigation, and it was now clear that the Senate would not vote on
the Gates nomination until the autumn. At this point Bush broke in, and with a contorted
face launched into an interminable enraged monologue, angrily brushing aside
interruptions. The passages are worth reproducing here in detail because of the insight
they afford into the workings of a tormented mind:
Bush: Let me say something on the Gates matter. What are we coming to here? You're
talking to somebody who had to prove his innocence --me--on the basis of rumor. It was
alleged by people that we weren't sure who they were, that I was in Paris at some deal to
keep Americans in captivity. That's what the allegation was against me. And I'm saying
to myself, who's making these allegations? What's the evidence? What have we come to
where a man has to prove his innocence against some fluid, movable charge?
And now I'm thinking about Bob Gates. And I'm saying: What is this all about? Isn't the
people that might be accusing him of something --shouldn't it be their responsibility
under the American system of fairplay? I have full confidence in him. But what is this
system where we hear some leak in some newspaper that behind closed doors somebody
has said something, and thus a lot of people run for cover?