Posted on 02/21/2008 12:06:32 PM PST by WL-law
Claims that the charges against McCain are “unsourced” leave out one source that is prominently mentioned: John Weaver.
So – who is he, and can he be believed?
I recall that Weaver’s name was directly associated with the stories, delivered to the press in the 2004 Bush-Kerry contest, that McCain was flirting with an offer floated by Kerry to become Kerry’s running mate.
In the retelling of that story by the Kerry people, the person who is square in the middle of the discussions and negotiations was -- John Weaver.
When McCain’s campaign was imploding, back in the fall 07, because the campaign was spending much, much more than it was taking in, and because McCain had hired too big of a staff, Weaver’s name was again prominent in the press –
For example, here are excerpts from a Washington Post story:
Senator Retools Campaign Team as Money and Support Fall Off
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/10/AR2007071000759_pf.html
By Dan Balz and Anne E. Kornblut
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
In the mid-1990s, years before Sen. John McCain officially launched his first bid to become president, it was John Weaver who convinced the senator that he had all the ingredients to win the GOP nomination and the Oval Office.
Officially launched his first bid to become president, it was John Weaver who convinced the senator that he had all the ingredients to win the GOP nomination and the Oval Office.
Weaver -- a lanky, fidgety Republican strategist with a deceptively low-key Southern drawl -- would go on to become one of McCain's closest advisers during the 2000 race, an architect of the "Straight Talk Express." .. On Tuesday, McCain parted ways with his longtime aide and engineered a dramatic shake-up of his presidential campaign team as he sought to reverse a months-long downward spiral that has left him short of cash and struggling for support.
The stunning developments unfolded quickly yesterday morning after Weaver and campaign manager Terry Nelson, a key member of President Bush's 2004 reelection team, issued terse statements announcing their departures from the McCain camp.
….
McCain quickly installed Rick Davis, the campaign's chief executive, as the new manager and vowed to press forward despite months of disappointing news. Davis long had sparred with Nelson, Weaver and Mark Salter, one of McCain's closest confidants, over operations.
……..Two other senior officials -- political director Rob Jesmer and deputy campaign manager Reed Galen -- followed Nelson and Weaver out the door, as did several lower-level aides.
………In a brief encounter with reporters in the Capitol, McCain sought to portray the extraordinary changes as nothing significant. Speaking of the departures of Weaver and Nelson, he said: "I can only say repeatedly what I have told you. They remain valued and strong friends, our campaign remains the same..."
…Over the past two weeks, according to multiple sources, McCain had several tense conversations with Nelson and Weaver over the campaign's direction and, in particular, the amount of money being spent long after it was clear that fundraising was falling far short of projections.
Now, here is Weaver again, as the person behind the McCain-Kerry VP solicitations in 2004:
http://www.nysunpolitics.com/blog/2007/04/john-kerry-mccains-people.html
Tue, 3 Apr 2007
In an interview with Jonathan Singer of the liberal blog MyDD.com, Senator Kerry of Massachusetts says that Senator McCain of Arizona, or at least his staff, approached him about becoming his running mate in 2004……
Jonathan Singer: There's a story in The Hill, I think on Tuesday, by Bob Cusack on the front page of the paper talking about how John McCain's people -- John Weaver -- had approached Tom Daschle and a New York Congressman, I don't remember his name, about switching parties. And I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about what your discussions were with him in 2004, how far it went, who approached whom... if there was any "there" there.
John Kerry: I don't know all the details of it. I know that Tom, from a conversation with him, was in conversation with a number of Republicans back then. It doesn't surprise me completely because his people similarly approached me to engage in a discussion about his potentially being on the ticket as Vice President. So his people were active -- let's put it that way.
Singer: Okay. And just to confirm, you said it, but this is something they approached you rather than...
Kerry: Absolutely correct. John Weaver of his shop... [JK answers phone]
……..Kerry had apparently been thinking of McCain as a possible running mate for some time; in August, 2003, he met with him to propose the idea and to suggest that they announce their pact before the Iowa caucus, according to a McCain aide. Then, in the spring of 2004, in a series of phone conversations with McCain, Kerry offered to augment the power of the Vice-Presidency with the defense portfolio--in effect, a combined Vice-President and Secretary of Defense, according to John Weaver and Mark Salter. "….
What else do we know about Weaver? I found this by Jonathan Chait, editor of the New Republic. Yes the same mag that was coming out with its own version of the McCain story, and thereby rushed the NT times to release the story it had been sitting on. And Note that the conversation cited with Weaver was BEFORE Weaver was let go by McCain in the above cited belt-tightening and the power struggle with Davis.
by Jonathan Chait
Issue date 04.29.2002
John Weaver hunches his angular frame over a Styrofoam cup of coffee in the basement cafeteria of the United States Senate and tries to explain what might seem–to an outsider–his peculiar political loyalties. Once a loyal Republican strategist who directed the presidential aspirations of über-conservative Phil Gramm and helped plot John McCain’s maverick primary run in 2000, he has since reregistered as a Democrat and severed consulting ties to all Republicans except McCain, for whom he still serves as chief strategist. “I only work for Democrats now,” he tells me. Noticing that he has overlooked the party affiliation of his most prominent advisee, I helpfully add: “And John McCain.” Weaver shrugs his shoulders and grins, “Oh, right.”
