SubscribeShocker: Media Run With NYT McCain Smear
From yellow journalists at the Associated Press:
Republican presidential hopeful, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and his wife Cindy, leave at the conclusion of a news conference in Toledo, Ohio. Thursday, Feb. 21, 2008.
McCain says report is “not true”
By LIBBY QUAID, Associated Press Writer
TOLEDO, Ohio - John McCain denied a romantic relationship with a female telecommunications lobbyist on Thursday and said a report by The New York Times suggesting favoritism for her clients is “not true.”
“I’m very disappointed in the article. It’s not true,” the likely Republican presidential nominee said as his wife, Cindy, stood alongside him during a news conference called to address the matter.
McCain described the woman in question, lobbyist Vicki Iseman, as a friend.
The newspaper quoted anonymous aides as saying they had urged McCain and Iseman to stay away from each other prior to his failed presidential campaign in 2000. In its own follow-up story, The Washington Post quoted longtime aide John Weaver, who split with McCain last year, as saying he met with lobbyist Iseman and urged her to steer clear of McCain.
Weaver told the Times he arranged the meeting after “a discussion among the campaign leadership” about Iseman.
But McCain said he was unaware of any such conversation. “I never discussed it with John Weaver. As far as I know, there was no necessity for it … I did not know anything about it,” he said…
In late 1999, McCain twice wrote letters to the Federal Communications Commission on behalf of Florida-based Paxson Communications — which had paid Iseman as its lobbyist — urging quick consideration of a proposal to buy a television station license in Pittsburgh. At the time, Paxson’s chief executive, Lowell W. “Bud” Paxson, also was a major contributor to McCain’s 2000 presidential campaign.
McCain did not urge the FCC commissioners to approve the proposal, but he asked for speedy consideration of the deal, which was pending from two years earlier…
McCain wrote the letters after he received more than $20,000 in contributions from Paxson executives and lobbyists. Paxson also lent McCain his company’s jet at least four times during 1999 for campaign travel.
He defended his integrity last December, after he was questioned about reports that the Times was investigating allegations of legislative favoritism by the Arizona Republican and that his aides had been trying to dissuade the newspaper from publishing a story.
“I’ve never done any favors for anybody — lobbyist or special-interest group. That’s a clear, 24-year record,” he told reporters.
McCain and four other senators were accused two decades ago of trying to influence banking regulators on behalf of Charles Keating, a savings and loan financier later convicted of securities fraud. The Senate Ethics Committee ultimately decided that McCain had used “poor judgment” but that his actions “were not improper” and warranted no penalty…
Robert Bennett, a Washington attorney representing McCain, said McCain’s staff provided the Times with “approximately 12 instances where Senator McCain took positions adverse to this lobbyist’s clients and her public relations firm’s clients,” but none of the examples were included in the paper’s story.
“There is no evidence that John McCain ever breached the public trust and that is the issue and the only issue,” Bennett, who once represented former President Clinton, told NBC’s “Today” show on Thursday.
And this preposterous hatchet job continues.
Note, for instance, how this article brings up the first surfacing of this self-same accusation as if it was another separate charge:
He defended his integrity last December, after he was questioned about reports that the Times was investigating allegations of legislative favoritism by the Arizona Republican and that his aides had been trying to dissuade the newspaper from publishing a story.
Though we do get to hear about the high journalistic standards of the New York Times:
Robert Bennett, a Washington attorney representing McCain, said McCain’s staff provided the Times with “approximately 12 instances where Senator McCain took positions adverse to this lobbyist’s clients and her public relations firm’s clients,” but none of the examples were included in the paper’s story.
And of course the AP (just like The Times) does manage to work in a mention of the Keating 5.
Never mind that Mr. McCain was only guilty of being handy when Congress and the media needed to include a Republican in the all-Democrat scandal.
(See Bob Bennett, who was the prosecutor of the Keating 5, for his comments about McCain’s innocence.)
This is our watchdog media at work here.
Remember how they held Bill Clinton’s feet to the fire when he was a candidate? I don’t either.
But hopefully this will put Mr. McCain on notice.
They media hates him just as much as they do any other Republican. Maybe more so, since he has tried to placate them by being a “moderate.” (Cf. Richard Nixon.)
Mr. McCain needs to realize that they will do whatever it takes to destroy him.
That is their job.
Related Articles:
9 Responses to “Shocker: Media Run With NYT McCain Smear”
Leave a Reply
You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.
February 21st, 2008 at 10:20 am
I heard about this when I awoke. That it came from the NY Times didn’t surprise me. They jumped the shark long ago. This may benefit McCain as he hits back. It’ll solidify his position among conservatives and garner some sympathy from folks who know this is an unfounded accusation substantiated by “anonymous” source – no blue dress or anything like that.
Today’s really big news is that the US Navy shot down the broken spy satellite – like hitting a bullet with a bullet. One shot, one kill, and they hit the fuel tank to boot. Nice shot!
I guess Reagan was right about Star Wars after all – Michelle Obama couldn’t be reached for comment.
February 21st, 2008 at 10:32 am
Does this mean the honeymoon is over between McCain and the NYTs? I wonder if Rudy is laughing his ass off?
But this story does do one thing; it takes the heat off Michelle Obama and her “for the first time I am proud of my contry” gaff. The timing was just too good to be coincidental. The entire MSM is now talking about McCain, not the wife of an empty suit with no policies and a record of riding the fence at vote time.
What this does tell you is that the NYTs considers McCain to be a viable opponent to the Zer-Obama Massaiah and they are worried that the annointed one will be defeated by the old war horse.
