Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Newsweek holds a Story (Dereliction of Duty)
New York Post ^ | 6 Novemeber 2004 | fastattacksailor

Posted on 11/06/2004 8:02:23 AM PST by fastattacksailor

What did Newsweek know — and when did the magazine know it?

(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: fraud; johnkerry; kerry; kerrydefeat; kerryloser; newsweek; newyorkpost
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last
I suggest that all take a look at this article. Not that it proves anything NEW, but merely reinforces the already obvious.

We very lucky that KERRY imploded.......and W saved the day!

1 posted on 11/06/2004 8:02:24 AM PST by fastattacksailor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fastattacksailor

Wow, we really did dodge a lurch-laced bullet.


2 posted on 11/06/2004 8:07:07 AM PST by aft_lizard (This space waiting for a post election epiphany)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fastattacksailor

Its time to finish Kerry off once and for all.

For the good of the nation


3 posted on 11/06/2004 8:07:25 AM PST by mylife (The roar of the masses could be farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fastattacksailor

McCain knew it even before Newsweak did.


4 posted on 11/06/2004 8:07:55 AM PST by dr_who_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fastattacksailor
Not NewsWeak, not any of the electronic or print media.

NONE

5 posted on 11/06/2004 8:09:20 AM PST by OldFriend (PRAY FOR POWERS EQUAL TO THE TASKS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fastattacksailor

I knew Kerry was bad, but this is something else. At least McCain had some priciples.


6 posted on 11/06/2004 8:11:54 AM PST by AmericanChef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fastattacksailor
The article asks "Why did newsweek sit on the story...."

McCain must have known that if Kerry had won, the promise would have been off the table.

I'm asking, Why didn't McCain tell somebody ? It definitely would have killed Kerry had it come out.

Seems they're all gutless & soul-less.
7 posted on 11/06/2004 8:13:45 AM PST by stylin19a (It's called GOLF because all the other 4 letter words were taken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

This editorial stands as a lesson to those who actually wanted Lurch to become the Prez. If he was willing to do this---the UN would have been running us next, IMHO.


8 posted on 11/06/2004 8:17:09 AM PST by fastattacksailor (new)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dr_who_2

I'm trying to remember just when this took place- (maybe one of you will)- sometime last spring or early summer when McCain endorsed GWB, they were together at a huge rally...McCain gave a TRULY impassioned speech for Bush- it brought me to tears - it was THAT inspiring.

I'd be interested in the timing- perhaps McCain was fresh from these phone calls with Kerry- and finally realized this guy was not presidential??


9 posted on 11/06/2004 8:20:17 AM PST by SE Mom (Reeling from re-election rapture!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: stylin19a
I'm asking, Why didn't McCain tell somebody ? It definitely would have killed Kerry had it come out.

I read this theory on another thread....McCain probably did tell the Bush campaign. Rove decided it would end up being a "he said, she said" kind of thing. MSM would, of course, back kerry and that campaign would, of course, deny, deny, deny. Might have cost Bush valuable votes.

10 posted on 11/06/2004 8:20:18 AM PST by CAluvdubya (From the RED part of California)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stylin19a

Then again, if McCain had said something about it, would anyone have believed him? Silly me. The press believes everything that McCain says.


11 posted on 11/06/2004 8:28:02 AM PST by dr_who_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: fastattacksailor

It would also be interesting to know if Sen. McCain informed President Bush about the offer.

If the journalist was bound by some sort of agreement, McCain wasn't. I think it was his Duty to inform the President AND the American public. Everyone would have listened and believed him, even the Dem. Dogs. They were chomping at the idea of him being Kerry's running mate...they couldn't have back-peddled after it was obvious they felt a Kerry-McCain ticket was their hope.

Imagine the election stats if this had been known and the increase in Bush's margin of victory.

No mention of McCain's responsibility to report that Kerry was the public has been made. Why is this aspect being missed?

Kerry's desperation - not surprising at all.


12 posted on 11/06/2004 8:28:38 AM PST by CitizenM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CAluvdubya

Kerry wanted to identify himself more closely with McCain to appeal to certain independents and supposedly republicans. Therefore, contacts with McCain would help Kerry. In the final days of the campaign, Kerry was constantly saying he would reach out to Bob Dole and John McCain, as if invoking their names meant he had their endorsement.


13 posted on 11/06/2004 8:30:56 AM PST by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: stylin19a
"Why didn't McCain tell somebody ?"

Maybe he did and that's how it eventually came out. We'll probably never know though.

14 posted on 11/06/2004 8:31:18 AM PST by mass55th ("If I were two faced, would I be wearing this one?"----Abe Lincoln (1809-1865))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: fastattacksailor

Kind of funny about McCain. I don't think he would have made 3 votes difference for Kerry, had he been the VP choice.


15 posted on 11/06/2004 8:32:56 AM PST by BillyCrockett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fastattacksailor
The OLD MEDIA can not, must not be Trusted ever again!
16 posted on 11/06/2004 8:34:29 AM PST by TexasCajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CitizenM
Whoops...guess I was too upset to see...I wrote: No mention of McCain's responsibility to report that Kerry was the public has been made.
I meant: No mention of McCain's responsibility to report that comment of Kerry's to the public has been made. Sorry, just woke up. Coffee has not kicked-in yet.
17 posted on 11/06/2004 8:39:13 AM PST by CitizenM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: fastattacksailor

Just re-inforces my theory that everybody in his party knew he was going to lose except Kerry. Well, maybe Kerry knew he wasn't supposed to win, but decided to double cross the party and go for broke.


18 posted on 11/06/2004 8:39:37 AM PST by Eastbound ("Neither a Scrooge nor a Patsy be")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun
(From the article) "Keeping the public informed is what journalism used to be about."

"The OLD MEDIA can not, must not be Trusted ever again!"

Your point is solid. It is hugely ludicrous for people to call themselves "journalists," yet promise not to report relevant things heard from a candidate during a NATIONAL election! The obvious question to these so called "journalists" is: - Then why did you bother covering Kerry in the first place? What's the point?

The damage this does to journalists in future campaigns is clearly evident. The question one asks is: "What did you promise to conceal in return for being allowed to tag along with the candidate?"

It becomes evident, again, that the suppression of the truth by CNN during Hussein's rule was not an anomoly, they were simply following the example set by the OM.

19 posted on 11/06/2004 8:58:25 AM PST by Enterprise (The left hates the Constitution. Islamic Fascism hates America. Natural allies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: fastattacksailor
Because the magazine promised the campaigns that anything obtained by this team of journalists during the course of the campaign would go unreported until the election was over.

Promises are promises, but whatever happened to what, under different circumstances, Newsweek and similar publications would herald as "the public's right to know"?

If this was Bush who had suggested such a thing, don't you think the OM would have reported it using their old stand-by "unnamed source"?

20 posted on 11/06/2004 9:03:10 AM PST by jellybean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson