John McCain lobbyist controversy, February 2008

On February 21, 2008, in the midst of John McCain's campaign in the 2008 Republican presidential primaries, both "The New York Times" and the "Washington Post" published articles detailing rumors of an improper relationship between John McCain and lobbyist Vicki Iseman.cite news | author=Jim Rutenberg, Marilyn W. Thompson, David D. Kirkpatrick, Stephen Labaton | url=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?_r=1&bl&ex=1203656400&en=d0734db651c10475&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin | title=For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk | publisher="The New York Times" | date=February 21, 2008]

According to the "New York Times" story, McCain, who was a member of the Senate Commerce Committee during the period when Iseman was lobbying the committee, developed a close personal relationship with Iseman. The "New York Times" came under intense criticism for the article because of its use of anonymous sources and its timing.

Concerns about favoritism from McCain

McCain wrote letters in 1998 and 1999 to the Federal Communications Commission (the FCC) encouraging it to uphold marketing agreements allowing a television company to control two stations in the same city, a position which Iseman had been advocating on behalf of her client Glencairn Ltd. (now Cunningham Broadcasting). McCain also introduced a bill to create tax incentives for minority ownership of stations, which several businesses Iseman represented were seeking.

In February 1999, McCain and Iseman attended a small fund-raising dinner with several clients at a Miami-area home of a cruise-line executive, then flew back to Washington along with a campaign aide on the corporate jet of Paxson Communications (now ION Media Networks), one of her clients. Later in 1999, Iseman requested McCain to write to the FCC urging it to reach a speedy decision in a case involving Paxson Communications. Iseman, according to an email sent to The Times, provided McCain's staff with the information to write the letter. McCain's two letters to the FCC resulted in William Kennard, the FCC chairman, issuing a rare public rebuke to McCain for his interference in FCC deliberations.

McCain also frequently denied requests from Iseman and the companies she represented, including attempts in 2006 to break up cable packages, something opposed by companies she represented. His proposals for satellite distribution of local television stations also failed to match the desires of Iseman's clients.

Iseman said she never received special treatment from McCain's office, and McCain said he never demonstrated favoritism to Iseman or her clients. During a phone call to Bill Keller, executive editor of the "New York Times", he said, "I have never betrayed the public trust by doing anything like that."

Iseman's clients contributed tens of thousands of dollars to McCain's campaigns.

Concerns about romantic relationship with McCain

According to the "Times" story, Iseman began visiting McCain's offices and campaign events so frequently in 2000 that his aides were "convinced the relationship had become romantic". One staff member asked, "Why is she always around?" Staff aides also worried that McCain's relationship with Iseman would receive negative media attention due to the letters McCain wrote to government regulators on her behalf, especially since McCain's campaign stressed his probity and included proposals for more stringent regulation of lobbying in the United States. The "Times" story never explicitly alleged that an affair took place and Daniel Schnur, McCain's 2000 communication director with no current connection to the campaign, called the "Times" account "highly implausible".

McCain's aides intervene to "save McCain from himself"

In a campaign to "save McCain from himself", his aides began restricting Iseman's access to McCain during the course of the 2000 presidential primary. According to a story in the "Washington Post" published the same day as the "New York Times" story, Weaver met with Iseman at Union Station (Washington, D.C.) to tell Iseman not to see McCain anymore. [cite news | author=Jeffrey H. Birnbaum and Michael D Shear | url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/20/AR2008022002898_pf.html | title=McCain's Ties To Lobbyist Worried Aides | publisher="Washington Post" | date=February 21, 2008] Weaver, who arranged the meeting after a discussion among campaign leaders, said Iseman and he discussed "her conduct and what she allegedly had told people, which made its way back to us." Weaver heard that she was saying "she had strong ties to the Commerce Committee and his staff" and told her this was wrong and for it to stop. [cite web
date= 2008-02-21
last= Cillizza
first= Chris
authorlink= The Fix (blog)
url= http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/02/john_weaver_speaks.html?hpid=topnews
title= John Weaver Speaks
publisher= The Washington Post
accessdate=2008-02-21] No discussion of a romantic involvement occurred because, according to Weaver, "there was no reason to".cite web
date= 2008-02-22
last= Bash
first= Dana
authorlink= Dana Bash
coauthors= Bronstein, Scott
url= http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/22/mccain.lobbyist/
title= Ex-McCain aide: New York Times report 'highly implausible'
publisher= CNN
accessdate=2008-02-22] Iseman confirmed she met with Weaver, but disputed his account of the conversation.

A campaign adviser was instructed to keep Iseman away from McCain at public events, and plans were made to limit her access to his offices. Campaign associates also confronted McCain directly about the risks he was taking with campaign and career. McCain allegedly admitted he was behaving inappropriately and promised to distance himself from Iseman. Concerns about the relationship eventually receded as the campaign continued.

