They have been in a hole, and now keep digging.
Posted on 02/21/2008 7:30:50 AM PST by TornadoAlley3
(CNN) — Former McCain political adviser John Weaver confirms to CNN that he did approach lobbyist Vicki Iseman about eight years ago, during McCain’s first presidential run, and told her she was threatening to undermine the heart of McCain’s campaign – that he is a reformer.
Weaver says he arranged the meeting with Iseman — first reported by the New York Times — out of concern that she was “telling people around town” she was getting access to, and had influence with, McCain that Weaver says she did not have.
But Weaver insists he never talked to or asked Iseman about any romantic relationship with McCain because “there was no reason to.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
In other words, the Times’ own source is saying that the Times is lying.
This is just a taste of how the media will bring McCain down once Hillary gets the nomination w/ Obama as her VP.
They did the same thing when Dole ran against Clintoon.
Get ready for it.
They did the same thing when Dole ran against Clintoon.
___________
Forgetting something? They did the same thing to Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 in every election cycle. Win some, lose some. What is a given is the NYT will back the democrat.
This is quite a blow to the already foundering NY Times...
The attack monkeys of the left are hard at work shuffling around their cages....
The rank and file just don't like McCain. He sells out the Republicans every chance he gets.
And yes, the Times will stick it to him for the rest of the year.
Imagine that? The NY SLimes lying?
I am sure the Times has a type-written memo that proves everything.
Takes Hillary's implosion off of the front pages, doesn't it?
In itself, unsurprising. What is surprising is that the person they had depended upon to back up their lies is not playing along.
Rather and Mapes at least had Bill Burkett and an old bat of secretary willing to lie on their behalf.
MSNBC is doing an interview with a senior staffer for MCCain- his contention is that it’s all about the New Republic piece coming out this afternoon- that exposes the dysfunction at the NYT’s...
Sounds like the Times story has a few holes in it.
McCain’s guy Weaver switched from Republican to Democrat a few years ago.
"A female lobbyist had been turning up with him at fund-raisers, visiting his offices and accompanying him on a client’s corporate jet. Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself — instructing staff members to block the woman’s access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity."
"Mr. McCain, 71, and the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, 40, both say they never had a romantic relationship. But to his advisers, even the appearance of a close bond with a lobbyist whose clients often had business before the Senate committee Mr. McCain led threatened the story of redemption and rectitude that defined his political identity."
"But the concerns about Mr. McCain’s relationship with Ms. Iseman underscored an enduring paradox of his post-Keating career. Even as he has vowed to hold himself to the highest ethical standards, his confidence in his own integrity has sometimes seemed to blind him to potentially embarrassing conflicts of interest."
Does someone in the DBM want to ask the Times why, if they’ve had this story for months and it is so important, they endorsed McCain the the Republican primary in NY om Super Tuesday? We KNOW why, but doesn’t the rest of America deserve a response?
I suppose Senator McCain can be excused for he knew the war not the "war" that his enemies carried on here in the U.S.
By now though I'd hope that he'd realize that the "war" prolonged the war, caused millions more victims in the war, kept him and his fellow POWs imprisoned longer than was necessary, and lost the war.
The war is over but the "war" continues. Look already, Senator!
Aha! That’s what I said earlier.
This will make a few Freepers sad.
There are some here who were already convicting him on the word of the NY Times!
BINGO!!
If there were no difference in the liberalism of John McCain, Hillary, and Barak, why is the NYT smearing McCain to help the Democrats?
Give the NYT a break... They only falsified a few little details—like whether they had sex.
Everyone lies about sex.
Really? When did Dan RaTHer get a job at the NYT/National Enquirer? Was it faxed from the Kinkos in Abilene too?
When are people going to realize we have an economic/military superpower of over 3oo million here, and it's the big things that count in selecting an administration? Not "too old" or "boring" or playing a saxophone.
NYTimes defends McCain piece.
“Takes Hillary’s implosion off of the front pages, doesn’t it?”
And Michelle Obama’s statements about not being proud of America. A twofer for the NYT.
Right striking against NYTPosted: Thursday, February 21, 2008 10:51 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: 2008, McCain
From NBC’s Chuck Todd and Domenico Montanaro
The right appears to be coming down on McCain’s side and striking out against the New York Times. From Politico:
Talk radio host Rush “Limbaugh wrote in an e-mail to Politico: ‘The story is not the story. The story is the Drive By media turning on its favorite maverick and trying to take him out. The media picked the GOP’s candidate, the NYT endorsed him while they sat on this story, and is now, with utter predictability, trying to destroy him.’
“Limbaugh added: ‘This is what you get when you walk across the aisle and try to make these people your friends. I’m not surprised in the least that the NYT would try to take out John McCain. Predicted this, in fact, way back in the early 2000s. Sen. McCain courted the media, cultivated them, even bragged that the media was his ‘base.’ I cringed when I heard it because the media turning on McCain was as predictable as the sun rising in the morning.’”
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/
They have been in a hole, and now keep digging.
Talk radio host Rush “Limbaugh wrote in an e-mail to Politico: ‘The story is not the story. The story is the Drive By media turning on its favorite maverick and trying to take him out. The media picked the GOP’s candidate, the NYT endorsed him while they sat on this story, and is now, with utter predictability, trying to destroy him.’
“Limbaugh added: ‘This is what you get when you walk across the aisle and try to make these people your friends. I’m not surprised in the least that the NYT would try to take out John McCain. Predicted this, in fact, way back in the early 2000s. Sen. McCain courted the media, cultivated them, even bragged that the media was his ‘base.’ I cringed when I heard it because the media turning on McCain was as predictable as the sun rising in the morning.’”
Rush is right.
.
Yep, I agree. And I can’t stand McCain. But this (unless there’s more we don’t know yet) is really dirty. The NYT’s is on thin, thin ice...
Maybe. But there’s a little more to it, I think. TNR v NYT. TNR/Beauchamp/Rush.
I’m actually rooting for McCain here.
But but...McCain knows how to work with these people to get things done.
Since John McCain is no longer a viable candidate, It's important that we Republicans get behind Ron Paul now.
LOL, those paulistas are fools.
Thats not even close to how its being portrayed in the liberal MSM. If you listened to ABC radio, they are insinuating that McCain’s been hitting it at their hourly belch.
I am so sick and tired of hearing that the media picked out candidate.
What bunk. We did it, all on our own. In fact the media declared McCain dead months ago.
John Weaver has changed sides more times than the French Army. He is a real weasel
Sex sells.
Sex sells unless it involves a candidate with a (D) next to his name, an alley, a man, a “Lewinsky”, and crack.
“Give the NYT a break”
As much as I detest the NYT, I am going to give them a break. They had to spill all these allegations NOW before the free speech deadlines of McCain-Feingold went into effect.
Touche as in . . . Hoist by me own petard
And lie unabashedly about the opponent if it helps.
I'm no McCain fan, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the NYT.
That has happened before w/other candidates. They renounced the liberal rags UNTIL it suits them. They, themselves, are not honest either while pointing the finger - that’s some lowlife principle to stand on, IMO.
Right! Well I am pretty damned rank, and John McCain just might be rough around the edges for a Republican. But his track record indicated he is an honorable man and a true American. I would rather have McCain as my president that Hillary and Bill, or Obama.
Could this by the NYT’s Rathergate?
Then get ready for another round of higher taxes, open borders and amnesty, socialized medicine etc. Becuase he’s in the DNC’s pocket.
Notice, almost without exception, the MSM endorses McCain in the primaries and now that the nomination is virtually locked up they come out with a hit piece on the guy. The NYT is a despicable rag.
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.