Monday, November 20, 2017

What Do You Know About George H.W. Bush? (Part 2)

Former President George H.W. Bush is awarded the Medal of Freedom by then-President Barack Obama.  (Larry Downing/Reuters)

Dark Legacy (George Bush)
Published on Apr 29, 2017
The Bush Crime Family
Published on Oct 22, 2016

The Bush Crime Family - The Mafia, CIA and George Bush
American Patriot
Published on Jul 2, 2016
‘I Want This for George’
Iraq, a family dynasty and George H.W. Bush’s secret pain over his son’s complicated legacy.
By Mark K. Updegrove
November 19, 2017
On December 23, 1990, President George H.W. Bush slept restlessly. The extended Bush family had gathered at Camp David for the holidays as they did every year of his presidency, boosting his spirits, but this year especially, he had a lot on his mind. A ground war in Kuwait looked increasingly likely as Saddam Hussein continued to ignore the warnings of the U.S. and allied nations. It preoccupied Bush, running continuously through his mind. On Christmas Eve morning, he awakened with the remnants of a dream in his head: He was driving into a hotel near a golf course. Across a fence was another golf course, a lesser one. He heard his father, the banker and senator Prescott Bush, was there and went looking for him, finding him in a hotel room just as he remembered him, “big, strong, highly respected.” The two men embraced. “I miss you very much,” the son told his father.
A dozen years later, during Christmastime of 2002, the extended Bush family once again found themselves at Camp David, as President George W. Bush was faced with the possibility of a war with Saddam Hussein, just as his father had been. But while 41 had unconsciously yearned for his father in 1990, 43 had his own father to lean on—and he was right there. As 43 labored to find a diplomatic solution to his standoff with Saddam, he briefed his father on the situation and solicited his view. “You know how tough war is, son,” 41 told him, “and you’ve got to try everything you can to avoid war. But if the man won’t comply, you don’t have any other choice.” The elder Bush’s advice went no further. “[H]e didn’t need to tell me, ‘I hope you’re concerned about the troops,’” 43 said of his father—in one of several interviews the two men gave for my new book on their relationship, The Last Republicans. “He knew me well enough to know that I’d be concerned.”
It was unprecedented. Never before in American history had a president had a father and presidential peer whom he could draw on immediately for counsel. When John Quincy Adams took office in Washington in March 1825, 24 years after his father left office, the decrepit elder Adams, at 89, was in Quincy, Massachusetts, in his last 15 months of life. John Quincy learned of his father’s death days after his passing on July 4, 1826, arriving in Massachusetts just in time for his funeral. “It is among the rarest ingredients of happiness,” he wrote a friend, “to have a father yet living till a son is far advanced in years.” Distance hadn’t allowed the elder Adams to be an active resource for his son during his first year and a quarter in the presidency. But the younger Bush’s father—big, strong, highly respected—was accessible to offer guidance. Regardless, by both Bushes’ accounts, 41’s succinct advice at Camp David was the only time 43 solicited his view on anything of consequence regarding Iraq—and it seemed to belie concerns 41 quietly harbored about a war.
By all inside accounts, George H.W. Bush was first and foremost a loving father during his son’s White House years, refraining from imparting unsolicited advice even as he worried about 43’s administration, especially later as the war in Iraq got mired in mission creep. “I would definitely not characterize 41 as counseling his son in a reproachful way,” said Jim Baker, his former chief of staff and secretary of state. “If he were counseling him, he would say, ‘Are you really sure this is something you want to do?’ Now, I know that 41 thought that some of the advice that 43 was getting in the foreign policy was not the right advice. … But he had the view that, ‘Look, we had our chance; now it’s [his] turn.’” Forty-one also conceded that the world had changed since his administration. “He always said to me, ‘Well, the world was different when I was there,’” 43’s national security adviser and secretary of state Condoleezza Rice said. “People who try to say, ‘Well, 41 would have been more circumspect,’ or ‘Jim Baker would have handled it differently’—with al Qaeda having blown up the World Trade Center, really?”
It was in large measure because 41 had been president that he didn’t tender advice more readily. “George Bush knew what it meant to be briefed as president,” 43 said. “He also knew presidents don’t need frivolous, shallow advice: ‘Even though it may not be as informed as your aides’, here’s my opinion …’”
George Bush knew what it meant to be briefed as president,” 43 said. “He also knew presidents don’t need frivolous, shallow advice.”
It was a lesson 43 himself had learned during his father’s presidency. “At one point in time, I said something that was clearly an extra burden,” he recalled, “and he’s not a lasher, but you could just tell by his body language that what I said was clearly unnecessary. And I said to myself, ‘Wow, I’m not going to do that again.’ I just wanted to be part of an environment that [made] him relax.”
Forty-one strove to do the same. Mainly, he played the paternal role of comforter for his son, who explained it this way:
If you’ve been president, you can see the stresses of the job; if you’ve been around a president you can see the stresses of the job. And most of the conversations were between father and son. “Son, how are you doing?” “Aw, I’m doing fine, Dad.” A loving father is one who understands it’s important to comfort in times of stress. To provide love in an environment that frankly is not very loving at times. To be a listener. That’s the crux of the role. … [N]ever before have there been conversations like this between two people who’ve both been president, who love each other. It gave me comfort to talk to someone who knew what I’m going through, to hear, ‘I love you.’ Because of all the people in the country, he knew the pressures of the office. Nobody knows what you’re going through. They just don’t know.
