#Viki iseman professional
“Thousands of e-mail messages to The New York Times and exponentially more e-mail messages, blogs, and Internet postings interpreted the article as implying the existence of an illicit romance and unethical professional relationship between Ms.
Even Times Public Editor Clark Hoyt wrote a piece describing readers’ anger over the article.Īll this media attention made the defamatory remarks even worse, Iseman alleged in her complaint. The article itself became big news when it ran – about 2,400 people commented on The Times’ Web site and media pundits from all political viewpoints made comments about the newspaper’s decision to run the story. Though the article never directly stated that there had been an affair, it quoted anonymous former McCain staff members who said they were concerned about the relationship between Iseman and McCain. During the time in question, Iseman had clients before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, which was headed by McCain. The article led with reported allegations that McCain and Iseman had been involved nearly a decade ago. The 3,000 word article, titled "For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Own Risk," focused on McCain’s rise out of various ethical dilemmas, such as the “Keating Five” scandal in the late 1980s. As one of her attorneys, Iseman recruited renowned First Amendment scholar and dean of the Washington & Lee law school Rodney Smolla, who usually represents the media side in such cases. In a lawsuit filed in federal district court in Virginia this week, the lobbyist sued the Times for defamation over a February article that she said insinuated McCain and Iseman were romantically involved. John McCain and Washington lobbyist Vicki Iseman has landed the paper in a $27 million dollar legal battle, The Times reported. That's the favor.A New York Times story about a rumored affair between Sen. Which lobbyist would you hire, after all, the one sitting in his office somewhere promising to make some phone calls, or the one sitting on a major party nominee's campaign bus? It's the guy on the bus.
Meanwhile, on the specific point that "If this is the record of a candidate with lobbyists on his campaign bus, then every candidate should have lobbyists on the bus" it's worth saying that putting the lobbyists on the bus is the favor.
#Viki iseman free
At times McCain has "failed and fallen short" in his quest to make American politics utterly free of the special interests, but he's never once actually done anything for special interests. But Brooks' column, like an angry McCain denial, doesn't have so much as a to-be-sure graf. Of course McCain's more tainted than his reputation suggests and of course his opponent is going to try to point that out. McCain's pre-existing reputation in this regard was as a kind of George Washington meets Paul Bunyan figure. You see something similar in today's David Brooks column where Brooks not only wants to defend the proposition that McCain is less lobbyist-tained than your average pol, but actually heap scorn on the notion that a rival campaign might suggest that "He’s more tainted than his reputation suggests." This is nutty. As I've said before, the most noteworthy thing about the recent Vicki Iseman story was the cataclysmically overbroad nature of John McCain's denials, which got him into saying not only that he'd never done a favor for a company he clearly had done a favor for, but that he'd never done a favor for any lobbyist at all.
0 kommentar(er)
