NY Times on Kitty Kelley book
Won't anyone just be honest about what they said, or about what they heard, anymore?

In a back and forth yesterday, Sharon Bush, the former wife of the president's brother Neil and a central source for the book, issued a pre-emptive retraction after a British newspaper printed an article on the book, quoting Ms. Bush as saying that Mr. Bush used cocaine at Camp David while his father was in office.

"I categorically deny that I ever told Kitty Kelley that George W. Bush used cocaine at Camp David or that I ever saw him use cocaine at Camp David," Ms. Bush said in an unsworn statement distributed by her lawyer, David Berg. "Although there have been tensions between me and various members of the Bush family, I cannot allow this falsehood to go unchallenged."

Doubleday, the book's publisher and part of the Random House division of Bertelsmann, said it stood by Ms. Kelley's reporting. The publisher said in a statement that Ms. Kelly met with Ms. Bush for a four-hour lunch on April 1, 2003, where an unnamed third party heard the conversation, and that Ms. Kelley's editor, Peter Gethers, discussed the same material with Ms. Bush over the phone.

The denial regarding knowledge of cocaine use by Bush is awfully limited isn't it? If she had never seen him do coke anywhere, anytime, wouldn't she have said that?