Forty-three allowed that “few are going to believe” that his father’s influence on his presidency wasn’t deeper, adding, “It’s so simple, it’s going to be hard for people to grasp the truth.” He conceded, “the big speculation” about his father’s involvement was “about Iraq.” Indeed, Iraq and Saddam, echoes of his father’s presidency, cast Shakespearean overtones onto 43’s presidency. He stared down the same enemy who had been his father’s chief antagonist—the malevolent dictator who had been driven out of Kuwait by his father and who later plotted to kill his father.
Yet the father had declined to overturn Saddam’s regime to avert the risk of alienating member states in the U.N. coalition and creating “more instability in Iraq,” he said, which would have been “very bad for the neighborhood.” And the son, it would soon become known in 2003, fatefully chose otherwise.
President George W. Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld talk to reporters at Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas, in August 2002. | Luke Frazza/AFP/Getty Images
The world was unaware of the conversation that transpired at Camp David between the father and son presidents, but great speculation arose among the public and in the media as to 43’s motivation behind the war. Was he trying to prove something to his father? Or avenge Saddam’s attempted assassination of his father? In September 2002, 43 had played into the latter conjecture by stating of Saddam, “There’s no doubt his hatred is mainly directed at us. … After all, this is a guy that tried to kill my dad at one time.” The statement left many to surmise that 43’s targeting of Saddam was a vendetta.
At the same time, the media speculated that the elder Bush was sending his son a message to abstain from war with Iraq using his friend and former national security adviser, Brent Scowcroft, as a proxy. On August 15, 2002, Scowcroft, joining a growing chorus of those opposed to the war, rendered his view in a stinging Wall Street Journal op-ed headlined “Don’t Attack Saddam.” In the piece, Scowcroft challenged 43’s rationale for the war by asserting that it would represent a diversion from the war on terror and that Iraq was not linked to al Qaeda in any direct way. Unlike the Gulf War, he contended, international opposition against the war would necessitate “a virtual go-it-alone strategy” that risks “unleashing an Armageddon in the Middle East” and would “seriously jeopardize, if not destroy, the global counterterrorist campaign.”
Scowcroft said 41 “knew nothing about” the op-ed ahead of time, pointedly sending him a copy as a courtesy at the same time he submitted the piece to the Journal. But he “did seek [41’s] permission to go public with his misgivings,” according to 41’s chief of staff, Jean Becker. “Forty-three would have loved if his dad had said, ‘Put a muzzle on it,’” she said. “But [41] felt, ‘That isn’t fair.’” Scowcroft, he believed, had “earned the right” to express his opinion.
But while 41 had no hand in the content of Scowcroft’s piece, Scowcroft was confident that he saw the war similarly. “I think I know 98 percent of what he thinks about foreign policy,” he said. “I can guess his reaction to most things. Do I think it reflected his view? Yeah. Yeah.” Baker said Scowcroft’s frankness “gave 41 some heartburn,” adding, “in retrospect, [Brent] was right about a lot of it, and I felt the same way, too, but I wasn’t gonna go out there and say it. I didn’t think it was my place.”
“The question people will be asking is, ‘Is this your opinion?’” Bush told his father in a phone conversation after the piece ran. “You don’t need a PhD in political science to know the ramifications. He didn’t do us any favors, Dad!”
“Brent’s a friend,” 41 countered
“Some friend,” 43 said.
To his staff, Bush raised the question: “Why did [Scowcroft] feel he needed to do [the op-ed] in the first place?” Scowcroft was, after all, the chairman of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, an independent body formed for the express purpose of weighing in on the quality of intelligence that reached the president’s desk. “He’s in my administration, and he communicates to me through an op-ed piece!” 43 vented incredulously to his chief of staff, Andy Card. “Why didn’t he call Condi or [her deputy Stephen] Hadley?”
“It’s an interesting incident reflecting Washington,” 43 said later. “It’s interesting that a former national security adviser to [my dad] would express his opinion, which of course delighted the chatterers. ‘Even Brent Scowcroft can’t believe what’s taking place! [George W. Bush is] clearly captured by the Neocons!’ I can hear it all.”
In the end, Bush chalked up the incident to “how it works inside the Beltway.” Scowcroft became something of a pariah in 43’s White House, even though he had been a mentor to Rice and Hadley and had helped to school Bush on foreign policy during the campaign. But tellingly, Scowcroft’s relationship remained intact with 41 and Barbara, who had pulled away from friends and aides in the past for perceived disloyalty. Forty-one, while largely circumspect in his own views on his son’s administration, would continue to carefully consider those of Scowcroft and Baker, his closest friends and confidants. “They’re very close to George,” Barbara said in 2014, describing her husband and them as “like brothers.”
President George H.W. Bush with national security adviser Brent Scowcroft (center) and Secretary of State James Baker (right) as they walk back to the White House after a May 19, 1992, ceremony in the Rose Garden. | J. David Ake/AFP/Getty Images
Ten days after the publication of Scowcroft’s piece, Baker wrote his own op-ed, which appeared in the New York Times on August 25. Less of a rebuke than Scowcroft’s, Baker’s commentary urged the president not to “go it alone” in Iraq, but to “reject the advice of those who counsel doing so” and secure U.N. authority as a means of occupying “the moral high ground.” He warned, “Unless we do it in the right way, there will be costs to other American foreign policy interests, including our relationships with practically all other Arab countries (and even many of our customary allies in Europe and elsewhere) and perhaps even our top foreign policy priority, the war on terrorism.”
