Neil Bush
- Share via
In response to “Bush’s Son Defends Role at S & L,” front page, May 24:
Neil Bush is a chip off the old block. His responses to congressional committee questions set a new family standard for rhetorical obfuscation.
Q: How do you explain the gift of $100,000 from Kenneth Good? A: It wasn’t a gift. It was a loan “that was never meant to be repaid.”
Q: Why is that not a conflict of interest? A: “It just isn’t.”
Q: Did you have any financial interest in any of Bill Walters’ business? A: No. “He was a partner in my business, but I wasn’t a partner in any of his businesses.”
Q: Why did you not mention the loan from Kenneth Good on a conflict-of-interest form required of directors? A: Because “it sounds a little fishy.”
Read my lips, Neil. It smells a little fishy too.
HERBERT L. WEINBERG
Los Angeles
Inside the business of entertainment
The Wide Shot brings you news, analysis and insights on everything from streaming wars to production — and what it all means for the future.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
