Female Lobbyist alleged by Times to have had affair with John McCain sues for libel
At this time last year and throughout the primaries, as I threw my support behind pretty much anybody and everybody but Arizona Sen. John McCain, I warned that the GOP’s own darling of the liberal media would be turned upon by his fair-weather friends in newsrooms and on editorial boards across America just as soon as he appeared to secure the GOP nomination with their help.
I was right.
As soon as it became clear that Mitt Romney was no longer a factor, that Mike Huckabee finally decided to bow out, and that McCain therefore all but had the GOP nomination locked up, the very same mainstream press which had up until that point been among McCain’s strongest supporters, the very same mainstream press which, in editorial after editorial, derided those evil, flat-earth, Neanderthal conservative right-wing nut-jobs shouting to the rafters about McCain’s liberal record to anyone who would listen, turned on him in a split second, running a front-page article in which the paper, without ANY named sources, insinuated among other things that McCain had been having an extramarital affair with a Washington lobbyist and lawyer named Vicki Iseman. From a piece posted here at America’s Right in late February:
In one swift stroke of the pen–in the first 250 words, no less!–The New York Times insinuated marital infidelity, brought up the Keating Five scandal, and referred to the Arizona senator and inevitable GOP nominee as “a man of honor chastened by a brush with shame.”
It’s going to be a long year, and 2012 never seemed as far off as it does now.
A little more than three weeks after endorsing him for the Republican party nomination, The New York Times has given a nearly perfect Cliff’s Notes version of McCain’s hand in the savings and loan debacle and painted a deleterious picture of the senator and a female lobbyist, the two kept apart like a pair of star-crossed lovers by panicking campaign and political advisers, all with little to no evidence and nothing more than off-the-record anonymous sourcing (so much for Journalism 101). Yet the 180-degree turn is far from surprising — I even figured that the Keating Five scandal would be at the top of the list, considering its simple-but-damning nature and its stark contrast to McCain’s self-portrayal as a champion of ethical politics. Admittedly, I had no idea whatsoever about the special lady friend.
More and more with each passing day, I get the feeling that the next President of the United States of America will be named Barack Hussein Obama. While McCain may have been the decaying satellite to the Times’ editorial missile, the Old Grey Lady still managed to work the Illinois senator’s name into the piece, referring to Obama as “a Democratic contender who has made lobbying and ethics rules a centerpiece of his own pitch to voters.” (Hillary wasn’t mentioned.)
In the weeks leading up to Super Tuesday, we saw all too well the ability of the mainstream media to shape even the votes of conservatives and republicans, as evidenced by the crowning of McCain at Mitt Romney’s expense. In this celebrity-obsessed America, McCain already has an uphill climb ahead of him should he wish to even contend with Obama, who has out-fundraised him by more than three to one — with the mainstream media feeding off of Obama and Obama in turn feeding off of the mainstream media, the cycle is going to be nearly impossible to break.
Now, having waited until after the election, Iseman has turned the tables on The New York Times, filing a defamation and libel action in the United States District Court in Richmond, VA. In the suit, in which she seeks $27 million in damages, Iseman claims that the Times defamed her in that front page story, providing its readership with misrepresentations that she engaged in an extramarital affair with McCain.
Iseman, in the lawsuit, maintains that her friendship with the senator was not of the romantic nature insinuated by the Times, but rather was “entirely professional, ethical, and appropriate.” The piece, she alleges, has severely damaged her reputation.
While yellow journalism was certainly nothing new for the folks at The New York Times, this to me was the venerable paper’s first foray into the unacceptably egregious bias which permeated its coverage of the 2008 election and contributed heavily to the election of Barack Obama. The mainstream press has been nothing short of disgusting in this latest electoral go-round, and I must say that, with a country teetering on the edge of collapse in the face of economic and cultural and foreign policy crises, the Times’ complicity in the election of a completely unqualified socialist to the highest office in the land should be worth well in excess of $27 million.