Baker’s piece drew less fire than that of Scowcroft, but while it didn’t give 41 “heartburn,” it did, along with Scowcroft’s, give him pause. As Card put it, alluding to Baker and Scowcroft, “I think people around 41 were disappointed” about the path that 43 was taking in Iraq, “which made 41 disappointed.” But 41 reserved judgment. He had faith that his son “made the decisions he thought he should make given the information he had,” Card said. Forty-one also remained largely silent in the media. “What I want to do,” he said, “is support [him], period. And because of that [I don’t] get into the depths of these issues as I might otherwise be inclined.”
The elder Bush lamented the fact that the media tried to “read” his relationship with his son as “some sort of competition.” “It wasn’t. Ever,” he said flatly. “Just love between a father and a son.”
Still, 41 fretted privately about the course his son was charting in Iraq. “I know that [41] was worried about the beating of drums for war, and worried about how Iraq would turn out,” Baker said. “Now, how much of that did he communicate with 43? I’m not privy to that.” There was another thing Baker observed in his longtime friend and former boss: “The one thing that stuck in 41’s craw was when someone would ask, ‘Why didn’t you take care of Saddam Hussein when you had the chance?’”
The answer would come soon enough.
By the waning months of 2003, even before Saddam’s capture, the critics of 43’s actions in Iraq would be vindicated. Rumsfeld’s plan for waging the war had worked, but there was no clear strategy in place for rebuilding the country. The tide turned to a postwar quagmire, unleashing insurgency and stirring up ancient tribal hatred between Sunni and Shiite Muslim sects that resulted in terrorism, violence, and political dispute that no one in the administration seemed to anticipate. Chaos swept the country. In October 2003, Time magazine published a cover story titled “Mission Not Accomplished,” as the military operation in Iraq dragged on perniciously and inconclusively. A year later, with the U.S. death toll exceeding 1,000, Time delivered a follow-up feature headlined “Mission Still Not Accomplished,” while Newsweek ran a story titled “It’s Worse Than You Think.” Car bombs, kidnappings, beheadings, and suicide bombs in Iraq became staples of foreign news coverage. By the middle of 2006, an average of 120 Iraqis would be killed daily.
The promise that U.S. troop involvement would diminish after Iraq’s liberation was dashed due to the power vacuum created by the dismantling of the Iraqi Army. There was also the matter of weapons of mass destruction. Though Saddam Hussein had been found, WMDs—the impetus for the war—had not, manifesting a glaring intelligence failure and eroding Bush’s credibility. By 2004, only one in five Americans believed Bush was telling the entire truth about Iraq. Conversely, while Saddam had been toppled to prevent the threat of global terrorism, al Qaeda found Iraq fertile ground for the recruitment and training of terrorists.
The war’s mounting price was also at issue. In September 2002, Bush’s director of the National Economic Council, Lawrence Lindsey, guessed the cost of the war to be between $100 to $200 billion, an estimate Rumsfeld called “baloney,” asserting that it would be more like $50 to $60 billion. In fact, five years after the war began, the Washington Post reported that its tally had topped $3 trillion, making it the second-most costly American war after World War II. Finally, there was the unexpectedly high cost in blood: As of 2017, a total of 4,424 American soldiers died in Operation Iraqi Freedom, while another 31,942 were wounded.
Among those who were disquieted about the situation in Iraq was George H. W. Bush. Though he declined to express his concerns to his son, he conveyed anxiety privately about the influence of his former rival Donald Rumsfeld, and the neoconservative Elliott Abrams, whom he had pardoned in his own administration for misdeeds in the Iran-Contra affair, a decision, according to Bush insiders, he came to regret. At the same time, he worried about Colin Powell’s diminished role as secretary of state, as Powell’s more moderate voice on foreign affairs was drowned out by those of Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the neocons.
Forty-three harbored his own concern that Powell was sounding off to the 41 camp about his marginalization and lack of presidential access. He also had his own view: It wasn’t that Powell didn’t have access to him, but that he simply “didn’t agree” with him. During the latter days of Bush’s first term, Powell was increasingly at odds with Cheney and Rumsfeld as tension in the White House mounted. Rice and Hadley were put in the middle of the conflict, 43 contended, but “didn’t know how to handle it.” It was no great surprise when Powell stepped down as secretary of state after Bush’s first term, replaced by Rice, who in turn was succeeded as national security adviser by Hadley.
The influence of Cheney on Bush’s presidency took on a life of its own during Bush’s first term. The media often depicted the vice president as a Machiavellian puppet master who pulled the strings on policy decisions, straying from the more moderate path he had tread in 41’s administration and leading 43 down the garden path on Iraqi regime change.
The fact that there was any doubt in anyone’s mind about who the president was blows my mind,” Bush said years later, adding that Cheney and Rumsfeld “didn’t make one fucking decision.”
Cheney’s conservative drift was a matter of some debate. Some chalked it up to his heart condition affecting his mind. Scowcroft, who had known Cheney since the two worked together in the Ford administration 30 years earlier and who went on to work with him in 41’s administration, said in 2006, “I don’t know him anymore. He’s not the same guy.” Cheney, for his part, said in 2013, “I don’t think I changed ideologically. What happened was 9/11 … that was a sobering moment.”
Well after his son had left office, 41 observed that “Cheney had his own empire and marched to his own drummer.” If so, it wasn’t something 41 addressed with his son during his administration. Any feelings 41 had about the matter were outweighed by his confidence in his son and his inherent optimism that everything would turn out all right. He “didn’t worry” about Cheney’s influence on 43’s presidency, he said in 2013. “It’s true,” Barbara Bush confirmed in the same interview, “he didn’t worry about that. He had great faith in George.” Instead, 41 used whatever sway he had with his son to gently question Cheney’s recommendations, not Cheney himself.
“I never talked to him about it,” Cheney reflected. “He never expressed views of it one way or the other. I’ve assumed that 41 and 43 talked about it, but I wasn’t there. … He didn’t come in and say, ‘Dick, you need to do X or Y.’ That just wasn’t his style.” Tellingly, though, 41 said in a 2006 interview that he and Cheney “used to be close,” while he remained more closely connected to other alumni in his administration who were then serving 43.
Barbara Bush was more vocal in her criticisms of Cheney, citing her belief that he had changed discernibly between her husband’s administration and her son’s due to the heart attacks he had suffered. “I think his heart operation made a difference,” she maintained, indicating that her view was largely influenced by Baker and Scowcroft. “I always liked him, but I didn’t like him so much for a while because I thought he hurt George. … I think he pushed things a little too far right.”
The president was aware of his parents’ wariness of the influence of Cheney and the neocons on him. “I’m confident they concerned Dad and Mother,” he said, believing that they, in turn, were influenced by the “inside-the-Beltway chatterers” he grew to disdain. Forty-three was appalled by his mother’s privately stated belief that he was “unduly influenced” by the neocons “clearly steering him to the right.” “Surely, you’ve got more confidence in your son that I would make up my own mind,” he told her on more than one occasion. “If you don’t agree with it, it’s one thing, but I’m plenty capable of making my own decisions.”
Barbara recalled her son’s admonishment. “Mom, when you’re criticizing someone in my administration, you’re criticizing me,” he had said. Afterward, she kept her doubts to herself.
Mom, when you’re criticizing someone in my administration, you’re criticizing me,” Bush said. Afterward, she kept her doubts to herself.
Forty-three was incredulous that anyone—let alone his mother—would believe that he wasn’t the one calling the shots of his presidency. “I hear the voices and I read the front page and I hear the speculation,” an exasperated Bush said in mid-April 2006, as Washington buzzed that he should replace Rumsfeld at the Pentagon. “But I’m the decider, and I decide what’s best.” As he put it six years after he left office, “The fact that there was any doubt in anyone’s mind about who the president was blows my mind,” adding that Cheney and Rumsfeld “didn’t make one fucking decision.”
Still, why hadn’t 43 further sought his father’s advice on Iraq? “I was content with the informed advice I was getting,” he said, “and it’s not like I wasn’t getting advice on both sides. … I was getting ample advice, and maybe it didn’t occur to me to ask him because circumstances had changed. He had never been confronted with an issue like 9/11.” Forty-three surmised that his father didn’t openly question his Iraq policy because his “disclose, disarm, or face serious consequences” ultimatum made clear his intention. “A lesson he taught me was, if you say something, you’d better mean it,” said the younger Bush. “And I meant it.”
Former Presidents George H.W. Bush and his son George W. Bush at the dedication of the latter’s presidential library on April 25, 2013. Among the items on display are statues of the pair. | Getty Images
As the 2004 presidential election neared and 43’s approval rating fell below the 50 percent mark, 41 did offer his son some political advice. Without specifically counseling him to dump Vice President Cheney, he suggested that he might consider “shaking up the ticket” by tapping a new running mate. Forty-three considered it—just as his father had considered his suggestion that he replace Quayle in 1992—but chose Cheney again when he couldn’t think of a better replacement.
But while Cheney would remain Bush’s vice presidential pick, his influence would wane. Throughout the balance of 43’s presidency, as he settled further in the office, the “decider” would move in a decidedly different direction.
On February 21, 2017, George H.W. Bush and Jean Becker, his longtime former chief of staff, had lunch in the Grille, a cozy, elegant dining room at Houston’s Forest Club, next door to Bush’s office on Memorial Drive. Forty-one was now back in good health and good spirits after a bout with pneumonia that had landed him in the hospital for more than two weeks in January.
Former President George H.W. Bush and his wife, Barbara, at the Super Bowl in Houston, Feb. 5, 2017. | Getty Images
Less than a week after his release, on February 5, he was well enough to toss the coin at the Super Bowl in Houston’s NRG Stadium, where the former president earned a standing ovation from a crowd of more than 70,000, including Mike Pence, the vice president of just over two weeks. As 41 dug into a prodigious slice of apple cobbler with vanilla ice cream, Becker talked of how beloved he was. “You’ve become an icon,” she would often tell him, and the old man would roll his eyes. When asked how he would like to be remembered, he would say repeatedly, “Let history be the judge.” Now, history’s indebted nod was clear. “I’m glad that the judgment of history has come in your lifetime,” she told him as he enjoyed his dessert.
At that moment, George H.W. Bush’s thoughts were less about his own presidency than that of his eldest son. George W. Bush hadn’t concerned himself with his legacy while he was in the White House, nor did he have illusions that he would see a binding verdict in his lifetime. One of the lessons from his father that helped to guide his decisions in the White House was that “history will ultimately sort things out, so one shouldn’t worry about legacy.” But George H.W. Bush, whose now-lauded presidency was stunted by the verdict of American people, was worried about his son’s legacy.
“What about George?” the 41st president asked Becker plaintively, his heartbeat as palpable as at any point in his 92 years. “I want this for George.”

Mark K. Updegrove is a presidential historian and the former director of the L.B.J. Presidential Library and Museum. This piece is adapted from his new book, 
George Bush Snr accused of groping by eighth woman
By Chris Bell
BBC News
17 November 2017
An interpreter, second left, says Mr Bush, centre, groped her in 2004
An eighth woman has come forward with claims that former US president George HW Bush groped her.
An interpreter, whom the BBC has agreed not to name because of the sensitive nature of her job, claims Mr Bush touched her inappropriately in 2004.
The alleged incident took place at a meeting between the former president and the Spanish defence minister Jose Bono Martinez.
The interpreter has not previously spoken publicly about the incident.
"It was 2004," she told the BBC. "Spanish troops had been withdrawn suddenly from Iraq and I was working as an interpreter in Spain."
Jose Zapatero's Socialist Party unexpectedly won the general election in March of that year.
The incumbent US president, George W Bush, was nearing the end of his first term in office. His relationship with Mr Zapatero was markedly frostier than the warm rapport he had enjoyed with the Spanish prime minister's conservative predecessor.
George HW Bush, the president's father, was hunting in Spain so, with an interpreter, Mr Martinez was sent to meet him armed with a gift - a pair of hunting rifles.
The interpreter would not disclose the contents of the meeting, citing confidentiality concerns. But media reports  suggest Mr Martinez was hoping to enlist Mr Bush's help in establishing greater communication between the US president and the Spanish prime minister.
'He grabbed my bum'
It was at the photo call after the meeting had finished when the alleged incident occurred.
"When the time came to take the photos, Mr Bush insisted on me being in the photo," the interpreter said.
"I remember thinking this was odd. Usually we stay outside of the frame.
"He grabbed my bum. At first I thought it was an accident, but then he did it a second time."
Roslyn Corrigan said: "He dropped his hands down to my buttocks and gave it a nice, ripe squeeze"
Her story is similar to other allegations made against Mr Bush. Another woman, Roslyn Corrigan, told the publication Time that Mr Bush touched her inappropriately in 2003, when she was 16. On Thursday, CNN reported allegations from a 55-year-old woman who said Mr Bush touched her inappropriately in April 1992.
In October, a spokesman for Mr Bush, Jim McGrath, acknowledged that Mr Bush had "on occasion… patted women's rears in what he intended to be in a good-natured manner".
Mr McGrath partially blamed Mr Bush's use of a wheelchair. "His arms fall on the lower waist of people with whom he takes pictures," he said.
The interpreter told the BBC that Mr Bush was standing during the alleged incident.
Mr Bush did not start using a wheelchair until around 2012, roughly eight years after the interpreter says the incident took place.
'He knew I couldn't say anything'
"He was not in a wheelchair at the time. We were standing in front of a fireplace," she said.
"I was angry more than upset, but I couldn't say anything in the circumstances. I remember thinking at the time, that he's doing this because he knows I can't say anything.
"How could I create a scene with a minister present when the atmosphere was already tense following the withdrawal of troops by a socialist government?"
George HW Bush, pictured walking with his wife Barbara in 2004
Though she had experienced sexual harassment both before and after the incident, it remains the only time she has experienced it at the hands of a politician.
"When I got home that night, I remember telling my kids," she said.
"I happened to comment on it to a colleague and she said the same thing had happened to her. In fact, when articles were published last month she sent me one of them, asking if it sounded familiar.
"I didn't think about it for a long time. Now people are speaking out about it, it's brought all these things flooding back."
It was her daughter who prompted her to contact the BBC, when she sent her the article about Ms Corrigan's allegations.
"I got really angry," she said. "Photo ops obviously were, or are, his modus operandi. I was there because I was a trusted interpreter. I was extremely professional. He was not.
"Who do the men who do these things think they are? I kind of think it's a duty now to speak out."

Mr Bush's spokesman has not responded to requests to comment on the latest allegations. But on Monday, in response to Ms Corrigan's accusation, Mr McGrath told the BBC that Mr Bush "simply does not have it in his heart to knowingly cause anyone harm or distress, and he again apologises to anyone he may have offended during a photo op".
George H.W. Bush responds after actress accuses him of sexual assault
By Lisa Respers France, CNN
Thursday, October 26, 2017
(CNN)Former president George H.W. Bush has responded after an actress alleged that he touched her inappropriately while he was sitting in his wheelchair during a photo op that took place a few years ago.
In a now deleted Instagram post published on her verified account Tuesday, actress Heather Lind wrote that she was "disturbed today by a photo I saw of President Barack Obama shaking hands with George H. W. Bush in a gathering of ex-presidents organising aid to states and territories damaged by recent hurricanes."
