I’ve been watching cable news all morning and one of the things that strikes me is that they don’t seem to grasp what the McCain/Iseman story is about. If this was just about Botox McCain getting lucky with some skinny lobbyist the campaign would probably be delighted to have it in the headlines to combat the "he’s too old" meme that’s gathering steam. It’s not. It’s about his relationship with a telecom lobbyist who boasted about her ability to professionally influence him in business situations, and whose lobbying interests McCain has taken clear action to help. It undermines all his "straight talk" crap about not taking money from lobbyists, which is why the campaign staff took action to keep her away from McCain:
John Weaver, a former top strategist and now an informal campaign adviser, said in an e-mail message that he arranged the meeting after “a discussion among the campaign leadership” about her.
“Our political messaging during that time period centered around taking on the special interests and placing the nation’s interests before either personal or special interest,” Mr. Weaver continued. “Ms. Iseman’s involvement in the campaign, it was felt by us, could undermine that effort.”
Mr. Weaver added that the brief conversation was only about “her conduct and what she allegedly had told people, which made its way back to us.” He declined to elaborate.
It’s Weaver’s word versus McCain’s word at this point. According to TNR:
[Weaver] adds that he talks with the McCain campaign every day, and that the campaign knew about his contact with the Times immediately after it happened. Weaver emphasizes that his only concern about Iseman was that she allegedly had been bragging around town about her influence with McCain (which is also how I read his quotes) and nothing more.
McCain, meanwhile, claims he knew nothing about Weaver’s encounter with Iseman:
Mr. McCain said he knew nothing about an account in The Times from John Weaver, a former top strategist and now an informal campaign adviser, who told the newspaper that he met with Ms. Iseman at Union Station at the time of Mr. McCain’s first run for president in 1999 and told her to stay away from the senator. “I don’t know anything about it,” Mr. McCain said. “Since it was in The New York Times, I don’t take it at face value.”
Reallly? That’s pretty amazing, considering the campaign has been trying to spike the story since December.
The whole thing makes McCain look bad, like some old mouthpiece they wheel out to harumph about special interests and terra terra terra but doesn’t really get much say about who he’s allowed to see or what’s going on.
All this pearl clutching on cable news, accusing the Times of "poor sourcing" in a sex scandal really misses several key points, not the least of which is that the part of the story they’re obsessing about (alleged sex) isn’t really the story at all.
Related posts:
- McCain Rediscovers His Passion for Screwing Us with Bad Telecom Policy
- Late Night: Obama Scandalizes Conservatives, Inexplicably Refuses to Cock-Slap Random Foreigners During UN Appearance
- We’re Having a Contest: Which Democrat Has the Most Lobbyist Skeletons in Their Closet?
- Lobbyist Lanny Davis: Liberals Should Give Up on Public Option
- Obama, Lieberman Express Support for Triggers
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Jane!
watertiger image?
About that image, shouldn’t McCain’s head be a lot lower? Wouldn’t that be the only thing he can do any more?
That is the one (pic) I mentioned @ the end of the last thread. Should have known you were 2 steps ahead, Jane. LOL
Three? Okay now I can read the post!
That picture has got to be photoshopped from the one of McCain hugging Bush, right?
Bob in HI
Rats! 4
Mr. McCain said he knew nothing about an account in The Times from John Weaver, a former top strategist and now an informal campaign adviser, who told the newspaper that he met with Ms. Iseman at Union Station at the time of Mr. McCain’s first run for president in 1999 and told her to stay away from the senator. “I don’t know anything about it,” Mr. McCain said. “Since it was in The New York Times, I don’t take it at face value.”
So he doesn’t believe it cause it’s in the Times? Isn’t that kinda fucked up- I mean HE WAS THERE!
It’s about his relationship with a telecom lobbyist who boasted about her ability to professionally influence him in business situations, and whose lobbying interests McCain has taken clear action to help.
