A Hole in McCain’s Defense?

Asked at one point if Paxson's lobbyist (Abrams never mentions Iseman's name) had accompanied him on any of the trips he took aboard the Paxson corporate jet, McCain responded, "I do not recall."

This is the exact question by Floyd Abrams during his disposition for the lawsuit. Mitch McConnell was directing the lawsuit on behalf of the Republican Party. He knew already that McCain made this trip with Vicki Iseman. Abrams is a great attorney who doesn't just do fishing expeditions. McConnell was trying to force McCain to soften his stance on McCain-Feingold by showing him he knew of the deals he had done for Paxson on behalf of Vicki Iseman for whatever favors "popped up". I would suggest that the technical language that was included in the letter to the FCC by McCain came directly from the papers left by Iseman with Mark Buseman. Buseman admitted to receiving the paperwork. Where is this paperwork? I would suggest that the technical language is almost directly from her paperwork.
If you include technical information in a letter to the head of the FCC how can it be that it wasn't used to influence the decision of the committee. That's what technical information is all about. It either proves or disproves your point in the letter. If nothing else, this shows that Vicki got into McCain's head and probably all around it.

The Times showed no quarter to Clinton or Giuliani, so why all the uproar over this story? The WaPo version sets the journalistic standard for this soon-to-be-forgotten episode--except that McCain has now has two different accounts to square. That's where he is in line with Bill, Ronnie, Dick and the rest of 'em.

I think you don't call the story "news", it is gossip. I am tired by these stories.... Will switch to vote for McCain - not a perfect man but still considered hornorable.

It is a major crime that people like you have a voice in this Country. The fact that two grown people might have had some kind of contact in pass years is the smallest of problem this Country has.
And if indeed John McCain is elected President, how in the Hell is this going to make a difference.
For all of you Holly Rollies, just look into your families, and see what is there. The fact that YOU might have forgiven them does not take away the fact that they are drunks, dope addict, child molester, by sexual, chooses not to believe in God any more, does not make these people, ???Bad People???.

Just maybe you need to stay at home and work on your worry beads.

Leave McCain alone!
.

The truth of the matter is that the Senator lied and we all know that the intent of his letters was to put pressure on the agency to act in favor of the company who he wrote the letters for. The Senator was not merely trying to get the commission to act he was attempting to use his position to affect the outcome in a way that was favorable to his lobbyist girlfriend. Politics is a dirty scuzball business, that's why the rich are the ones involved in it!

Who cares?? - Let's talk issues. No one can really say what Obama stands for. His speeches of " Hope and Change" are lovely, but they mean nothing. Let us not forget Elliot Spitzer and his promise of "Change". That did not go too well did it. We need the media to stop selecting our candidates and let the American people decide on their own. It is apparent you have an agenda. This is one of the most far left newspapers and we cannot trust anything you say.

As a Democrat, I usually take pleasure in seeing the Republicans attack each other. However, McCain is a good man. He has served his country loyally and respectively. To stir the pot in this manner is truely dispicable. I am saddened that this is what our representatives in the nation's capital, as well as our media, has chosen to cover and latch onto.

Two months ago no one cared about Mr. Mccain's priovate life, now suddenly they are looking for anything that can be against him, why? are the democrats and the liberal media afraid of him? I believe that's the reason

I see nothing wrong with the NYT article. It was not about sex but about a candidate that runs on honesty and integrity against special interest and lobbyists. When something comes out showing a different side of course they should print it. But it sure looks like small potatos. It wont hurt McCain, and I think this article actually helps him. It looks like he even felt he did nothing wrong but that the appearances matter and he made a mistake.. Now most of the posts here are useless but overall it was nice when the story came out that both sides were concerned about mudslinging. Its nice to know the vast majority of Americans want someone with honesty and integrity in the white house. McCain always put America first and I respected the man, but now that he has flipped and backs the Bush failed economic policy, it looks like he puts the republican party ahead of America. Overall he is a good guy but I wont vote for him. If he does become President he may be to the press like Reagan, the teflon man because nothing would stick. But he had an Attorney General Meese that was the velcro man and was blamed for everything.

As a life long republican,, I see a pattern. He cheated on his first wife who was disabled and this kind of dishonesty can cros into every aspect of his life. I hope there is another option soonl. capenewfs

"I don't recall..." where was Newsqweak when Hillary said this a few hundred times in her depositions? oh, I forgot, Issikof was in training for his faux koran in toilet story that caused muslims to riot & kill all over the world.

How is that a hole in McCain's defense relative to his having a sexual affair with the woman as inferred in the NY Times. This is merely more left wing press defending it's own.

How did someone whose demerits at Annapolis are legendary (and that's not a bad thing) get such a squeaky reputation? This is hardly high crimes and misdemeanors, but a considered look at the narrative indicates that something was amiss.

Nuqueen1,

There is nothing remotely factual about the google references you have posted. They are not journalistic in nature and are mere blogs.

Drop this story already. You've proven McCain's story that he did not help the lobbyist when he stated, and you quoted in your story,
McCain: "That he had applied to purchase this station and that he wanted to purchase it. And that there had been a numerous year delay with the FCC reaching a decision. And he wanted their approval very bad for purposes of his business. I said, 'I would be glad to write a letter asking them to act, but I will not write a letter, I cannot write a letter asking them to approve or deny, because then that would be an interference in their activities. I think everybody is entitled to a decision. But I can't ask for a favorable disposition for you'."

Clearly shows no favorism.