February 15, 2002

2:38 PM

Though the president has claimed Ken Lay is merely an acquaintance that he hasn't seen in months, the smoking gun uncovered documents pointing out historically there has been a fairly regular correspondence and perhaps a close friendship between the two. They're all from 2000 and earlier, but will things like this dog the president or raise any suspicions?
posted by mathowie (31 comments total)

Suspicions... of what?
posted by dagny at 2:41 PM on February 15, 2002

1. View duck
2. Hear duck
3. Watch duck act like duck

conclusion:
must be a duck
posted by plemeljr at 2:45 PM on February 15, 2002

Seriously, I wish Bush III would have just said he had known Lay for ages. I doubt that Bush really had any connection to Enron [besides getting huge amounts of money - other topic entirely]. The fact that there is smoke [the memos] makes people think there is a huge fire, when [in my opinion] it was just a group of criminals that used the system.
posted by plemeljr at 2:48 PM on February 15, 2002

I think you could air a video of Bush dancing the hokey-pokey while bludgeoning kittens and small children and his supporters would still take his side.

After all, if the President is shown to be a bad, bad man, doesn't that mean the terrorists won?
posted by websavvy at 2:50 PM on February 15, 2002

While a part of me would grin at seeing Republicans get caught in the same kind of political scandal-making muckity-muck that they pushed on Clinton, I really don't want to stoop down to the level that they did and go looking for it. A pig snouting through the mud after a truffle will occasionally find a truffle, but is still a pig. I will reserve judgement until more obvious information is released. If there really is a sinister connection, I have no doubt it will be found.
posted by dness2 at 2:55 PM on February 15, 2002

"Kill all the politicians!" ..oh wait no. Will was talkin' about lawyers...
posted by ZachsMind at 2:58 PM on February 15, 2002

Heh heh knee surgery get well note... looks like Lay is sucking up there. This looks more like to me just like Lay is trying to suck up to the HNIC of Texas. And I still don't get how Enron proves that Bush is evil. It doesn't look to me like Lay and his cronies are getting any help from Bush now.
posted by Keen at 3:18 PM on February 15, 2002

kinda reminds me of this quote :)

"Everyone is running around this town claiming they did not have political relations with that man, Ken Lay." -- Fritz Hollings, Senator from South Carolina
posted by kliuless at 3:20 PM on February 15, 2002

I think you could air a video of Bush dancing the hokey-pokey while bludgeoning kittens and small children and his supporters would still take his side.

No, it's just that some people want proof and not innuendo. There are several people that I know that you could establish just as feeble of a link to as these "smoking gun" documents show - and I don't now shit about them when it comes down to it.
posted by RevGreg at 3:22 PM on February 15, 2002

my man clinton got lewinskied, now bush is getting layed.

i would pay SO MUCH MONEY to see dubya forced to go through the same interogation that bubba did, because dubya would simply wither.

God bless you, karma.
posted by tsarfan at 3:23 PM on February 15, 2002

keen, it doesn't have to happen now. like the pardons could come in a few years!

btw, i feel like we're slowly chipping away at the sclerotic institutions that tie our great nation down.
posted by kliuless at 3:25 PM on February 15, 2002

The letters are very interesting. I noted a few things:
1. They show the international business and political connections that the governor had.
2. The reference to a call to Tom Ridge on Enron's behalf.
3. It all seems so grossly POLITICAL. I have a friend who gives me a lot of money, and then I put in calls to people on his behalf, and go and meet other people that he knows. It's very yucky.
4. What is up with all of the wife stuff? Linda and I..., Laura and you...
posted by goneill at 3:28 PM on February 15, 2002

From tsarfan:
my man clinton got lewinskied, now bush is getting layed.

Ha ha ha!
posted by Keen at 3:48 PM on February 15, 2002

Let's see. Bush says he hasn't met with Ken Lay since spring 2001. Matt posts a link to copies of correspondence between the two, none of which is newer than from the year 2000, and alleges Bush is hiding something. Why am I not buying this? It is common knowledge the two were friendly acquaintances; Bush fully admits as much in the very press conference Matt linked to.

