Skip to comments.Politico's Martin Still Can't Explain Exactly What Herman Cain Did
Posted on 11/06/2011 2:07:12 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
(VIDEO AT LINK)
In an interview with Howard Kurtz on CNN, Politico's Jonathan Martin still can't explain what exactly it is that Herman Cain reportedly did to the women who received payouts from the National Restaurant Association. Mr. Martin's main argument is because the story hasn't been fully challenged, it must be true. Here's a partial transcript of the back-and-forth between Martin and Kurtz.
Howard Kurtz, CNN: "Jonathan Martin, let's talk about the first story last Sunday, you and three colleagues reported this and what it didn't contain in the way of details. Here's the language from the story. Sexually suggestive behavior that made the women angry and uncomfortable, descriptions of physical gestures, not always overtly sexual, innuendo, and in one case, an unwanted sexual advance at a hotel."
"Why publish the story then when you couldn't answer the essential question: What precisely is Herman Cain alleged to have done to these women?"
Jonathan Martin, Politico: "Howie, I think any journalist would find the, uh -- a report of two women got a five figure, each, cash payout after alleged sexual harassment against a CEO of a trade group that is now a major contender for president, newsworthy. And that's the story we had, and that's what we published."
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
“Alleged sexual harassment” is not sexual harassment.
Have we reached 11,000+ headlines on Google News yet?
Still no story to go along with the propaganda campaign by the Dem Media?
I think he should have to explain to his employer(s) why he thought running with this story was worth destroying what scant bit credibility Politico may have had.
Seems if it’s “good enough” to have an attorney for one of those “ladies” opine that whatever the act that wasn’t specified was, he believed it to be sexual harassment — well it ought to be good enough to ring up some defense attorneys in this field and have them vouch that this is a normal way to make garbage sexual harassment lawsuits go away.
There are still people on FR defending this story (saying Cain still has to answer for something). How do you answer when you are not even sure what specifically you are accused of? It makes me SICK.
And The Most Irresponsible Journalist Award Goes to The Politicos Jonathan Martin!
So tell me, how do you write a news story about an organization paying for a speaker when you dont even know if the organization is paying for the speaker?
Ask journalist Jonathan Martin. He knows all about it.
You see, Jonny wrote a piss poor story the other day about how the Iowa Family Policy Center will be paying a large speaker fee if Sarah Palin comes to Iowa to keynote the IFPCs fall funderaiser.
The only problem is that Jonny has no sources confirming that any exorbitant fee is being charged or paid.
Jonny also got some inside info from David Kochel, who was a top aide to former (and future) presidential candidate, Mitt Romney.
Hey Dave, didnt I just read a story about how Mitt Romney tried to buy off the Iowa Christian Alliance?
I heard you helped facilitate that little scheme. And somehow you are shocked at the thought of a well-known political figure (who very likely isnt running for president) getting paid a speakers fee for (gasp) a public speaking appearance? ..
and then weve got Tim Albrecht quoted. He was the Iowa spokesman for Romneys 2008 caucus campaign.
And it always seemed like, whenever the Romney people had rumors they wanted to start about other candidates,
Jonny was their go-to guy to get those rumors in writing in front of a national audience.
"Who's the Palin Leaker from the McCain Campaign?
National Review Online The publication of a Vanity Fair profile of Sarah Palin
appears to have opened old wounds in the McCain campaign.
... the source of the Diva leak was Nicolle Wallaces husband."
That reporter Jonathan Martin is so nervous and defensive, you’d think he was the one accused of sexual harassment.
Yes, this Politico regular looked sour and quite uncomfortable this morning given that he and his whole gang are found not to be heroes after all, but caught instead with their britches around there ankles trying to defend a nasty case of smearing opposition research with no real there, there. Even that Kathleen Parker person redeemed herself slightly, by giving Martin flak. Rather enjoyable outcome all around wouldn’t you say? For once, no free pass on a cheap shot. Gotta be a FIRST.
I don’t see it so much here, but what gets me on other blogs is the people lamenting (or pretending to lament) that this scandal-ette (and there are plenty of women who vouch that Herman Cain behaved himself like no less than a gentlemen in their private presence) is going to turn the USSC over to progressives and oh woe the country is lost.
No There There bump...
Those are Perrywinkles and Romneybots, mostly.
Tell Jonathan to put some ice on it.
Jesse Jackson is being sued for sexual harrassment by a man in Chicago, from what I am told.
Media has not reported it.
Are there still people on FR defending Politico/the sexual harassment non-story? I saw a few at first, but they got beat down pretty bad [or good, depending on your POV]. I thought the rest of the smear merchants crawled under a rock and stayed there. Am I mistaken?