"I found it disturbing because I recognize the respect ex-presidents are given for having served," Lind wrote. "And I feel pride and reverence toward many of the men in the photo."
Lind did not mention the name of the event where the alleged touching took place, nor did she specify in her post the manner in which she was touched. She said in her caption that she was there with the Bushes to promote a TV show.
"But when I got the chance to meet George H. W. Bush four years ago to promote a historical television show I was working on, he sexually assaulted me while I was posing for a similar photo," the post went on to say. "He didn't shake my hand. He touched me from behind from his wheelchair with his wife Barbara Bush by his side. He told me a dirty joke. And then, all the while being photographed, touched me again."
The former president's spokesman Jim McGrath issued a statement to CNN Wednesday about the allegation.
"President Bush would never — under any circumstance — intentionally cause anyone distress, and he most sincerely apologizes if his attempt at humor offended Ms. Lind," the statement said.
McGrath issued a second statement later Wednesday to provide context.
"At age 93, President Bush has been confined to a wheelchair for roughly five years, so his arm falls on the lower waist of people with whom he takes pictures," McGrath said. "To try to put people at ease, the president routinely tells the same joke — and on occasion, he has patted women's rears in what he intended to be a good-natured manner. Some have seen it as innocent; others clearly view it as inappropriate. To anyone he has offended, President Bush apologizes most sincerely."
The internet was quick to circulate a picture of Bush and wife Barbara, both of whom appear in the photo flanked by a group of actors featured in the TV series, "TURN: Washington's Spies." Lind, an actress on the show, is seen standing to the left of Bush in the photo.
CNN has reached out to Lind to confirm that the image being circulated is the one she was referencing and to ask why the post was deleted. Lind has not responded to CNN's request for comment.
The photo appears on AMC's official site, with a caption that indicates it was taken at a private screening for the show hosted by the Bushes.
The allegation comes in the wake of the scandal surrounding Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein, director James Toback and other men being accused of harassing and assaulting women. Weinstein, through a spokesperson, has "unequivocally" denied "any allegations of non-consensual sex." Toback denied the allegations to the Los Angeles Times, which was the first to report about women coming forward.
Women worldwide have been using #MeToo on social media to share stories of their own experience with sexual harassment and assault.
Lind said her fellow cast members and producers were aware of what happened and were supportive after the alleged incident.
"I am grateful for the bravery of other women who have spoken up and written about their experiences," she said. "And I thank President Barack Obama for the gesture of respect he made toward George H. W. Bush for the sake of our country, but I do not respect him. #metoo."
#MeToo was started more than a decade ago by activist Tarana Burke and received renewed attention after actress Alyssa Milano asked women in a tweet to respond, "me too" if they had been harassed or assaulted in the past.
Sources: Bush 41 says he will vote for Clinton
By Jamie Gangel and Eric Bradner, CNN
Wed September 21, 2016
Was Donald Trump almost on the George H.W. Bush ticket? | New York Post
(CNN)Former President George H.W. Bush said Monday that he will vote for Hillary Clinton in November, according to sources close to the 41st President -- an extraordinary rebuke of his own party's nominee.
The sources said this was not the first time Bush had disclosed his intention to vote for Clinton.
The comments came during a receiving line for board members of the bipartisan Points of Light Foundation when Bush was speaking to Kathleen Hartington Kennedy Townsend, Robert F. Kennedy's daughter and the former Maryland lieutenant governor. There were roughly 40 people in the room, and it's not clear how many people heard him, though multiple sources did.
The Republican former president's embrace of the Democratic nominee represents a dramatic new chapter in the complicated three-decade-old relationship between the two most prominent families in American politics.
It's a stunning political move -- one that comes just 49 days from the election, and less than a week before Clinton and Donald Trump square off in their first debate.
Trump's campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, told CNN's Erin Burnett Tuesday that she respects "the 92-year-old former president very much and his decision."
"It is ironic that he would vote for the wife of the man who knocked him out of the race," she added on "Erin Burnett OutFront." "But look, this was a bruising primary ... so I know there are a lot of hurt feelings there."
News of his support for Clinton came first on Facebook, when Kennedy Townsend posted a photo of herself with George H.W. Bush, along with the caption: "The President told me he's voting for Hillary!!"
Kennedy Townsend sits on the advisory board of the Points of Light Foundation.
Bush family representatives declined to respond publicly.
"The vote President Bush will cast as a private citizen in some 50 days will be just that: a private vote cast in some 50 days. He is not commenting on the presidential race in the interim," Bush spokesman Jim McGrath said in a statement.
But sources with knowledge of the conversation told CNN they were surprised and disappointed that Kennedy Townsend had publicly shared a private conversation with the former president.
Kennedy Townsend declined to comment through a spokesman at the Rock Creek Group, where she works as managing director. She later took down the Facebook post.
GOP's Trump divide
Trump's controversial candidacy has split the group of former Republican nominees. Mitt Romney has hammered Trump in speeches and on Twitter, calling him unfit for office. But former Kansas Sen. Bob Dole has endorsed Trump, as has Arizona Sen. John McCain -- though somewhat reluctantly, often referring to "the Republican nominee" rather than Trump by name.
Neither George H.W. Bush nor George W. Bush had weighed in on the general election -- even as Trump savaged George W. Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq. However, many of the 41st and 43rd presidents' Cabinet secretaries and national security officials have backed Clinton.
