McCain has reacted badly to this story IMHO ....

[Blackhatjack]

Even if McCain knew this story was coming out in advance and had an opportunity to craft a response on the ready, this statement sets up a clear confrontation with the NYTimes and leaves little room for either to retreat.

If this story is supported in any meaningful manner, it will severely damage McCain.

What a primary season!

Shades of 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman' kind of denial.

[Hobarticus]

1. Well, you're definitely seeing how publicly peevish he can be...

...and that's never attractive.

[yourguide]

2. His denial is so absolute...

he is going to have HUGE problems if it can be proven.

[tekisui]

3. And he has Bill's same lawyer from that scandal.

Robert Bennett is defending Grandpa this morning.

[yourguide]

4. good info!

thanks.

[CorpGovActivist]

5. My friend...

... it's so good to have your thinking on this.

My friend.

My friend, my partner calls Mrs. McCain http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2901132&mesg_id=2901132">Cindy Cyborg.

My friend.

:toast:

[Blackhatjack]

8. LOL My friend..... You know the McCain people massaged the NYTimes BEFORE it went to press...

The NYTimes Editor must have held back even more damaging information that they chose not to publish.

Now that McCain has absolutely denied it and effectively called them liars, we sit and wait for round 2 of disclosures from the NYTimes to defend their reputations(Although I have had my doubts about the NYTimes in past because it appeared to be in the Bush Republicans' pockets).

THere is likely much more to come.

I would have said we have not had an opportunity to review the story, interview those who prepared it, and determine where the evidence came from to support the printing of this story which we expect to prove is inaccurate.

That would leave the 'door open' to McCain to prove some aspects as inaccurate later and then claim the whole article is inaccurate because a part of it is untrue. IT would make McCain sound reasoned and credible in not returning fire from the hip and the jury would be out with the public.

This is almost public relations malpractice IMHO.

[CorpGovActivist]

11. This story is a case study, no matter how it unfolds.

This is a must-follow for me.

[Blackhatjack]

13. With your background, what do you surmise they must have been thinking?

I did not hear the actual statement, was busy....

Was it as absolute in its denial as reported?

Why would an advisor allow such a statement to be reactively given like this?

[CorpGovActivist]

28. I watched it live and in real-time.

McCain is either telling the God's Truth, or he just blew it.

Because the editorial board of the NYT did not green light this story without an incredibly high degree of confidence in the veracity of the sources.

There is no way on God's Green Earth any reporter would affix his or her name to a byline like this, without something more than circumstantial evidence. Ditto the editors.

This is career-ending stuff if you botch it.

I don't care if the source was McCain's own mother. Absent independently-verifiable evidence, the editors would've told the reporters: "file it away in your notebook for the future, just in case," and that would've been the end of it. I've seen many cases in which the reporters and editors believed the source, but didn't have enough verifiable evidence to run with it.

If, on the other hand, a source had, - oh, say - cell phone video taken surreptitiously without the Senator's knowledge, within the strictures of being a party to a conversation (which, in many jurisdictions, including DC, is perfectly legal to do), then a copy of that in the NYT safe pretty much makes this story a lock.

McCain is notoriously techno-illiterate. I'm guessing it wouldn't be hard to get him to speak into the pretty camera phone, in a moment of buzzed candor.

- Dave

[Blackhatjack]

29. I agree with you. As any Editor knows, you never empty the tanks in the first story...

Legal will not sign off to run certain items, because you never know --the subject could confirm the allegations without the necessity of running those items in the first story.

However, every allegation in this case was probably double sourced, and given the absolute denial of McCain the NYTimes will likely decide to run more of the withheld material to protect its reputation they put on the line by running this page one, above the fold.

[Blackhatjack]

6. First rule - Absolutes should be avoided in denying all accusations and rumors...

The public will hold him accountable if his statement is proven to be untruthful in any way.

[demokatgurrl]

7. I disagree- I'm no McCain supporter

but I think that he was smart to just come right out and address it, rather than ignore it and pretend it will go away, or have surrogates speak for him.

I don't think this story will have legs. Remember, he's a republican. They get away with stuff.

[Blackhatjack]

10. In politics, appearances are always more important than truth....

He has now set himself up to be proven a liar.

People expect politicians to be less than truthful and forthcoming in massaging their answers to questions.

People pay attention to absolute statements later proven untruthful.

Very shaky ground to be staking out....

[OnionPatch]

19. Republicans don't suffer much from sex scandals.

For two reasons: One...the other Republicans simply don't believe anything they hear that makes their candidate look bad. Two....the Democrats couldn't care less what one does in their private life. Who's left to be outraged?