As I told you long ago, fasten your seat belt, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
Maybe with all the layoffs that the NYSlimes has been having due to low readership, they are trying to garner the readers of the National Inquirer. The NYSlimes, coming to the rack at the grocery check out in your neighborhood soon.
February 21st, 2008 at 12:11 pm
retire05, Not only is the honeymoon over, I think a divorce might be in order. “Bumpy ride” indeed!
February 21st, 2008 at 12:29 pm
So much for “fact checking” by the Slimes and the AP. “The Arizona Republican”? The local fish-wrap here in Phoenix is the Arizona Republic, no “an” on the end and yes, they did run a few articles back in Dec. on the relationship between McCain and various lobbyists including Ms. Iseman. Nothing came of it because there was really nothing to report. Simply a witch hunt with no witches to be found.
The morning edition of the Arizona Republic doesn’t have this story, (probably because of deadline constraints) but they have it as an online story and lo’ and behold, the mistake is still there.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/.....21-ON.html
Perhaps this “an” addition is an innocuous mistake or lack of fact checking but I think it goes deeper than that.
The liberal bias of the MSM is obvious and they never pass up a chance to associate “Republican” with a scandal, The question remains whether it’s a conscious effort or perhaps just embedded in their psyche to always make the Republican = scandal/bad/evil connection.
In this instance, a Slimes or AP reporter is busy typing away, they have the smell of Republican blood in the water and the frenzy builds within. They scan their notes and see “Republic” and BAM!! The “an” is added and there we have it, Republican = scandal. A little while later, editors are reviewing the article and once again, the Republican blood in the water clouds their view and the mistake is propagated. On the other hand, maybe they’re all just b*tt stupid.
Perhaps I’m reading too much into this but what the hey, that’s my two cents worth. ;o)
February 21st, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Eva: “This may benefit McCain as he hits back. It’ll solidify his position among conservatives and garner some sympathy from folks who know this is an unfounded accusation substantiated by “anonymous” source – no blue dress or anything like that.”
Here’s a little conspiracy theory for today - Maybe it was meant to solidify his position.
Now don’t get me wrong, I’m a McCain fan, but things do seem a bit fishy. McCain has had a rather positive relationship with NYT for awhile. And this story is certainly not up to the NYT’s normal “standards”. NYT does write biased propaganda drivel, but they do so with plenty of sources they can misquote, statistics they can spin, and facts they can twist. This has none of those. It’s almost an obvious attempt at a smear.
The story was pretty much forced by the New Republic, so NYT had to run it. Perhaps some McCain aides and the NYT got together to make lemonade out of the lemon? NYT gets to keep it’s reputation with liberals and it’s journalistic “integrity” for reporting the story. McCain gets sympathy for an obvious yet easily dismissed smear. Makes one ponder…
Or maybe they are indeed just incompetent hacks. Maybe they endorsed McCain because they considered him the lesser evil. And maybe they are just working the old media routine of “build them up, and then tear them down”. Because drama sells.
February 22nd, 2008 at 1:26 am
Sadly, John McCain gets what he deserves.
He had no problem slandering Mitt Romney in Florida and at the Reagan Library.
Senator McCain even demeaned Sec. Rumsfeld for personal political gain.
He knows all about ‘ugly’ politics…
Defending him because the Opposition is referencing his weak offering, is exactly what Liberals have done in the past with unethical fools, like the Clintons.
Liberals were eager for a McCain victory in the Primary, trying to defeat the more sound Conservative offering in Mr. Romney, not only because they knew McCain was liberal, but because they viewed him as easy pickings.
With some very misguided help, a little mindless scheming to defeat Ms. Rodham, and a tired bias against Mormons, they have succeeded.
This reminds everyone of the vivid problems of running a 3 Decades old Washington Insider for the Presidency.
Especially, at a time when Congress has an all time low approval rating.
Many are going to lose credibility, trying to make a sale with this former Keating 5 Member.
The sitting Senator of 24 years is bitter, temperamental, dishonest, and uninspiring.
John McCain lacks vision, debates poorly, and thinks Hillary Clinton would make a good President.
Senator McCain actually lied about his reasons for voting against tax reduction, and wants to massively tax the American Public on gasoline to address Global Warming.
It is going to be a long, ugly, regretful General Election and I am not interested in ‘circling the wagons’ for this tired Washington Insider.
He is only going to make matters worse…
February 22nd, 2008 at 1:48 am
McCain’s buddies in the msm are locked and loaded with their sites squarely on our maverick nominee. This is but the first of many salvos that will be directed at McCain.
I believe part of the msm long term strategy will be to pound away until they can elicit an eruption of Mount McCain. Based on watching him strain to control his temper in interviews where he is asked pointed questions, the msm will probably get what they are after.
February 22nd, 2008 at 3:23 am
Uh oh, the straight talk express adoration tour of the Lame Stream media is at an end! How long until Sen John McQueeg cracks up?!? Do I hear Ball Bearings?!? ROFLMAO
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:27 am
Don’t forget, HNAV, the smear that Bush had used a blitz of late-night phone calls to accuse him of fathering an illegitimate child with a black woman–the one he couldn’t find a single, solitary shred of anything resembling proof for.
Seems to me that he’d pick a mulatto child as the most disgusting accusation an opponent could make says more about him than anyone else.
Otherwise, though, you’re right. He deserves it.
McCain made his living by betraying his own. Now he thinks the media is his ally, and their betrayal has just begun. It’s almost as good as watching the Democrats turn their backs on al-Sheehan to let her know that yes, she was a tool.