George H.W. Bush national security adviser Brent Scowcroft endorsed Clinton in June, saying she "has the wisdom and experience to lead our country at this critical time." George W. Bush Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said on CNN in August that he "would have preferred Jeb Bush, but I think Hillary is a great choice. I am afraid of what Donald Trump would do to this country."
And Louis Wade Sullivan, the Health and Human Services secretary under George H.W. Bush and the only African-American in his Cabinet, said this month 
that "though my enthusiasm for Hillary Clinton is somewhat tempered, I certainly believe she is an infinitely better choice for president than Donald Trump."
But George H.W. Bush isn't speaking for his entire family. Marvin Bush, the former president's youngest son, has said he would vote for Libertarian Gary Johnson. George P. Bush, George H.W. Bush's grandson, has backed Trump.
And Jeb Bush, Trump's former primary rival, has said he won't vote for Trump or Clinton.
A representative for George W. Bush wouldn't comment on Kennedy Townsend's Facebook post or how George H.W. Bush would vote. The representative simply said George W. Bush is "spending his time working to keep the Senate in Republican hands and is not commenting on the presidential campaign."
The Bush-Clinton relationship
The evolving relationship between the Bush and Clinton families began in 1992, when Bill Clinton ran against -- and defeated -- incumbent President George H.W. Bush. Eight years later, with Clinton term-limited out of office, Bush's son, then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush, succeeded Clinton on a pledge to "restore honor and dignity" to the White House -- a not-so-subtle knock on Clinton's marital infidelity.
But Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush have also spent their post-presidencies teaming up for philanthropic endeavors. And in recent years, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush have increasingly appeared together.
The two grew so close that George W. Bush has referred to Clinton as his "brother from another mother," and Clinton has said the two bonded over becoming grandfathers.
A Bush-Clinton matchup
Early in the 2016 campaign cycle, it appeared the two families could be headed for another showdown with the presidency on the line: Hillary Clinton was seeking the Democratic nomination, while former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush -- the 41st president's son and the 43rd president's brother -- was a Republican candidate and a fundraising powerhouse.
Even if George H.W. Bush hadn't endorsed Hillary Clinton, it was hard to envision him backing Trump.
Neither of the former Bush presidents attended the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, where Trump became the GOP's nominee -- with the Bush family staying out of presidential politics after Jeb Bush, denounced repeatedly by Trump as "low-energy," exited the race.
CLARIFICATION: This story has been updated to clarify the context in which George H.W. Bush made his comment about voting for Hillary Clinton.
CNN's Daniella Diaz contributed to this report.
George H.W. Bush Settles Old Scores With Cheney and Rumsfeld
The 41st president’s comments criticizing two of his son’s closest advisers on the Iraq war are rooted in tensions dating back to the Ford administration.
David A. Graham 
November 5, 2015
Dick Cheney is introduced as George H.W. Bush's nominee for defense secretary in 1989.Ron Edmonds / AP
One of the benefits of being 91 is you don’t have to hold back anymore—you can say what you want. And in a new biography, former President George H.W. Bush tells Jon Meacham just what he thinks about Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld’s work in his son’s administration, as reported by Fox News and The New York Times.
“He just became very hard-line and very different from the Dick Cheney I knew and worked with,” the elder Bush said of the man who served as his secretary of defense. “Just iron-ass. His seeming knuckling under to the real hard-charging guys who want to fight about everything, use force to get our way in the Middle East.” He said Cheney built “his own empire.”
“I’ve concluded that Lynne Cheney is a lot of the eminence grise here—iron-ass, tough as nails, driving,” George H.W. Bush said. He made the comments during interviews for Meacham’s forthcoming biography Destiny and Power: The American Odyssey of George Herbert Walker Bush. (One takeaway from the book is Bush’s love of the phrase “iron-ass,” which seems at once like a dated Yankee descriptor and also delightfully vivid.)
He was even harsher about Rumsfeld, who he deemed an “arrogant fellow.”
“I think he served the president badly,” Bush said. “I don’t like what he did, and I think it hurt the president having his iron-ass view of everything. I’ve never been that close to him anyway. There’s a lack of humility, a lack of seeing what the other guy thinks. He’s more kick ass and take names, take numbers. I think he paid a price for that.”
Bush—or 41, as the family calls him, in contrast to his son, 43—doesn’t let George W. Bush off the hook entirely.
“The big mistake that was made was letting Cheney bring in kind of his own State Department,” he said. “I think they overdid that. But it’s not Cheney’s fault. It’s the president’s fault.” He also told Meacham, “I do worry about some of the rhetoric that was out there—some of it his, maybe, and some of it the people around him.”
The scathing remarks may be explicitly about what happened between 2001 and 2009, but they’re rooted in much longer disagreements and feuds, running back some four decades.
Most prominently, Bush and Rumsfeld have been rivals for power since Gerald Ford was president. Rumsfeld was Ford’s chief of staff, while Bush—who had chaired the Republican National Committee in the closing days of the Nixon White House—was appointed envoy to China. The resignations of Nixon and Vice President Spiro Agnew had left the vice presidency open, and Bush was a top candidate for the post. Rumsfeld, however, pushed hard for Nelson Rockefeller, who ultimately got the job, thinking he was a greater asset at the ballot-box. During the search process, news emerged of potential campaign-finance irregularities during Bush’s unsuccessful 1970 campaign for Senate from Texas. Some observers believed that it was Rumsfeld who had leaked the news in an effort to hurt Bush’s chances. The scandal kept popping back up to hurt Bush throughout the rest of his political career.