It’s easy to forget that the Arizona senator is not, in fact, a Democrat. In the past year he has stood against his party on so many prominent and contentious issues that his concurrences with GOP dogma have become more of an exception than a rule. In the conservative media, he has become a figure of vilification on par with Tom Daschle. Last fall, when his name came up in a meeting of House Republicans, he was booed. And it is no exaggeration to say that he has co-sponsored virtually the entire domestic agenda of the Democratic Party. One prominent Democrat enthuses, “He’s the leader of the loyal opposition.” Typically that role falls to a leader of the opposition party. But the most popular and effective champion of the Democratic Party’s values isn’t Tom Daschle. It’s John McCain. And at a moment when the party is casting about for a leader to define it against a popular president, and McCain is casting about for a home after his virtual expulsion from the GOP, there is an obvious solution to both dilemmas: John McCain ought to become a Democrat–and a presumptive front-runner for the party’s presidential nomination in 2004.
...
...
It’s strange that amidst all the political gossip about a McCain third-party candidacy, Washington has barely considered the far more logical possibility of a McCain second-party candidacy. Last summer one senator informed Newsweek that McCain himself has discussed the idea. “‘I know he’s looked at our field and said to himself, ‘I could take these guys,’” the (presumably Democratic) senator explained. Yet the capital’s political rumor industry, which usually requires only the flimsiest scrap of data to launch a speculative frenzy, completely ignored this tidbit. The conventional wisdom seems to be that Democrats wouldn’t accept McCain. Elizabeth Drew, whose recent book Citizen McCain reflects the McCainiac worldview, writes, “McCain, with his conservative record on issues such as abortion, would never be welcome in the Democratic Party.” But while McCain’s historical voting record may be conservative, his recent record in Congress is anything but. In off-the-record conversations, Republicans argued that Democrats would never accept McCain, while Democrats–even very liberal ones–said just the opposite. The assumption that McCain is at ideological loggerheads with the Democratic Party either misunderstands McCain, or the Democratic Party, or both.
Mmmmm. Weaver was also behind the McCain move to join the Democrats in 2001, and tip the majority of the Senate away from the Republicans – before Jim Jeffords pre-empted McCain.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/democrats-say-mccain-nearly-abandoned-gop-2007-03-28.html
By Bob Cusack 03/28/07
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was close to leaving the Republican Party in 2001, weeks before then-Sen. Jim Jeffords (Vt.) famously announced his decision to become an Independent, according to former Democratic lawmakers who say they were involved in the discussions.
In interviews with The Hill this month, former Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) and ex-Rep. Tom Downey (D-N.Y.) said there were nearly two months of talks with the maverick lawmaker following an approach by John Weaver, McCain’s chief political strategist.
Democrats had contacted Jeffords and then-Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) in the early months of 2001 about switching parties, but in McCain’s case, they said, it was McCain’s top strategist who came to them.
At the end of their March 31, 2001 lunch at a Chinese restaurant in Bethesda, Md., Downey said Weaver asked why Democrats hadn’t asked McCain to switch parties.
Downey, a well-connected lobbyist, said he was stunned. “You’re really wondering?” Downey said he told Weaver. “What do you mean you’re wondering?”
“Well, if the right people asked him,” Weaver said, according to Downey, adding that he responded, “The calls will be made. Who do you want?” Weaver this week said he did have lunch with Downey that spring, pointing out that he and Downey “are very good friends.”
… “Within seconds” of arriving home from his lunch with Weaver, Downey said he was on the phone to the most powerful Democrats in town. One of the first calls he made was to then-Senate Minority Leader Daschle.
“I did take the call from Tom [Downey],” Daschle said in an interview. “It was Weaver’s comment” to Downey that started the McCain talks, he added.
….. McCain consistently shot down the rumors, though Weaver acknowledged this week that the senator did talk to Democrats about leaving the GOP.
He said McCain was invited to a meeting in Kennedy’s office with several other Democratic senators but “didn’t know what the meeting was for” and left soon thereafter. Weaver added that Edwards approached McCain on the Senate floor to discuss the matter.
Daschle, however, said the talks went much further, claiming that there were times that he and Democratic leaders thought McCain “might be our best opportunity.”
Daschle stressed that McCain never considered becoming a Democrat, but was close to becoming an Independent. Downey said, “I actually thought during the initial stages of this that [McCain leaving the Republican Party] was almost a certain deal.”
Weaver, who changed his party affiliation to “Democrat” several years ago, said he respects Daschle and Downey, but added, “They’re partisan Democrats and we’re in the political season.”
Told of Weaver’s version of what happened, Daschle said, “Obviously, our recollection of what transpired is somewhat different.”
… Downey said he talked to Weaver at least once a week during McCain’s discussions with Democrats, asking him questions like, “What is the state of play?” and “Where are we?”
“Weaver was very active in this,” Downey said, “None of this happens without Weaver.”
Hmm.. So here’s my theory. Weaver had been playing the role of McCain’s alter-ego, in the alternate-universe version where McCain is a democrat. Weaver has been McCain’s front-man for McCain's flirtations with both the Dems AND the MSM media, including the NY Times. And this back-room line of communication is why the MSM loves McCain -- as many have pointed out, the MSM really has BECOME McCain's constituency. Chait’s article, which I excerpted, merely reveals this.
And so -- when Weaver was dumped by McCain in a power struggle, and McCain indicated that was implicitly going to submerge his democrat persona and “go butch” as a conservative, Weaver got fired, and Weaver turned on McCain. Weaver went to the Times with this. And when McCain finally declared, in essence, that he was going to resolve his political ambiguity by staying republican and seeking the nomination (eschewing a 3rd party run or a cross-over), then the MSM infatuation chilled, and the NY Times started sharpening the knife.
The Times wanted to sit on their hit-job until after the convention – but word got out to the New Republic. The New Republic, and its writer Jonathan Chait, had long been working on the McCain-as-Democrat theme, and they were anxious to run with the story NOW, and not sit on it for maximum damage to the republicans.
That’s what I see in this.
Sounds like this is the best the NYT had on McCain and it was use it or lose it.
Weaver sounds like a keeper.
This lame attempt by the Slimes to sling mud on McCain is the biggest non-story in politics today.
This is already becoming yesterday's news.
Yawn.
I wonder what Britney is doing today.
Yawn
John Weaver Speaks
John Weaver, a former senior aide to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and the man in the middle of maelstrom surrounding the Arizona senator’s relationship (or lack thereof) with lobbyist Vicki Iseman, just spoke to The Fix in an attempt to clarify his role in all of this.
Here’s Weaver’s statement:
“The New York Times asked for a formal interview and I said no and asked for written questions. The Times knew of my meeting with Ms. Iseman, from sources they didn’t identify to me, and asked me about that meeting. I did not inform Senator McCain that I asked for a meeting with Ms. Iseman.
Her comments, which had gotten back to some of us, that she had strong ties to the Commerce Committee and his staff were wrong and harmful and I so informed her and asked her to stop with these comments
Weaver is an A-hole but he is a smart A-hole and, more or less, he is our A-hole. If anyone can shake up a moribund Republican Party, he can. We won't like a lot of it but at the end of the day we will come out ahead.
Weaver is a weird bag, at one time the libs thought he was the 2nd coming of Karl Rove, so they slimed him, from both the left and the right.
I take anything written about him with a grain of salt.
evidently
the female lobbyist was going around wash dc
promoting herself as an insider with the commerce committee
which mcpain headed
banking on her frequent appearances at public events with mcpain - and others she was lobbying - as evidence
which, according to weaver was more self-promotion on her part than truthful
however, importantly, from what weaver actually told ‘sources’ there was no romantic element to the relationship or to his concerns about her
The Iseman cometh!
Of course, McCain (Of The Keating Five) could never be involved is something like this.
I don’t like McPain and will not vote for him but this slime job hit piece by the DailyKOS inspired NYT is over the top and is a non-starter and is a despicable attempt to sling mud at their avowed political opponents. But this is only the beginning, prepare to duck and dodge from here on out.
The NY times should have kept their mouth shut, I predict this becomes bigger than the Dan Rather phony documents story. And ultimately helps McCain
I guess the big allegation is that several unanmed sources thought something was going on?
Yet the NY Times endorses McCain January 25th 2008
The NYT’s story seems to be false (big surprise!). What many have overlooked in that smear story is what the Times has suggested about the woman in question, namely, that she is someone who would trade her sex for political favors. Well, maybe that is true for some, but is it true for that woman? Has she been slandered? Libeled? Maybe, she should file an appropriate law suit against the NYT! If she was a lobbyist, simply being persistent, she needs to take those bastards to task!
That's all true if you believe Weaver. I don't know him, but based on what I uncovered above, and adding the impulses of someone who was fired -- well, I'm not ready to agree with you -- not just yet, anyway.
“— well, I’m not ready to agree with you — “
it’s weaver you don’t agree with
i have no opinion
only reporting the characterization weaver says he made of the matter when he spoke about it to others
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.