Tony Messenger of the St. Louis Post Dispatch has written an excellent column about Nixon's shaky memory. One of the crucial points in E.Coli-Gate was when the public discovered that several top level Nixon aides were lying about their knowledge of the test results, and Nixon is waffling about it.
E. Coli? What E. Coli?
Tony Messenger asks three questions about how Nixon got the information that nobody in his office knew. All three deserve answers.
Question One: Did it come from spokesman Jack Cardetti, who admitted knowing about the testing results even when he told reporters that nobody in the governor's office knew of them?
Our thoughts: The answer to this question has to be yes, with the addition of fellow aide Jeff Mazur. Cardetti and Mazur both knew about the tests early on. Either they lied to Nixon or Nixon instructed them to lie, and since Nixon has been protecting both of them we have to conclude it's the latter.
Question Two: Did it come from chief of staff John Watson, who was the liaison with the DNR and had met with Director Mark Templeton around the time the results were available?
Our thoughts: Almost certainly yes. The Senate investigation is focusing on the meeting in question (June 5) because of a big tangle of unanswered questions. Joe Bindbeutel went to great effort to prepare a report for Watson on the test results for this meeting, but his participation was suddenly and without explanation canceled. (Note: His lack of participation can't be verified because a Sunshine request for security tapes outside the Governor's office was refused due to terrorism concerns.)
Templeton may very well have delivered the report anyway, but we don't think the June 5 meeting is necessarily the first time that John Watson heard about the E. coli tests. Bindbeutel's unexplained exclusion from the meeting, and the end of his attempts to inform the Nixon administration, suggest he was told to be quiet.
Question Three: How, indeed, did it come about that Nixon himself passed on incorrect information to the public?
Our thoughts: In a best case scenario, Nixon's staffers lied to protect him - but that doesn't leave a plausible account of why the test results were concealed in the first place. The explanations given by the DNR are too contradictory to take seriously, and Joe Bindbeutel has been caught lying so many times we'd have a hard time trusting him even if he was under a subpoena.
At this point it's almost a question of which lie you want to believe - there have been so many problems and omissions and deceptions that sorting through it all is an enormously complicated task. Fortunately, the Senate investigation has the resources to untangle the situation. For the final word we await their account, but we would note the substantial amount of evidence, reviewed in our earlier posts, that suggests Nixon knew very early on.
E. Coli? What E. Coli?
When did Nixon realize his staffers were lying? From the words of the man himself: "I'm not exactly sure . . . This is a very busy job . . . It's not a single data point . . . I just don't remember"
The response is difficult to explain, given that he suspended one of his appointees to the DNR for giving him a misleading report about beach closures. When that happened, he told the public he was outraged. Why are guys like Jack Cardetti getting away without even a scolding?Tony Messenger asks three questions about how Nixon got the information that nobody in his office knew. All three deserve answers.
Question One: Did it come from spokesman Jack Cardetti, who admitted knowing about the testing results even when he told reporters that nobody in the governor's office knew of them?
Our thoughts: The answer to this question has to be yes, with the addition of fellow aide Jeff Mazur. Cardetti and Mazur both knew about the tests early on. Either they lied to Nixon or Nixon instructed them to lie, and since Nixon has been protecting both of them we have to conclude it's the latter.
Question Two: Did it come from chief of staff John Watson, who was the liaison with the DNR and had met with Director Mark Templeton around the time the results were available?
Our thoughts: Almost certainly yes. The Senate investigation is focusing on the meeting in question (June 5) because of a big tangle of unanswered questions. Joe Bindbeutel went to great effort to prepare a report for Watson on the test results for this meeting, but his participation was suddenly and without explanation canceled. (Note: His lack of participation can't be verified because a Sunshine request for security tapes outside the Governor's office was refused due to terrorism concerns.)
Templeton may very well have delivered the report anyway, but we don't think the June 5 meeting is necessarily the first time that John Watson heard about the E. coli tests. Bindbeutel's unexplained exclusion from the meeting, and the end of his attempts to inform the Nixon administration, suggest he was told to be quiet.
Question Three: How, indeed, did it come about that Nixon himself passed on incorrect information to the public?
Our thoughts: In a best case scenario, Nixon's staffers lied to protect him - but that doesn't leave a plausible account of why the test results were concealed in the first place. The explanations given by the DNR are too contradictory to take seriously, and Joe Bindbeutel has been caught lying so many times we'd have a hard time trusting him even if he was under a subpoena.
At this point it's almost a question of which lie you want to believe - there have been so many problems and omissions and deceptions that sorting through it all is an enormously complicated task. Fortunately, the Senate investigation has the resources to untangle the situation. For the final word we await their account, but we would note the substantial amount of evidence, reviewed in our earlier posts, that suggests Nixon knew very early on.
Comments