Did Bush LIE on his security background check?

[Stephanie]

Did he have to take a background check before being allowed to go to Camp David, stay at the WH, etc. during his father's term in office? Or would he not be checked until he won the presidency? Does the timing indicate that, assuming Kelley's facts are correct, he would have had to lie to obtain his security clearance?

_______________________________

http://news.bostonherald.com/election/view.bg?articleid=43105

<snip>

Shocking accusations that President Bush snorted cocaine at Camp David when his father was in the White House have surfaced in a racy new book by celeb author Kitty Kelley about the powerful family.

``Bush did coke at Camp David when his father was president, and not just once either,'' Kelley quotes former sister-in-law Sharon Bush as saying, according The Daily Mirror of London.

The president first dabbled in drugs in the mid-1960s while at Yale and later snorted cocaine or smoked marijuana while in the National Guard, according to Kelley's new biography, ``The Family: The Real Story of the Bush Dynasty.''
_______________________________

http://www.bushwatch.com/bushcoke.htm

According to an AP report today, Bush held another press conference and said that "he could have passed stringent background checks for illegal drug use when his father was president, from 1989-1993." ASSUMING Bush meant that he would have taken the background check in January of 1989, that would mean that he's saying he hasn't used cocaine in 11 years, since he said yesterday that he hasn't used cocaine in the last seven years. However, Bush added, "Not only could I have passed in today's White House, I could have passed the standards applied under the most stringent conditions when my dad was president, a 15-year period." Of course, Poppy was only President for 4 years, and 7 and 4 equal 11, not 15. " Since "the Bush White House asked staff members if they had used any illegal drugs in the last 15 years," reporters may have ASSUMED that Bush meant those 15 years, but that's not what he said. ASSUMING Bush meant that he could have passed the 15-year drug test at the beginning of his father's presidency, that would make the total non-coke time 26 years, which is how a Bush spinner seems to have interpreted Dubya's statement: "Bush spokeswoman Mindy Tucker said the Republican presidential front-runner was saying that he has not used illegal drugs at any time since 1974, when the 53-year-old Bush was 28." However, "Asked if Bush could have met the standard when his father was vice president, from 1981-1989, Tucker said, 'My understanding is he was answering questions regarding when his dad was president, not vice president,' leaving the actual non-coke span up in the air. What we're left with, then, is that we're sure Bush has not answered the question about cocaine use, one way or the other, prior to his 29th birthday. From age 29 on, we're in need of some clarification from Bush, not a spinner. A statement like "I didn't use hard drugs after age 29" would suffice. Until then, we're mired in waffle-talk. One way or the other, the question that has been asked for months remains unanswered, did Bush use hard drugs at any time in his life? Politex, 8/19/99

* * * * *

"Gov. George W. Bush, dogged by criticism for refusing to say whether he has used illegal drugs, answered part of the question Wednesday and said he had not done so in the last seven years. Mr. Bush's statement came in response to a question from The Dallas Morning News about whether, as president, he would insist that his appointees answer drug-use questions contained in the standard FBI background check. 'As I understand it, the current form asks the question, 'Did somebody use drugs within the last seven years?' and I will be glad to answer that question, and the answer is 'No,' Mr. Bush told The News....The Questionnaire for National Security Decisions, part of the background check, asks about illegal drug use going back seven years. Applicants also are asked if they have ever used illegal drugs while employed as a law officer, prosecutor or court official....FBI applicants can have used so-called hard drugs, such as cocaine and heroin five times in their lives, but not during the 10 years immediately before their applications, (according to FBI Agent Rene Salinas). Applicants take lie-detector tests to verify their answers to drug-use questions....'You are required to answer the questions fully and truthfully, the questionnaire says.... Mr. Bush, the GOP presidential front-runner, would not elaborate about drug use beyond seven years ago." Dallas Morning News, 8/19/99
_______________________________

[Sub Atomic]

1. Short answer:

"yes"


But to be fair, I think he's claiming that there are multiple definitions of the word 'lie'. If you mean did he lie (down) on his application, then the answer would be no.

:eyes:

[Stephanie]

2. I'm laughing now

But in fact they would go that far. They have no limits, no honor, no decency.

[Stephanie]

3. I'm just asking

because I want to know!

[sundancekid]

4. it usually boils back to 1974, which means NOT CLEAN during TANG years

but may be "fixed" through for the application period

[moondust]

5. More than once.

1. He would have required a clearance in the TANG. That one would have expired upon exit from the TANG or earlier, possibly when he didn't take his flight physical and was grounded.

2. He probably needed one to hang around DC during poppy's WH stay. That one would have expired when poppy left office at the latest.

3. He might have required a clearance as governor of Texas to have access to federal security information pertaining to Texas.

4. He needed one in the 2000 campaign to get security briefings. #3 above might have partially covered him during the 2000 campaign but a candidate for President needs a higher clearance than the governor of a state so it would have to be upgraded at which time everything would be scrutinized more closely.

I know one guy with naval intelligence experience and a prior Top Secret clearance who applied for a job at a civilian security agency and was denied a clearance because he admitted he had smoked pot years before. They also (used to) use lie detector tests for screening applicants.

[Stephanie]

6. Who gives the screening? FBI?

And is there a penalty for lying?

[moondust]

7. A special agency.

I had a Top Secret clearance for military service in the mid 70s and the background check was done by:

Defense Investigative Service
Personnel Investigations Center
P.O. Box 1211
Baltimore, MD 21203-1211

In 1991 I filed an FOI request with them and they sent copies of their records from the background investigation they did on me in the mid 70s. It was extensive. I found out that they had talked to a number of people in my community, checked on previous places of residence, former employers, etc.

It may have been different for a Congressman's boy. It may be different for non-military jobs. Some things obviously may have changed since the 1970s.

I think everything in this stuff is signed basically "under penalty of perjury" and lies would have warranted denial of clearance and possible prosecution for perjury.

[Stephanie]

8. So if Bush lied in these security clearance examinations he's a PERJURER?

He could be liable for perjury?

gosh that sounds familiar.

[moondust]

12. Yes, a PERJURER. And...

if it is found that he lied on his application I think his security clearance would be subject to revocation. Without access to sensitive state secrets there is no way one could hold high federal office, certainly not the highest. :evilgrin:


(There is a possibility that exceptions are made for elected officials. I don't suppose an elected representative from northern Cal or someplace would be denied his seat in Congress because he ran as the marijuana legalization candidate and openly admits he has smoked pot. I don't know how that works.)

[Stephanie]

16. If he lied on his application his security clearance might be revoked?

That would be interesting, wouldn't it? Remember how they tried to get Clinton disbarred over the perjury trap? Or maybe they did get him disbarred? What goes around.

[Mr_Spock]

9. Logically, we should try to find the few times he told the truth.

It would be easier no?

[Stephanie]

10. LOL! Of course you're right. Let's see.

He told the truth when he said "it would be a whole lot easier if this was a dictatorship, so long as I was the dictator."

[Mr_Spock]

11. Wow, I can't believe it but I think you did find the one time he spoke the

truth.

[shrub chipper]

13. Don't forget the "You're my base" line

that was in Fahrenheit 9/11.That was true, too.

[Mr_Spock]

15. Oh, yeah - the "billionairs for Bush". So why to red-necks support the

companies who laugh at how stupid they are? I must be missing something - have the Repukes tricked them into thinking they'll get special favors if they vote for them?

[leesa]

14. It's far easier to enumerate the things Bush told the truth about, if

there are any.