I agree, but the NYT botched this whole thing by putting the sex angle so strongly into the story. They should have left it out unless they have more. And if they have more, it should have been in the story.
Right you are, again, Jane.
But, it’s just easier to make it about the Stray Cock.
Even here, last night, the guys just love the vicarious chubby.
Maybe I’m being sexist.
If so, please excuse.
Anybody can have sex inside the Beltway; a lot of people write books about it, some win Pulitzers disclosing the antics of presidents who do it out of wedlock. (A quaint phrase, as if a barge were stuck in a canal, going neither up- nor downstream.)
Sex aside, let’s just follow the money – and the legislation and rule making that flows from it. As a fictional Oxford don once said, what good is power it took a lifetime to accumulate, if you can’t abuse it?
Without sex this probably has no legs- if he fucked her- it’s hot.
This is a pretty loaded comment:
“Our political messaging during that time period centered around taking on the special interests and placing the nation’s interests before either personal or special interest,” Mr. Weaver continued. “Ms. Iseman’s involvement in the campaign, it was felt by us, could undermine that effort.”
Why…if she’s just like any other lobbyist…why?
McCan’t supporters weigh in on today’s news, and they’re not happy:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com:8…..nmug1.html
And the NYT endorsed him – and he discounts a story they ran? too funny.
Hi Jane, everyone! Stray cock hmmm. Her dress here (and pre-photo shop) looks like bed wear.
McCain really like to hug power, doesn’t he!
The sex angle, blond bot look alike was how to get the wires buzzing. Hopefully it IS a bait and switch and the influence peddling angle WILL become the focus.
Hmmmmm. “Romantic” appears to be the key word in Saint John’s response. Now many people may have romantic relationships with or without sex and/or flings of a sexual nature that may perhaps be labeled legitimately as not being romantic in nature. So which is it in this case? Does it depend on the meaning of “Romantic” ?
who would have ever thought john mccain would remind us of gary hart
Indeed. Not the real McCoy in that pic. I suspect it substitutes the Ms. for the Shrubster in their famous embrace. But it may accurately describe McCain’s dependence on things beside money for which he was willing to legislate. Here’s hoping we find out, or put this canard to bed.
Is there any information on what motivated Weaver to share this information with the NYT?
Why would he do it and why now?
Oh man, St. John is the gift that keeps giving. That Photoshop work is priceless!
That, I believe, is a key question.
Oh, come on Richmond. You mean to tell me you’ve never worn something like that to class? *g*
I thought her dress looked like a drapery.
Republicans don’t do any fucking in their sex scandals. This probably involved diapers. I mean Depends.
Caption:
“I’ll never go hungry again”
I think the cable news media’s first thrashing about here, will soon be seen to be a gnat on a freight train.
What I expect to happen is The Times and other real news organizations going to keep digging and dropping the important other shoes to this story.
What did Weaver tell McCain?
Is there real evidence of McCain’s relationship with Vicki?
But most importantly (because the first two questions are minor–what is the full extent of an improper lobbying quid pro quo with John McCain?
I don’t consider Cable News or Network news to be much more than infotainment. as far as news organizations, and I say this because it’s just rare for them even MSNBC to really dig into important stories that are Bush scandles.
Compare the networks (cable or major) digging and examining of stories to those on blogs like FDL or EW. The TV media rarely gets beneath the surface, and if and when they do, they are inevitably interviewing print media. You see print media and now web site personnel as go to people on the cables and the networks, and the blogs are underrepresented but I expect that there will be a sea change soon as to bloggers’ presence on the networks/cables.
The print media and the blogs are far more sophisticated as news analysts, and the blogs are relatively new and evolving media.
