Posted on 02/21/2008 8:10:38 PM PST by jdm
Tom Maguire has up a great post detailing many details some of us may have forgotten about this McCain non-story. First up is this TNR piece which purports to tell us all the backroom dealings going on at The Times regarding the story:
The McCain investigation began in November, after Rutenberg, who covers the political media and advertising beat, got a tip. Within a few days, Washington bureau chief Dean Baquet assigned Thompson and Labaton to join the project and, later, conservative beat reporter David Kirkpatrick to chip in as well. Labaton brought his expertise with regulatory issues to the team…
Of the reporters in the room, Bennett knew Labaton the best. In the 1990s, Labaton had covered the Whitewater investigation, and Bennett viewed him as a straight-shooting, accurate reporter who could be reasoned with.
Why am I bolding the name of Mr. Labaton? Well lets go back in time to the 2000 race and a few article that Tom found:
January 6, 2000
McCain Urged F.C.C. Action On Issue Involving Supporter
By STEPHEN LABATON
Senator John McCain, who has made fixing the corrosive influence of money in politics the cornerstone of his campaign, twice demanded in recent weeks that a regulatory agency take action in a matter that ultimately benefited a major contributor to his presidential campaign.
January 7, 2000
Issue for McCain Is Matching Record With His Rhetoric
By STEPHEN LABATONEleven years ago, Senator John McCain defended himself against ethics accusations for his ties to a corrupt savings association and a campaign contributor by saying that he had performed a legitimate constituent service when he met with regulators who were preparing to seize the institution.
What happened with that “scandal?” McCain released years worth of correspondence to the media showing how he had worked to get projects going, sometimes without the bidding of a lobbyist, sometimes with the bidding.
January 9, 2000
Responding to Criticism, McCain Releases Letters
By James RisenSenator John McCain of Arizona released hundreds of letters today that he has sent to federal agencies under the jurisdiction of his powerful Senate committee, including more than a dozen involving the businesses of contributors to his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination.
Mr. McCain said he was acting to defuse criticism of his interventions before the Federal Communications Commission on behalf of companies regulated by that agency, one of many supervised by the Commerce Committee, which he has headed since 1997.
In sheer volume, the release of more than two years of committee correspondence was both a remarkable display of openness and an effort to show that there was nothing unusual in what Mr. McCain has done by writing to agencies that regulate the companies whose employees have supported his campaign.
”If people view them in their entirety, they will see that I have acted on one fundamental principle, to protect the consumer,” the senator said today while on a campaign swing through South Carolina. ”The overwhelming majority of these communications are: ‘Please act, please act.’ ”
The letters to the Federal Communications Commission show that in several instances, Mr. McCain sought help for companies in telecommunications and related fields that have also given to his presidential campaign.
But officials from both the McCain campaign and the Senate committee stressed today that the letters were sometimes sent without prompting from lobbyists and contributors, and that they reflected Mr. McCain’s longtime policy positions. Some were also written jointly with other members of the Commerce panel, including Democrats.
After which the Times backed WAY off and the story died as it should of, as a non-story dug up to bring down a potential nominee for the Presidency. Somehow TNR, who we all know does a real thorough job at fact checking stories, missed the fact that Mr. Labaton had been deep into this scandal eight years ago and now it magically appears once again.
Byron York also has some added information:
I just got off the phone with John Weaver, the former top McCain campaign official who is now an informal adviser to the campaign. I asked him about his 1999 meeting on the campaign’s behalf with lobbyist Vicki Iseman. He said he “had no reason to think” that McCain might have been having an affair with Iseman, but he was concerned about word he had heard suggesting that Iseman was telling associates she had connections with McCain. “This was a woman who was saying that she had special influence with John’s committee staff and with him,” Weaver told me. “I didn’t believe that was the case.”
“When you hear back from several people that this person is saying they can get anything done, then that is alarming,” Weaver continued. So Weaver met with Iseman, at a Union Station restaurant, and told her to back off. He told me he didn’t exactly say, “Get lost,” but that that was the gist of it. “The discussion lasted all of five or six minutes in which I told her to cut that stuff out,” Weaver told me. “I said, ‘You need to stop this.’” Iseman’s response, according to Weaver: “She was not happy.”
It is not all that unusual for lobbyists to spread the word that they have good access with lawmakers; it’s the currency of the realm in that business. “If a newspaper is going to run stories about lobbyists who claim they have special relationships with members of Congress, it will run out of ink,” Weaver said.
Its such a thin story, so full of innuendo that I really have to wonder at the timing of this thing. Remember, prior to this story the big news was the Obama plagiarism thing and now its off the radars. Would they run this sorry piece of reporting to get it off the water cooler conversation or are they really this hard up to attack McCain anyway, anyhow?
The untold story here is that Matt Lauer admitted this morning on NBC that this story has been percolating around newsrooms for 3 months.
THREE MONTHS!!!
Why did they not make it available to the public BEFORE John McCain was nominated?
Answer: They did not want someone other than McCain as the Republican nominee.
Point: The media DOES control our political process. We like to imagine that they do not, but we are wrong. We have to get lucky.
BINGO!
I think the remarks by Mrs. Obama were potentially more damaging to the Obama campaign than the plagiarism issue...but that’s been forgotten as people obsess over this non-scandal.
John McCain is the machine candidate.
The NYT has actually made me feel for McCain. I think that I will vote for him now.
Here’s what is gonna come out after the convention:
“Cablevision, another broadcaster, also donated $200,000 to the McCain foundation around the same time the senator took action in Congress favorable to that company.”
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/10/AR2007021001510_p...
This Times piece is backfiring like the Rather hit piece against Bush did.
When will the liberal press ever learn?
ping
If you’re comment was serious, and I think so...somebody said that would be the unintended consequence from this...it would make Conservatives angry enough to maybe vote for McCain.
Michelle Obama needed a diversion to prevent her racists anti-American sentiments from being scrutinized. This gives her time to fabricate an alternate perspective the media will push for her and her husband. Don’t look now but she is the planned heir after Barack is eight years into his socialist ‘change’ campaign.
Ping.
Bush proves that.
Influences. Manipulates. Yes.
I agree that it’s way to early to be spreading dirt on McCain for the fall election. The diversion theory makes much more sense.
**The NYT has actually made me feel for McCain. I think that I will vote for him now.**
I think a lot of people feel this way — and think this way too!
Yes, and a lot don't.
Regards
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.