Posted on 09/08/2010 12:38:21 PM PDT by curth
Vanity Fair's Michael Joseph Gross and I went back and forth this morning in part about what strikes me as an improbableanecdote involving Palin's musing on a campaign-trail wedding for her daughter. I found it improbable because a McCain aide told me -- and told Dave Weigel at the time -- that he'd floated the idea on a lark and leaked it to the Sunday Times, but that it was little more than a joke. Gross responded that we had different sources, and that his was firsthand.
Now Scott Conroy, a Palin embed and co-author of the critical, reported book on Palin's rise Sarah from Alaska emails over his informed thoughts on the matter:
[Co-author] Shushannah [Walshe] and I were fed the same story more than a year ago while we were researching our book. We decided not to print it because although it was related to us by a senior aide who claimed to have been on the receiving end of Palin's inquiry, the source had a very obvious axe to grind and insisted upon anonymity. Also, there were several other people present at the time that Palin supposedly posed the question. We spoke to all of them, and none recalled hearing Palin ask, at that time, about when Bristol should marry Levi. In fact, a couple of the people present said that they would have overheard the question if she had indeed asked it. This doesn't mean that it’s impossible that Palin could have asked the question, but the aide's story did not rise to the level of what we considered reportable. Anyway, it seems apparent that the Vanity Fair reporter spoke to the same senior aide for his story and, as he says, did not get the wedding anecdote from a British newspaper report or another “half-serious” aide .
So it's possible that a staffer, inspired by the embellished Sunday Times story, took the anecdote as his or her own and converted it into lore. Or it's possible that it really happened; judging sources' reliability is a very subjective thing, though Conroy and Walshe had far more access than either Gross or I do.
And, as usual, Politico waffles.
I hope Breitbart and Daily Caller take
them down in credibility at least 10
notches!
What does it matter? The default position remains: modern reporters lie in order to advance their political agenda.
They come up with the most convoluted stuff in an effort to smear Sarah.
That story didn’t make sense, and was totally irrelevant anyway.
What does it matter? The default position remains: modern reporters lie in order to advance their political agenda.
This is almost a yawner. The filth got the attention.
Gross is an outed, bitter, homosexual Sarah hater and his “fairy tale of hate” has made its rounds. The people who already hate her believe it and decent people don’t usually read that crap and when they do, they’re not apt to believe unsourced crap.
ok, what did i do wrong?
/>
- - - - - -
Three small errors:
src=” and then at the end jpg”>
</a>
...just the ">"
looks like you started with <img src=
but then inserted <a href
rather than just the link to the image
That's ma girl !
YOU BETCHA !
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.