I have a hard time believing this is not about sex. It’s as if the campaign is saying, “heavens no, it wasn’t an inappropriate relationship, therefore it’s a non-story.” See how that works: no sex, no story. McCain can have a professional relationship with lobbyists because he’s a straight shooter, a maverick who’ll tell ‘em they’ve gone too far. But they only get to that part of the story if it’s not about sex.
mebbie that’s the only way they could be sure it would make the tabloid headlines.
besides, how often is the moon full, AND eclipsed, all the samedamday?
and it’s leap year.
gives ya goosebumps.
let the tabloids roll!
Then you can bring ‘em back to earth, Jane. Just keep tweaking the story to flesh it out bit by bit, and you’ll catch a lobbyist, then another, and another. Then a flashback to Keatingville, and so on, and so on…
The NYT article has McBush admitting that he “behaved inappropriately”…So what did he mean by that?
All you wise ass mofo’s that think it’s so goddamn funny that someone gets old, it won’t be that long for your punk ass either.
you get out much? lingeree’s been high fashion some yrs now.
McBush seems to be just a little vague on his recollections…..wiggle room?
It’s twice the dress MoDo wore to the annual White House reporters’ roast last year, the one where Rich Little put Karl Rove to sleep and everyone who was anyone stumbled over to Hitchens’ Kalorama digs afterwards. I read the Enquirer.
Again, I’m not sure what you’re saying.
Please explain.
Inquiring minds….
Hi Adie!
Denial + Blame the messenger … hmmm, McCain really is a Repug …
Could any of this be related to FISA?
I agree without the sex the tabloid cable news networks would not be interested in this at all. As it is, even while decrying it they will be promoting the sexual angle. That’s just the way they are. As I keep saying they really aren’t news organizations. OTOH to fill in the time and show that their interest is not completely prurient they will hit on McCain’s history of conflicts of interest: Iseman, Keating, his foundation, etc.
I want to hear from Miss Vicki.
rendanx February 21st, 2008 at 10:10 am
27
In response to rwcole @ 12
Republicans don’t do any fucking in their sex scandals. This probably involved diapers. I mean Depends.
reply
Shorter St. McVain: “Vicki, I think we’re gonna have to go to the mattress on this one.”
The world wants to know if McCain had sex with that woman in 1999. The way the media is harping on this is as if it was happening now. It can’t be about the sex.
Rush, Huckabee and the “Conservatives” have come out in defense of McCain … which means that this story will drag on even more.
Eventually, the NYT will break more damning evidence and Rush & Co. will break out their Long Knives and turn on McCain …
Me too.
It seems that part of this story is about her running around town bragging about how much influence she had with John. How will this play out for her future lobbying relationships? Might it make people wonder just how circumspect she can be?
Check out the huge golden arches in burning Belgrade!
Raven, I don’t think that comment was about age, rather it was about the sex games some/many Repugs play involving dressing up as babies, etc. …
Someone should ask Cindy if this is one of her “proudest” USA moments…
Sure. and babies wear depends?
Hi back!
Hey, please help demi 37, heh heh.
I could don the same outfit & send a pic, but, well, fabric’s not ….
And, clingy? uh- for everyone’s sanity, i’ll just pass.
mfffptz
I really don’t care that much, I just find it funny how we get all bent out of shape about it when someone we don’t like uses some stereotype and then “we” jump on it when “we” get the chance.
Praise the Lord!
TNR piece up now:
http://tnr.com/politics/story……2cd2b96a24
You know, whenever I think of Smith I think of Kristin Davis in Sex in the City. . .know what I mean?
I agree with you 100%.
The Repugs have been photographed wearing Depends because they can’t find diapers large enough to fit, for their sex games.
Ah the frustration of trying to convince people that Holy Joe is not a Democrat! Does the staff get it now? I mean after all those wingnut votes, hiring young Rethuglicans for the campaign . . . how thick can these people be?
marcy’s latest is a must read also. Sorry can’t make the linky thing work.
Hell hath no fury like a scorned political
hackaide. My guess is there’s some money that didn’t come his way that he thinks should have.Someone spots smoke. McCain hires a prominent DC fireman in Bennett. Don’t tell me there is not a fire.
money or Miss Vicky, that is.
Aha!!
“McCain has personally pleaded with NY TIMES editor Bill Keller [at left] not to publish the high-impact report involving key telecom legislation before the Senate Commerce Committee, newsroom insiders tell the DRUDGE REPORT,” Drudge continued. “The paper’s Jim Rutenberg has been leading the investigation and is described as beyond frustrated with McCain’s aggressive and angry efforts to stop any and all publication.”
“The drama involves a woman lobbyist who may have helped to write key telecom legislation,” he added. “The woman in question has retained counsel and strongly denies receiving any special treatment from McCain.”
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/….._0221.html
This story will just keep dribbling out. Questions are out there now. The circus is just starting.
McW: “I’d rather have a free lobbyist in front of me than a pre-frontal botox amie.”
Miss Vicki sure looks a lot like McC’s wife, indicating he has a strong preference for thin blonde types. And he does have a history of marital infidelity. . .
That said, I don’t care if he had sex with her. And because he isn’t as furiously anti-sex as some other R’s, (someone correct me if I’m wrong) hypocricy isn’t as glaring an issue.
It’s the close ties to lobbying that bother me. And the lying about said ties, as your post states.
Why does MSM always get the story so wrong?
Like Biodun said in Attaturk’s thread this morning…it’s a glorious day!!
707!
From TNR:
I
I’ll say.
Actually, no. Tried watching just a bit of that, and broke out in hives. Grew up too close to NYC & hated it.
I’m neither city-, nor sit-around-meowing inclined, except around you guys and the Lake.
But I did see “The Group” years ago. Does that date me much? heh.
Played a mean classical fiddle, and really did train hosses. Gawllee!
Stay sane, and I’ll try. Deal?
I agree with you and Jane S. If this were just about the sex, McC and his minders would be bragging about it (while desperately figuring out how to keep the current Mrs. McCain from spitting out a damaging quote). The sex angle fits the MSM horse race thing perfectly (especially those bored with Laura appearing comatose and Shrub preferring his bicycle). It will be side splitting to see who goes down the sex-is-what-this-is-about road, and which Fox Noise outlet hypocritically tells us to clean up our act.
But as EW would say, that’s just the shiny object. What legislative corruption, if any, are not supposed to see? Why are apparently GOP sources leaking this, and what do they hope to gain?
Didn’t the NYT hold the FISA story until after the 2004 elections, so as not to hurt Shrub’s chances? I remember last Summer, when the Sen “Wide Stance” Craig story broke the day after Abu Gonezales resigned, effectively eliminating Abu’s crimes from the headlines, or certainly bumped them down considerably. The Larry Craig stuff was known for over a month prior by the organization the first ran with it. Coincidence they decided to release it right after an incredibly damaging story happened for the Repubs?
Now this. They’ve had this in the can since last year. We’re talking about things that happened 8 years or more. Why now?
Lush Limpballz has always been an accurate barometer of what the real power people want. I’ve been suspicious of his actions in regards to McCan’t, along with many other wingnut talkers. Perhaps this is an inside job and last-ditch effort to get rid of St. John so they can bring back their first choice, Mittens Romnutz? Mittmo still has more delegates than Mike Applebee’s after all.
They feel they can’t win with McCan’t, so why not give it one more try? If they damage St. John in the process, no big whoop since he won’t win anyway. Dunno…just a theory, but I do know for a fact that stories like this are sometimes held for publication during opportune times.
Did John tiptoe through the tulips with Miss Vickie?
707!
Wow. So everyone has “retained counsel”.
Sorry. Meant to comment in the Holy Joe thread.
I sincerely think that while this affair paints McCain as a hypocrite, the idea that a politician who has made it all the way up into the realms of Presidential candidate has corruption in his closet does not seriously bother the American electorate as a whole. I think we expect it, and simply going back through the last, I don’t know, 150 years of Presidents and the scandals that have been uncovered, I think the populace is quite inured to it. What Americans, like people all over the world, demand, however, is that the President deliver for them.
Personally, I think it would be far wiser to simply hammer away at Mc Cain’s record and positions, most of which are broadly anathemic to the great majority of our populace. His temperment too is very scary; bring on the you tubes–who wants a loose cannon with a finger on the button? I think progressives should let this play out and rather hammer away at Iraq Forevah! Tax giveaways to the rich forevah! No health care forevah! Was against torture before he was for it and other well documented flip flops; don’t know much about economy, etc, etc, etc. “Like hope, only different” or “More War and No Jobs.”
What key telecom legislation is before the Senate Commerce Committee?
MCCAIN
Shit. I guess now they know the one with me hugging Bush was faked. I mean, really — I don’t ever even remember doing that one.
AIDE
No, no, John — come on — THIS one was photoshopped — you know, faked.
MCCAIN
THIS one was faked? So they never really got a shot?
That really struck me too. Something’s up.
tula has a new post upstairs about green technology
What Senator from Louisiana would that be, Mr. Vitter? The one who’s wife – before the story broke about his alleged sex with prostitutes while wearing diapers – declared that if he ever played around, he and Wayne Bobbitt would have something in common.
OT: Uh oh. Looks like the Repubes might have to “spread democracy” in Belgrade.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/n…..assy_i.php
American embassy gets overrun and ransacked by protesters. Not good.
But this is just soooooo much fun!
You can bet that I won’t be making a spectacle of myself trying to run for president when I’m 72 years old.
Hmmm telecoms, telecoms. Seems I’ve heard about them in some other news story. Which one?
Could it be FISA?
Umm, that would be my bet.
This article is connecting a lot of dots:
http://www.opednews.com/maxwri…..p?did=5270
Net Neutrality.
They are standing on a ledge of the Embassy and taking down the US flag.
V1@gr@ can make anybody shagadelic, baby!
Too bad we couldn’t get that eclipse next Friday (2/29).
McCain responds:
Oh, very funny. I should have waited and just run when I’m 100. I’d show everybody.
I heard it speculated somewhere that Rove was behind this, paving the way for Jeb. [adjusting tinfoil hat]
the huff has Lanny Davis making up the most bizarre excuses for being a fascist that I have ever seen. He defends the selling of a public TV station to a christian business that was selling it to a for profit station.
I have never felt comfortable with someone that starts a story about their involvement in a fascist takeover by claiming to be a “liberal democrat”
The story is an astounding bit of puke that might soon come from stray cocks own splew, except for the illegal involvement in other lobbying ventures that are being revealed today by the St. Just unreal that someone could justify selling America to someone that can turn a profit.
I’m not “touching” that with a ten foot pole. [emphasis added]
I’ve only read of that ’speculation’ in comments. I haven’t bothered to look into it. I doubt there is any truth to it. If so, I’ll tell you what, if you think the Democratic voter turn out has been record breaking so far, just think what would happen if a Bush were on the opposing ticket. The damn would come tumbling down.
This a good critique from pro-serbian perspective.
Nice Photoshop job! I agree that it’s not about the sex, but about the lobbying and hypocrisy. But, of course, sex sells. More attention should be paid to the hypocritical side of the story.
The Times story is falling apart, they should have waited for more reliable sourcing!
Where to you see that? All I see on teevee is Serbia.
Dammit, can’t you see I’m trying to ignore this scandal? Trying to keep my focus on McCain’s homicidal designs on the Muslim world?
Trying…to…focus….
OK, I give up, for now. So let me point out that McCain brings a whole new meaning to “taking on” the special interests.
I heard alittle Laura in the car this am (sure wish we still had Air America). She also had Bennett on. Apparently, we just don’t get it: The Times ran this story now, per a caller, to get the Mich. Obama story out of the news. Just a cover, really nothing. I would say it may have worked for Michelle; not so much for Cindy.
EmptyWheel connects the dots lucidly. Must Read.
http://emptywheel.firedoglake……elections/
admit it. there’s a certain appeal to getting him out of the campaign by any legitimate, legal means. gone is gone. eh?
that being said, i read u loud & clear & share your frustration…
similar thots occurred here.
if junior vetoes a bill on Feb. 29, does it only apply every fourth year?
Jane, McCain and Weaver have been attached at the hip since the last of never; save for a few periods where McCain dumped him out of the blue for some self serving reason and then later goes back to him soon as he needs him. If Weaver did it, it was reported and known to McCain.
And Jane is in fine fettle with “Stray Cock Express.”
I think even Rethugs will have a grudging admiration for that one, the way I hate myself for admiring “Sore Loserman,” or the LaRouchies’ old slogan, “Feed Jane Fonda to the Whales.”
;->
and strongly denies receiving any special treatment from McCain.
oooh, guess the Iseman didn’t cometh
It may be JUST a COINCIDENCE…but notice how the leaked personal attacks on Ambassador Wilson occurred WHILE BUSH WAS IN AFRICA???
Now it’s happened to McCain…the guy that was next to last on Bush’s “buddy list” to continue his (ahem) ‘legacy’.
oh, that is rich.
“I did NOT have sex with THAT woman!”
She was a Geisha…she just fluffed him! His favors to Paxson and the other companies she represented were simply “roses” for some “face-time” with her. IMO it doesn’t matter if this went to “home-run” level…he was giving legislative favors to an intimate acquaintance who benefitted from them. In return her clients padded his campaign coffers with fat wads of cash and a pretty lady.
And don’t tell me that it wasn’t improper! The FCC Chairman at the time told McCain by mail that he was interfering with the closed deliberations of Commissioners when he wrote them about acting on the Paxson application for a TV Station license. McCain asserts that he wasn’t taking sides…but it was pretty clear he was NOT siding with the citizens groups that wanted the status quo. And why would he pretty much only intervene in the cases that involved Ms. Iseman.
Corrupt jerk and hypocrite!
And that ignores all the personal “family” issues about whether he and Cathy have an “open-marriage” or what not!
Succinct Frame….
See http://emptywheel.firedoglake……elections/
Um, err, the Lunar Eclipe can only happen on a full moon….
I think that it should not be forgotten here just what McCain was doing for Paxson and Iseman. He was pressuring the FCC to change its fundamental policy on whether religious proslytization constituted “educational programming” which would allow them to buy up Public TV and non-commercial radio stations.
In other words, McCain and the Republicans were going to create a massive right-wing propaganda network on what once was the domain of PBS and University stations devoted to the free-flow of ideas, minority programming, and educational forums.
McCain, Paxson and the Sell Out of Non-Commercial Programming
Since the story ‘broke’ on the night of an eclipse, a new name for mccain, in honor of eclipse: Loony Ick-Lips
The caption reads “…This might be like Dukakis in the tank…”
ot – HONOLULU (AP) — Defense Secretary Robert Gates says the U.S. is prepared to share some missile defense-related technology with China following the successful shootdown of a dying satellite.
Looks like McCain doesn’t know the difference between would-he and woody
The question MCain asked himself about the Keating 5 in his memoir is the SAME question he failed to ask when it came to his relationship with Vicki Iseman:
“Why didn’t I fully grasp the unusual appearance of such a meeting?”
Why? Because you specialize in hypocrisy and bullshit.
One shouldn’t be surprised if in fact McCain’t philandered around with a pretty younger woman. After all, it is his M.O. He left his first wife who stuck with him for 5 years while he was a POW for a younger prettier trophy wife named Cindy. Looks like he was just being himself, looking for a new and improved wife.
Agree, great title.
OMG , I’m still laughing my tail off !