Bush family e-mails hacked: Was anything stolen of value (beyond privacy)?

Hacked Bush family e-mail released to date shed light on George H.W. Bush's 'kindness and good nature,' the family's concern for his health, and, perhaps, a preview of a W. art exhibit.

Luch Nicholson/Reuters/File
Former President George H.W. Bush and his wife, Barbara, stand during the national anthem at the NCAA Final Four college basketball championship game in Houston in this April 4, 2011, photo. The US Secret Service is investigating whether the former president's e-mail was hacked, along with e-mail of other family members.

The Bush family has been victimized by a hacker, in case you haven’t heard. Someone who calls himself “Guccifer” has managed to penetrate the e-mail accounts of an unknown number of relatives of ex-Presidents George H.W. and George W. Bush. We’ll leave the technical analysis to others, and focus on the stuff that’s actually been published: Are these sensitive secrets that shouldn’t have come into the public domain?

Yes, in the sense that nobody should have stuff like this stolen and then plastered all over the Internet. Presumably, the FBI will get involved in tracking this person down. But no, in the sense that what we’ve seen so far makes the Bush family seem more sympathetic, if anything. It reveals their concern for George H.W.’s health during his recent hospitalization and indicates that it was more serious than publicly known.

According to summaries of some of the material published on The Smoking Gun website, one Dec. 27 e-mail from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) to his four siblings saluted his father’s “kindness and good nature." It talked about how he’d helped Bill Clinton reestablish his reputation by treating him well, for instance.

In a Dec. 26 e-mail, George W. asked relatives for anecdotes, thoughts, and other material that might be useful in a eulogy. “Hopefully I’m jumping the gun,” he wrote.

Thankfully, he was. At the time, news organizations hadn’t reported on the seriousness of Bush pere’s illness. But here’s a little journalistic secret: Most in the mainstream media knew that something was up. This is not due to any publishable inside knowledge, so don’t cry conspiracy. It’s due to rumors and the context – when an elderly ex-president is hospitalized for any length of time, it is best to begin planning coverage for all eventualities.

As to the rest of the stuff, the thing that jumps out at us is George W.’s artwork. Yes, he’s a painter now. That’s been known for some time. So were Winston Churchill and Dwight Eisenhower. That’s pretty good artistic/political company to keep.

W. mentioned this last year at a semiprivate gathering in Memphis, Tenn., where he was interviewed by daughter Jenna about his life for an audience of business and civic leaders. At the time, he said his artistic subjects were mostly dogs.

“I guess you can teach an old dog new tricks,” he said.

But the hacker-obtained material includes at least two images of current W. paintings, and they’re not dogs. Apparently, he e-mailed some examples of his latest work to sister Dorothy Bush Koch, and they’re self-portraits of him in the shower and bathtub.

Amateur mind-readers, start your engines! In the shower one, you see Bush’s torso from behind, staring at the wall, while his face shows in a wall-mounted mirror. To us, it appears as if he’s actually looking in another direction, and the face should not be showing. Is that a subtle comment on the nature of self-observation? Or a mistake? You decide.

The one in the bathtub has a nice geometry to it, with his toes sticking out of sudsy water, the faucet and handles in the background. Brushstroke might use a little work, though.

There’s also a photo of Bush painting something that appears to be a church, and him posing with cardboard cutout of himself as an artist. Very meta. We’d be unsurprised if a Bush art show, all proceeds to charity, is not far away.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.