by Jerry Politex, Monday, Jan. 10, 2000

In early September the "Washington Post" published a story about Bush "top fund-raiser" Wayne Berman, president of Park Strategies LLC in Connecticut, whose activities are being looked at by the FBI. One such activity has $50 million in state pension funds being invested through Park Strategies into a Carlyle Group fund. Carlyle is a "Washington merchant bank and client of Park Strategies that retains former president George Bush as a senior consultant." In 1991 Bush had appointed Berman to be assistant secretary of commerce. Last year Berman and retired senator Al D'Amato (R-NY) formed Park Strategies and hired Paul Silvester, who previously was Connecticut's treasurer and was in charge of investing state pension funds. According to the Washington Post, "Silvester was a catch for the firm because of his familiarity with state treasurers from around the country, who control massive pension funds hungry for new investments. Berman too is intimately familiar with many top state officials because he is a leading fund-raiser for the Republican Governors Association."

The Carlyle Group is also a who's-who of political operatives: "Like Park Strategies, Carlyle also markets its familiarity with government officials--among its partners are former secretary of state James A. Baker III, former defense secretary Frank C. Carlucci and former White House budget chief Richard Darman. The Carlyle Asian investment fund that received the $50 million sum from Connecticut also retains former president Bush as a top adviser, and Carlyle's European fund retains former British prime minister John Major. Both men have made hundreds of thousands of dollars counseling Carlyle on where to invest its money overseas, introducing Carlyle executives to foreign leaders and giving speeches at Carlyle gatherings. Bush's fees from Carlyle are poured into his accounts in various Carlyle funds, which lately have yielded up to 40 percent a year in returns." more

by Jerry Politex, Wednesday, January 12, 200 9:00

Bush tells folks outside of Texas that if they don't know what he's capable of doing, they should just come down to Texas and look around. Then they'd know. Some are dismayed by what they've found. On Monday we wrote that in the February issue of "Harper's" Joe Conason's will "report that scant weeks after Dubya was sworn in as first-term Texas governor in 1995, the University of Texas Board of Regents voted to place millions of state dollars with the Carlyle Group, even though Bush had just quit his job as a corporate director of Carlyle-owned Caterair, a leading U.S. airline caterer." more

an anonymous reporter submitted the following toRed Rock Eater News Service (RRE) newsletter...

Key Stories And A Money Chart May Be Found At Bush Watch Here.

Back in January when the administration was new, the Washington Monthly noted (2nd last item)the Bush family business:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/tilting/2001/0104.tilting.html

The NYT ran a front-page photo of former President Bush with Saudi King Fahd on a trip to Saudi Arabia as part of his work for the Carlyle Group. The ice-breaking story by Leslie Wayne quoted Charles Lewis: "In a really peculiar way, George W. Bush could, some day, benefit financially from his own administration's decisions, through his father's investments. The average American doesn't know that and, to me, that's a jaw-dropper."
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/05/politics/05CARL.html

Judicial Watch commented that the senior Bush's association with the Carlyle Group was a "conflict of interest (which) could cause problems for America's foreign policy in Middle East and Asia". Judicial Watch called on the President's father to resign.

Without saying 'revolving door, it was noted that the former FCC chair was joining the telecom and media section at Carlyle:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/02/business/02KENN.html

On May 7, European Venture Capital Journal identified the Carlyle Group as heavy hitters with "an all-star roster of professionals (that) just got stronger":
http://www.evcj.com/evcj/ZZZW91V8LKC.html

On May 13 when another conservative world leader cashed in his chips and traded on his former government insider status and knowledge of the regulatory system, the BBC ran a story headlined: Major to chair private equity house

The London Times followed on May 26, noting that "The employment of Bush Sr has attracted attention, mainly because his son is ultimately responsible for awarding US arms contracts":
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,37-2001180089,00.html

In late September The Wall Street Journal touched on salient aspects of the story last month by highlighting the bin Laden family investments in the Carlyle Group, then dropped it like a hot 'tater. "Bin Laden Family Could Profit From a Jump In Defense Spending Due to Ties to U.S. Bank", by Daniel Golden, James Bandler, and Marcus Walker, The Wall Street Journal, 9/28/01

After the WSJ story, Judicial Watch spokesman Larry Klayman posted a release uppping the ante. He was again ignored by the mainstream when he said, "This conflict of interest has now turned into a scandal. The idea of the President's father, an ex-president himself, doing business with a company under investigation by the FBI in the terror attacks of September 11 is horrible. President Bush should not ask, but demand, that his father pull out of the Carlyle Group."

A down under paper picked it up: Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/state/2001/10/28/FFX262DBATC.html

The confluence of Bush and bin Laden family interests was noted briefly in the last item at:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0111.whoswho.html

Along with others in the world press, India and Pakistani newspapers have either either reported or copied aspects of the perceived conflicts:
http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/280901/dLAME27.asp http://news.indiatimes.com/articleshow.asp?art_id=1197180992

There's been a little but not much editorial comment:
http://baltimorechronicle.com/media3_oct01.shtml
and indignation at the Center for Public Integrity, which was then strangely attacked by a Washington Post columnist.
http://www.public-i.org/story_01_103100.htm
http://www.public-i.org/commentary_01_042001.htm
http://www.public-i.org/story_01_021201.htm
Charles Lewis of the Center for Public Integrity discusses the revolving door of the Carlyle Group.
(audio, Democracy, Now!, Pacifica Radio, March 6)

The WSJ story had legs. For a few weeks in October, the mainstream, including LAT and the Chicago Tribune among others, turned up the heat on Saudi Arabia, so much so that President Bush felt compelled to call the Saudi Prince to thank him for "cooperating" with the investigation to find the perpetrators of the attacks on the Pentagon and Twin Towers.

On October 25, the NY Times' Elaine Sciolino and Neil MacFarquhar told of the delicate dance: Naming of Hijackers as Saudis May Further Erode Ties to U.S. The story ran with a photograph of Saudi foreign minister Prince Saud al-Faisal with President Bush in the Oval Office, noting that "the Saudis value such personal contacts highly".

The engine at govexec.com presents and searches tables that sort and order defense contractors. Among many tables that establish the Carlyle Group as the 11th and sometimes 12th leading defense contractor, depending on which branch of the armed forces is the purchasing agent, there's one table that establishes President Bush's family business as the 12th largest missile defense contractor:
http://www.govexec.com/top200/01top/catmissiles.htm
But only 32nd in defense contracting of electronics and communications:
http://www.govexec.com/top200/01top/catelectronic.htm

The defense angle was covered by Defense News in August:
http://www.veritascapital.com/view_news.asp?ID=14

After 9 11, the Carlyle Group pulled the plug on its Web pages, which are still visible in Google's cache but won't be for a lot longer. Bush AND "Carlyle Group" is one possible search term.

Some U.S. editors are ignoring or downplaying the story while the U.K. and other international press are interested. A topical example from a recent week:

A buried one liner in a U.S. newspaper notes with no elaboration the revolving door relationship between the administration and the Carlyle Group:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14990-2001Oct30.html

Forty-five days after the dive-bombing at the Twin Towers, another buried one liner confides that the bin Laden family will no longer be doing business with the Bush family within the Carlyle Group:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59924-2001Oct26.html

Part of the larger picture is explored at The Ex-President's Club at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,583869,00.html

If this Guardian story is true, then there was not, as was widely reported, a massive U.S. intelligence failure leading to 9 11.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4293682,00.html

Sydney Morning rewrote the above story, crediting the BBC: Before 9 11, Bush told agents to back off bin Ladin family
http://www.smh.com.au/news/0111/07/world/world100.html