Only Dems suffer from sex scandals. At least this is what it seems to me.

[angie_love]

20. I find it interesting that some hillary supporters that are bashing Obama

relentlessly on Rezco are now defending McCain. VERY INTERESTING.

[TwilightGardener]

26. Hillary supporters want McCain to defeat Obama, so that Hillary can have another chance

in 2012. They'll hopefully get weeded out, or leave voluntarily, if/when Obama gets the nom.

[TwilightGardener]

9. He's certainly set himself up for a challenge--I don't think the story stops here.

If it was totally fabricated, he would threaten to sue the NYT, I would think. The other shoe will have to drop. I, for one, am glad to see Repubs rally around him, because if they keep him as their nominee, it's all the better for us when more shit comes out later.

[Blackhatjack]

12. Wouldn't you like to be a fly on the wall at Campaign Huckabee today? LOL

Do you think the Huckabee people knew this would come out eventually, and that is why Huckleberry made that statement about 'anything can happen' between now the Repub convention?

Wouldn't that be a hoot that Huckabee waltzes in the back door at the Convention?

[TwilightGardener]

15. Huckabee has no chance. The Repubs don't want him as their standardbearer--

he has absolutely no power in the GOP, aside from attracting evangelicals. If it goes to the convention, they'll still either go with McCain or Romney.

[JohnnyLib2]

14. I think we should highlight ethics and hypocrisy (even though sex is more fun.)

I was stunned to see Bill Bennett show up on TV last night. Historically, that signals BIG, BAD legal jeopardy, which he is the top dog on defending.

[karynnj]

16. Unless there is SOLID proof, he responded as well as possible

He denied both the favors charge and the relationship very calmly, yet emotionally. To me this is more convincing that the anger and finger pointing of some. He spoke of his record and honor. Now, his record is nowhere as strong as he says it is - there was Keating 5 and he skirted his own McCain/Feingold rules with his PAC. I do think people who are favorably disposed to McCain will not believe this until they get some facts.

That this is the NYT does make it more believable than if it were a less mainstream source. Calson and Scarborough seem to be saying that John Weaver is the source. This may rest on his credibility. Remember that the NYT was one of the first to cover Whitewater. Given that the more important and damaging story may be the favors given, if they were, I wish they would have not made the relationship accusation. It is less provable (if provable at all) and discrediting it could discredit the stronger allegations.

Listening to Tweety, he is speaking of how McCain is such a straightshooter etc. Buchanan is already saying if not true, Keller should be fired. This sounds like the beginning of the CBS/Rather story. I worry that the unprovable affair is this year's "faked documents".

[Hawaii Hiker]

17. Sex scandals = Republicans (see David Vitter, Mark Foley, Larry Craig, etc.)

but no doubt, Republicans will do what they do best, sit & bitch about the New York Times....

I bet they didn't complain when (which newspaper was it?) that broke the Lewinsky/Clinton scandal in 1998...

Think how much the NYT must have disliked the other Republican candiates as they endorsed McCain (for the Republican primary) back before super Tuesday, Feb 5th. :popcorn: :rofl:

[Yurem2008]

18. That is why Huckabee refuses to go away

he must have suspected this...he said anything can change the direction of a campaign...

[loveangelc]

21. Yeah, all hell is breaking lose in the NY Times boards right now.

There are going to be pressured to come up with SOMETHING and report this. The pressure is on for the NY Times to get those unnamed sources named.

[Blackhatjack]

22. You can bet this story was heavily editted and vetted by legal before going to press...

.... there has to be lots more for them to have run in above the fold page 1.

[loveangelc]

24. yeah, and now they are going to have to put everything they know out now.

[tulsakatz]

23. I think there is more to this story.........

...in other words, there is more to it than what we know now. And I'm sure it will develop as the election progresses.

It was noted yesterday that the NY Times usually does not do this kind of attacks on a person's character unless there is good reason for it. Right now, we still don't have enough evidence to know what really happened.

But ultimately, it will point to McCain as another symbol of DC corruption. Just the appearance of something improper (as this clearly is) will contrast the difference between McCain and Obama. And that's an argument Obama can win easily...

[Blackhatjack]

25. An absolute denial by the 'Straight Talker' is potentially kyptonite to McCain..

[Blackhatjack]

27. Where is Dr. Phil's Body Language Expert? Was McCain LYING when he issued his denials?

He sure looked less than truthful and forthcoming in his statement.