See earlier post. He apparently was a rising star in astronomy before he got involved in ID and let his scientific endeavors suffer. Unfortunately for him, schools don't care much about what you did before you got there when deciding tenure. They care about what you've done while at the school, and in his case it wasn't much, especially compared to his previous work.
That makes a very good case against tenure. The school sees a scientists sliding down in his work, the clear reasoning being that he is likely to continue sliding, and you don't want someone like that to have tenure.
But there could be good reason not to give him tenure. However the emails remove the benefit of the doubt that should normally be given to the University.
This had nothing to do with GG's competence, publishing or grants. It was all about evil ID.
Be honest and acknowledge that. The written record is abundantly clear.