Former Republican co-chair of the 9/11 Commission, and Disney/ABC consultant Tom Kean, appears to be telling contradictory stories to the media about whether he is a paid consultant to the embattled Disney/ABC fictional account of September 1.
In today's New York Times we learn that there is a possibility Kean will be receiving a fee for his work on the film:
Mr. Kean, who called Mr. Clinton a good friend, said it was outrageous to suggest he was being swayed by money or politics, and added that any fee he received would be donated to charity.Clearly some possibility of Kean receiving payment for his consulting still existed, or Kean wouldn't have had to offer to give the money to charity.
Yet just yesterday afternoon, on a radio interview with Sirius satellite radio, Kean told Michelangelo Signorile categorically that he was not a paid consultant to the film. You can listen to Kean saying this here (you may need to save the file to your computer then open it in order to get it to work).
SIGNORILE: People are very confused then as to why you had signed your name to this ABC docu-drama as a paid consultant...So, is Kean or isn't Kean a paid consultant to this project? Did he or didn't he plan to make money off of September 11 and his role in the Commission? Did Kean lie to the NYT when he implied he might be paid for the work, or did he lie to Michelangelo Signorile when he stated categorically that he wasn't being paid a dime for the work? If Kean "wasn't a paid consultant" then there would be no reason for him to tell the NYT only a few hours later than any consulting fees he received would go to charity - since there wouldn't be any. Or was Kean trying to mislead Signorile by claiming he wasn't a paid consultant because he was going to give the money to charity - which then begs the question of when Kean decided to give the proceeds to charity.
KEAN: Well, first of all, I'm not paid consultant.
We need to get to the bottom of this. Why is Disney/ABC spokesman Tom Kean waffling on whether he was or wasn't expected to be paid for helping Disney/ABC exploit September 11?
(And just as importantly, with Kean's son running for US Senate in New Jersey, was there a real or apparent conflict of interest with Kean's work on the movie? And could said conflict have had any effect on the final outcome of the film?)
