Skip to comments.Wead: Unreleased Tapes a 'Betrayal'
Posted on 02/21/2005 1:55:22 PM PST by timewarner
Monday, Feb. 21, 2005 1:33 p.m. EST Wead: Unreleased Tapes a 'Betrayal'
Audiotapes released Sunday of President Bush speaking in a private, off-the-record conversation may not be as damaging as critics had hoped, with Bush winning raves in some cases for sounding the same in unguarded moments as he does in public.
But presidential historian and former first family friend Doug Wead, who secretly recorded Bush, is hinting that the full nine hours of audio he has could be a different matter.
Asked whether the president would view his release of the audio as an act of treachery from a trusted friend, Wead told the Washington Post on Monday, "It depends on what else is on the tapes." Then Wead implied that the unreleased material could be embarrassing, explaining, "Ninety percent of the tapes have not been heard. He can see that my motive was not to try to hurt him."
How could Bush see that, unless Wead was holding back damaging clips?
"If I released all the tapes, it would be an act of betrayal," the author told the Post, further indicating he has some explosive material.
But in the next breath Wead promised: "Most of them have never seen the light of day and never will."
That's not, however, what he told the New York Times for its front page story on Sunday, explaining that he wanted to release them when he died in order to leave the nation a unique record of Mr. Bush.
Other aspects of Wead's story are also raising concerns. He told the Times, for instance, that his motive in releasing some of his tapes had nothing to do with the fact that he has a new book to publicize.
However, the Post reports that Wead's publisher was deeply involved in making the tapes public.
"He said that he had never intended the tapes to become public, but that his publisher, Simon & Schuster, asked to hear them for libel reasons," reports the Post.
The Post continued, "He said after he played them for his editors, he was contacted by the Times and agreed to play portions for a reporter."
Why was the Times alerted? And why did Wead agree to help the paper if he never intended to make the tapes public?
At this point, there's only one logical answer: Mr. Wead's earlier plan to hide his tapes forever changed radically once his publisher began to see dollar signs.
Made up news story by Newsmax.
Preparing to raise his price from 30 pieces of silver.
This is how the liberals work. You trust them for one purpose, like publishing a book, then they break that trust for their purposes. No doubt someone at the publisher's, or connected therewith, contacted the NYT.
Now it's probably inevitable that the rest of the tapes will be released, because thanks to Mr. Wead's stupidity, and the stupidity of his comments, we're all thinking that there's damaging stuff. Not good for Bush. Not at all.
Who hasn't said things in private that they wouldn't want to world to hear? I know I have. But if you look at Bush's record and what little of the tapes I've heard, seems like he's the same in public and private. Compare tapes of Nixon and Bush and see who seems to be more honest and forthright. I think this will turn out to be much ado about nothing.
"But in the next breath Wead promised: "Most of them have never seen the light of day and never will.""
Those tape are damaging to Wead, so of course they won't be made public.
Wead is a jerk who took advantage of a friend to feed the his need for riches.
Someone needs to punch this turkey in the nose.
Weads tapes could have been extremly damaging during two presidential campaigns. The fact that they didn't come out during either campaigns tells me that Wead wasn't seeking to harm the president.
Spiritual advisors, ie. Ministers/Priests etc., also have an obligation regarding confidentiality and this guy screwed the pooch.
This guy is beginning to get on my last nerve.
Maybe there's nothing harmful in the tapes. What little I heard makes me admire Bush even more.
Typical Dim thinking - they can plot all kinds of illegal/immoral things and justify it by saying it was all good, and a decent, God-loving man cannot eaxamine how his faith in God will play to different crowds because that makes him sordid and conniving.
No wonder they're on the way down and out.
Wead has not only betrayed a friendship, he is hyping his book.
This guy is to friendship what OJ Simpson is to Nicole.
Let me get this straight: you tape private conversations with a "friend" without his knowledge or permission, then release embarrassing segments of those tapes to his enemies in the media, but it's only a "betrayal" if you release the entire thing? Sounds like Mr. Wead is the one who's been puffing the weed.
I remember seeing him on Jim Bakker's PTL, always seemed like trouble.
It sounds like he's looking to blackmail the president or up the ante for $$ from the media.
Or that there is nothing that could damage him on the tapes. Slow news cycle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.