Ford later regretted taking Rumsfeld’s advice, choosing Bob Dole over Rockefeller for the ticket when he unsuccessfully ran for reelection in 1976.* In 1980, Republicans nominated Ronald Reagan as their presidential candidate. Given Carter’s tenuous position, the vice-presidential nomination was a much sought-after prize for top Republicans. Ford was under serious consideration, but Reagan ultimately ruled him out, finding his demands for what was effectively power-sharing with the second-in-command too extreme. Other candidates included Rumsfeld as well as Bush, who had run against Reagan in the primary and lost.
As Reagan aide Richard Allen recalled, “There was no question that a Bush candidacy would be a hard sell. Among Reagan’s advisers, [Lyn] Nofziger and [William] Casey viewed Bush as a liberal, and others were almost unanimously against him, some even contemptuous.” Reagan’s camp was upset by Bush’s decision to remain in the GOP race long after the Gipper had effectively sealed the deal. But Bush emerged as an effective compromise candidate for the slot, largely thanks to Allen’s urging. Rumsfeld felt he was more in line with Reagan’s own policy views—Bush was almost ruled out as too liberal on abortion and economics—and was chagrined to have been passed over. He wasn’t the only one; Milton Friedman called choosing Bush over Rumsfeld the worst decision of Reagan’s presidency.
“There’s a lack of humility, a lack of seeing what the other guy thinks. He’s more kick ass and take names, take numbers.”
That decision was certainly costly for Rumsfeld. After two Reagan terms, Bush succeeded Reagan in the White House. (Rumsfeld toyed with a run for the Republican nomination in 1988, but ultimately decided against it.) Once in office, Bush appointed Dick Cheney—a former Rumsfeld protege—as his secretary of defense. (He also reappointed Cheney’s wife Lynne as chair of the National Endowment for the Humanities.)
While Rumsfeld and Cheney have always been close—Cheney recommended Rumsfeld to run the Pentagon in the second Bush administration—there isn’t the evidence of a long-running rivalry between him and George H.W. Bush as there is with Rumsfeld. But the two men did disagree about policy. In the lead-up to the first Gulf War in 1990, Bush wanted to get congressional authorization to attack Iraq. 
Cheney argued against it, saying the administration should act on its own. (Bush went to Congress, which approved the war.) When the attack was successful, Cheney agreed with the president’s decision not to continue to Baghdad and topple Saddam Hussein, as a 1994 interview recorded; Cheney would seem to have disregarded his own warnings a decade later when the U.S. again attacked Iraq. As Jake Tapper reported in 2003, Cheney also oversaw the production of a very hawkish defense-planning report—written by Scooter Libby and Paul Wolfowitz—which the Bush administration disavowed.
The idea that George W. Bush’s foreign policy reflected a fundamental shift in worldview from his father’s approach is not a new one. It was made in 2003, and my colleague Conor Friedersdorf argued in October that Jeb Bush’s presidential campaign was foundering in part because by aligning himself with his brother, he had taken up the wrong George Bush’s worldview. One reason for that shift, surely, was that George W. Bush’s administration was heavily influenced by Rumsfeld and Cheney, two men who had long had a harsher and more aggressive approach to the world than George H.W. Bush. What do Bush 41’s comments to Meacham indicate, inside this context?
For one, the book shows that Bush père really did have substantive disagreements with much of his son’s conduct of foreign policy. (He also singled out one 2002 speech for criticism: “You go back to the ‘axis of evil’ and these things and I think that might be historically proved to be not benefiting anything.”) It isn’t quite right to say that Bush 41 is letting his son off the hook; after all, he told Meacham, “The buck stops there.” It’s also true, however, that the harshest words are reserved for Rumsfeld and Cheney.
George W. Bush himself issued a statement Thursday praising both Rumsfeld and Cheney. Those comments aside, the fact is that Bush 43’s relationships with both of his ex-aides are highly strained. He fired Rumsfeld somewhat unceremoniously after Republicans took a drubbing in 2006, though long after it was clear that the war in Iraq was a disaster. In January, Rumsfeld bluntly criticized Bush for attempting to nation-build in Iraq.
As for Bush and Cheney, their once-close partnership was also deeply strained by the end of the presidency, as reporting from Peter Baker and Time 
has showed. Bush became more skeptical of his vice president’s counsel, and Cheney “was even the butt of jokes that would never have been uttered aloud in the corridors of the White House in the first term,” according to Baker. The final break came over Bush’s refusal to pardon Libby, who was convicted of lying to investigators in the Valerie Plame leak probe.
In his comments to Meacham, George H.W. Bush has a chance to settle some old scores with Rumsfeld and Cheney. But while his remarks are being widely interpreted as Bush 41 distancing himself from the Bush 43 administration, the tensions between George W. Bush, Rumsfeld, and Cheney suggest a different interpretation: His remarks offer a way for the famously tight-knit Bush clan to once more close ranks around one of their own.
Also See:

What's with Recent U.S. Presidents?

27 June 2013

What Do You Know About George H.W. Bush? 

(Part 1)
05 December 2011