Someone brought the relationship between Bush the Elder and Lay in a recent thread, and I made the same comment there I'll make here: It is not the least bit surprising that an oil executive from Texas - especially one that ends up as governor - and the CEO of one of the state's largest companies, an energy company at that, end up being friends. Nor is it surprising that the governor would discuss matters of energy policy with said CEO. That is the way the government works. Leaders of industries are always, always, ALWAYS consulted by government leaders on matters that affect their industries. The only people that think this is somehow inherently suspicious are those that think Big Business is somehow evil in the first place.

By the way, Letterman made the Lay/Lewinski joke days ago.
posted by aaron at 4:40 PM on February 15, 2002

aaron writes

"The only people that think this is somehow inherently suspicious are those that think Big Business is somehow evil in the first place.

By the way, Letterman made the Lay/Lewinski joke days ago."

Business is amoral, the only morals involved are those the owners, managers bring to them, the problem is that many view this as a license to do as they will, and simply say well that's business. Human's especially where money is part of the equation are inherently suspicious.

The fact that the Lay/Lewinski joke is old doesn't mean that it is not amusing nor does it mean that everyone has heard it. Of course some of us (I'll include myself) can't let any little thing we dislike go by unchallenged in some way.
posted by onegoodmove at 5:09 PM on February 15, 2002

but will things like this dog the president or raise any suspicions? If recent history is to be consulted, yes; Most seem to want to learn the truth, but there's a minority who want the result to be condeming of GW. Without a special prosecutor, the whole truth probably will never be known. How about Ralph Nader? He's a lawyer and not beholden to either side.
posted by Mack Twain at 5:10 PM on February 15, 2002

Bush says he hasn't met with Ken Lay since spring 2001. Matt posts a link to copies of correspondence between the two, none of which is newer than from the year 2000, and alleges Bush is hiding something

I haven't alleged anything, I noted the non-overlapping time between the two events and merely asked if this amounts to anything.

Personally I think the smoking gun doesn't live up to their name by publishing this stuff as damning evidence when it seems to me there is no wrongdoing (nothing illegal is proven by these documents). Basically it's all smoke and no fire, and I'm surprised, since the smoking gun is usually better at providing documents to support their claims.
posted by mathowie at 5:13 PM on February 15, 2002

It is not the least bit surprising that an oil executive from Texas - especially one that ends up as governor - and the CEO of one of the state's largest companies, an energy company at that, end up being friends.

Of course, their friendship has nothing to do with the two of them making more money or gaining more power. They just like one another. They do.

Business isn't about making money. It's about friendship and brave executives taking pay cuts before they lay off workers and providing the earth's endless bounty to all God's children, all at zero percent financing and out of the goodness of the solid gold-plated hearts of big business people, bless em one and all.

And what do you know...it worked! Enron made more money (and aren't we better off for that?), and Bush got more power (and isn't the whole world a better place than when he took office?).

Isn't friendship/business a beautiful thing?

Appropriate background music:

"I'd like to teach the world to sing, in perfect harmony. I'd like to buy the world a Coke, and keep it company."
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 5:31 PM on February 15, 2002

Personally I think the smoking gun doesn't live up to their name by publishing this stuff as damning evidence when it seems to me there is no wrongdoing (nothing illegal is proven by these documents).

I totally agree mathowie. Most of that so called intimate correspondence reads like form letters I get from organizations I've donated money to - perfunctory, required and not at all that sincere. Nothing seemed to detail Lay or Bush having any more personal knowledge about the other than one could garner from the media or quick chats with the other or acquiantances of the other. Damning evidence? Not!

Of course, their friendship has nothing to do with the two of them making more money or gaining more power. They just like one another. They do.

Wow, and those are actually the goals of their respective positions! How shocking. I still haven't seen anything to define these two as having a deep friendship as you seem to want to imply.

