Is the New York Times being set up a la CBS and the TANG story?

[CTyankee]

That was one of my first thoughts when I saw GMA and my NYT this morning.

AFter all, CBS was a media heavy hitter and it seemed like they had a lot more evidence than has surfaced with the McCain story. The the rug was pulled out from under it and Dan Rather and Mary Mapes were sent off in shame.

Could this be a Rovian-type set up to throw the NYT off its pedestal, result in the firing of the story's writers and discredit the paper for the rest of the campaign?

As much as I would like to believe the story, I am very afraid of another rerun of Gotcha!

[mak3cats]

1. That's the first thing I thought as well...

...guess it's just our suspicious natures.

[NWHarkness]

2. I don't think so

The story is very carefully parsed. They make no direct assertions of wrongdoing.

[chelsea0011]

3. Right. The NYT doesn't say McCain was having sex. All it says is

that his aides were worried he was having sex and wanted to distance her from him. In other words....he was having sex with her.

[MADem]

6. Tweety is on tv spitting and saying "SEK-SHUAL relations????"

He's HOPING for it...!

[Medusa]

11. But that's the problem. It's just too thin to be soup.

I sort of felt like I was reading a high class version of the National Enquirer between their anonymous sources, the implication, but not open accusation of an affair, and again, no firm proof that he had voted on anything on behalf of her clients. It was just a really strange article from beginning to end as I read it. I was excited when I first heard about it but then I read it and read it again and there's just not a whole lot of there, there. Very strange.

[Cass]

4. Wouldn't surprise me.

From what I've heard so far, the republicans are making this seem like a NYT-created hit piece on McCain, as if the NYT made it up out of whole cloth. Dismissing it as nothing more than a liberal media smear. I hope the NYT has plenty of facts and impeccable sources behind them if the republicans attempt to go after them ala CBS/Rather.

[MADem]

5. I think they are WILLING PARTICIPANTS. They'll "take the hit" when they find out they are wrong

They'll "reevaluate their reporting methods" and say, "Awwww, we're sorry, we didn't MEAN to make a mistake. We REEEEEEALLY do try, sometimes we make HONEST mistakes!!!"

And McCain will gain cred as the guy who was SMEARED!!!! VICTIMIZED!!!!!! By the 'librul' New York TIMES!!

That's ALREADY "The Spin." The guy walked off the stage fifteen minutes ago, and that pig Scarborough is already on it, that other pig Bill Bennett is on it, and that scold Buchanan has done it, too.

Remember the LAST TIME we heard that the NYT "held" a story? It had to do with WIRETAPPING, and if they hadn't held it, Kerry would probably have become President.

Remember another time they gave us "fishy" info? SADDAM HAS WMDs!!!! It's TRUE--Judy Miller told us so!

The NYT is the "Propaganda Arm" of Record.

And I am NOT convinced that THEY aren't complicit.

[Virginia Dare]

7. If this is a hit piece it's coming from the right wing anyway..

McCain pissed a lot of people off in D.C., especially in the lobbying world. He's made some powerful enemies. I guess the chickens have come home to roost.

[MADem]

8. Turn on your tee vee. This is playing out like a choreographed little dance.

They're spending as much time speculating "how much money he could get" if he were a private citizen enduring this "libel."

They're casting aspersions on the "anonymous sources."

Unless they find a smoking gun, this will make the right like him BETTER. It's a badge of honor to be 'victimized' by the 'left wing' (even though NYT is anything BUT left-wing).

[Virginia Dare]

9. Didn't this report originally start with Drudge?

it was my understanding that the NYT was sitting on it until Drudge got wind of it.

I'm not understanding what the Democrats would have to gain from getting this story out now. If it's coming from them, why not wait until late Summer to break it?

[MADem]

10. Drudge stole it from National Review's 'in box' I believe.

Same as he stole the "Monica" story from Newsweek's Isikoff's out-box...

This IS from the GOP. Start with John Weaver, and cast your net from there...

[CTyankee]

12. But what do they GAIN at this point? It would make sense to me if they did it

at the beginning of the primaries, but this is too late in the game, too many voters have had their say...

Unless the pukes figure they'll lose the election anyway and effectively gets rid of McCain. :shrug:

[MADem]

14. Turn on the tee vee--McCain is a HERO, the NYT is a bunch of "librul meanie PIGS!"

That WEAVER guy just called in to MSNBC and said he is NOT the source of the sex allegations, and that everytime the NYT called him, he called McCain and told him what they asked, and what he said.

Huckabee says he has "always known McCain to be a man of the HIGHEST integrity."

[ReformedChris]

13. NYT has been off the pedestal for a while, they look foolish sitting on the story so long..

Then magically publishing it when another news organization was going to report on it/point out the reasons why the Times held the story. I know that journalism takes time, reasearch, and confirming sources, but you open yourself up to criticism when you put out a story only when threatened by a rivals actions.

BTW: it was absolutely the best thing to publish this and I am all for aggressive reporting by papers (right or wrong). McCain is a shadowy character IMHO and more layers will be peeled off this rotten onion!