Heck, I was hanging out with a guy the other night who feels he is very good friends with me and I can't even tell you his last name or where he lives - but he is convinced we're close friends. I see him maybe once or twice a month and might talk to him for maybe 10 minutes at each meeting. Oh yeah, and he's going to jail next month for theft - so I guess I am an accessory because we're good friends and we've been seen talking all the time. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Find some PROOF to back up the accusations please.
posted by RevGreg at 6:06 PM on February 15, 2002

Hrm... just reading the single letter you cited as "like this dog", and I'm thinking... "so?" It sounds like a 8th grade essay, but not something potentialy bad for anyone, I mean, How is that particular letter any diffrent from the leters people sent the DOJ about microsoft?

I hope to see bush go down, just because he's stupid... but the fact that he and lay were friends dosn't really mean much...
posted by delmoi at 8:25 PM on February 15, 2002

I'd love to see a big, slimy paper trail leading from Lay to Bush, but I don't see these letters providing it. However, I now know that Ken Lay has terrible penmanship, and GW isn't far behind.
posted by kittyloop at 9:55 PM on February 15, 2002

bad capitalist! no martini!
posted by panopticon at 11:31 PM on February 15, 2002

Most of that so called intimate correspondence reads like form letters I get from organizations I've donated money to - perfunctory, required and not at all that sincere.

One hardly gets a "form letter" when the one sending it is the CEO of Enron and the recipient George W. Bush the governor of Texas.

Yet nevertheless, the Smoking Gun has only obtained these, probably because they are meant to show perfunctoriness and ordinary acquaintanceship in hopes to hedge bets that later more damning evidence doesn't surface, but when it does it will be easy for the defense to point out: "Nobody ever said they weren't friendly with each other". But, it still seemed you could get glimmers of their alleged true, business/friendly relationship from them. Either way, that's why these were left unprotected by Bush's cracker-jack agitprop team.

Ken Lay never was beholden to the public to be "transparent" with his correspondence like governor of Texas' office is. This is why we'll never read any memos or emails sent by Bush II to Ken Lay. They've all been destroyed.
posted by crasspastor at 11:52 PM on February 15, 2002

Who needs penmanship when you have secretaries?
posted by kindall at 1:00 AM on February 16, 2002

who needs facts when you have prejudices
posted by Mick at 2:48 AM on February 16, 2002

Lay's Letters to Bush Show Personal Ties: I think that Hanna Rosin's story today in the Washington Post has the right take on this correspondence.

"Nearly once a month Lay wrote to Bush, urging him to support laws that would benefit his company, mainly utility deregulation, which would allow Enron to enter a larger share of the energy market; tort reform, making it more difficult to sue corporations; and a law that would reduce Enron's corporate taxes. There is no record of a written response from Bush and no indication that he followed through on the requests. However, as governor, Bush ultimately made all three of those priorities his own."
posted by Carol Anne at 7:05 AM on February 16, 2002

bad capitalist! no martini!

*coffee coming out nose*

Don't know if this is original, but damn it's funny.
posted by terrapin at 9:51 AM on February 16, 2002

Thanks for the direct links showing us what this attempt at transparency and disclosure actually looks like. Some think more transparency could have prevented both the Enron and Al Qaeda messes. I went looking for more about Enron and "Central Asia" after reading the letter about meeting with the Uzbek ambassador. Found 2 items to share with other beginners: a Salon article, and an e-mail of background research.
posted by sheauga at 5:40 PM on February 16, 2002

After all, if the President is shown to be a bad, bad man, doesn't that mean the terrorists won?

Only if the nation turns its collective head and looks the other way, leaving him in office.
posted by rushmc at 12:47 AM on February 17, 2002

plemeljr wrote: ...it was just a group of criminals that used the system.
you could say the same about enron.
</sarcasm>
posted by quonsar at 1:55 AM on February 17, 2002

I read through the little memos and letters. There's nothing "personal" about them.

Write to your congressman, and you'll get the same kind of generic, friendly sounding response.

Nothing to see here.
posted by Witold at 7:40 PM on February 17, 2002