Response from McCain's campaign

On February 20, the night before the article appeared in the printed newspaper, but just after the story was available online, the McCain presidential campaign issued the following statement: "It is a shame that "The New York Times" has lowered its standards to engage in a hit-and-run smear campaign. John McCain has a 24-year record of serving our country with honor and integrity. He has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists, and he will not allow a smear campaign to distract from the issues at stake in this election. Americans are sick and tired of this kind of gutter politics, and there is nothing in this story to suggest that John McCain has ever violated the principles that have guided his career.” A McCain campaign adviser added that the report “reads like a tabloid gossip sheet”.

Robert S. Bennett, whom McCain had hired to represent him in this matter, defended McCain's character. Bennett, a registered Democrat, was the special investigator during the Keating Five scandal that "The Times" revisited in the article. Bennett, who was coincidentally on Fox News' "Hannity and Colmes" program to promote his autobiography shortly after the paper published the story on their website, said that he fully investigated McCain back then and suggested to the Senate Ethics Committee to not pursue charges against McCain.

"And if there is one thing I am absolutely confident of, it is John McCain is an honest and honest man. I recommended to the Senate Ethics Committee that he be cut out of the case, that there was no evidence against him, and I think for the New York Times to dig this up just shows that Senator McCain's public statement about this is correct. It's a smear job. I'm sorry. " [cite web | title = Bob Bennett Reacts to New York Times Story on John McCain | url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331651,00.html| accessdate = 2008-02-25 | date = February 21, 2008 |publisher = Fox News Channell |author = Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes ]

McCain spoke in a press conference the following day saying, "I'm very disappointed in the article. It's not true." He stated he never showed favoritism for her clients: "At no time have I ever done anything that would betray the public trust." He went on to characterize Iseman as a friend but no closer than other lobbyists. Both he and his wife strenuously denied any impropriety. He said he wasn't aware of the meeting Weaver had with Iseman nor of any concerns among his staff about his association.cite web
date= 2008-02-21
last= Quaid
first= Libby
url= http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/21/AR2008022100343.html?hpid=topnews
title= McCain Says Report Is "Not True"
publisher= The Washington Post
accessdate=2008-02-21]

Ethics of publication questioned

"The Times"' decision to publish the article while relying almost entirely on anonymous sources has raised ethical questions relating to the story's veracity and importance.

George Stephanopolous, an "ABC News" correspondent, said that — while damaging — as long as the sources remain anonymous this story will not throw the campaign off course. He quoted McCain aides that they will go after "The New York Times" "with extreme aggression — if the newspaper was going to act like a partisan they were going to treat them as a partisan." [cite web
date= 2008-02-21
last= Stephanopolous
first= George
authorlink= George Stephanopolous
url= http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4322573
title= McCain Charges: Scandal or Smear
publisher= ABC News
accessdate=2008-02-21] On the same day, fellow Senator Joe Lieberman, who has endorsed McCain for the presidency, said, "The story I think is outrageously unfair to him. There's no 'there' there." [cite web
date= 2008-02-18
last= Singer
first= Stephen
url= http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/articles/2008/02/21/lieberman_defends_mccain_from_suggestion_of_improper_relationship/
title= Lieberman defends McCain from suggestion of improper relationship
publisher= Associated press
accessdate=2008-02-21] "U.S. News & World Report" publisher Mort Zuckerman said, “I don’t think that there is enough acknowledged sourcing for this story." Commentator Bill O'Reilly raised the question about why the paper had endorsed McCain on January 25, 2008 for the Republican nomination if they had information that alleged an inappropriate relationship. [ cite web
url = http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331867,00.html
title = Did The New York Times Smear John McCain?
date = February 22, 2008
author = Bill O'Reilly
publisher = Fox News Channel ]

Academics and legal journals offered both support and criticism of the story. The editor of the American Journalism Review said while the article wasn't entirely convincing it did put to question McCain's reputation as a reformer. [cite web
year= 2008
month= February/March
last= Rieder
first= Rem
url= http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4482
title= The Senator and the Lobbyist
publisher= American Journalism Review
accessdate=2008-02-24] The editor of the Columbia Journalism Review said the circumstances outlined in the story were sufficient to justify its publication.cite web
date= 2008-02-22
last= Rainey
first= James
pages= page 2
url= http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-media22feb22,1,3173594.story?page=1&cset=true&ctrack=1
title= McCain story proves incendiary among journalists, conservatives
publisher= Los Angeles Times
accessdate=2008-02-24] However, a dean at the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism disagreed, saying, " [If] you haven't covered all your bases or been transparent about where you got the information . . . then the criticism takes over and the story loses its significance." Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center faulted the paper for focusing on the purported affair.

Several conservative voices, who had recently criticized McCain, came to his defense. Brent Bozell of the watchdog Media Research Center said, “The "New York Times" is giving the "National Enquirer" a bad name”. cite web
date= 2008-02-21
pages=
url= http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/02/21/fit-to-print-new-york-times-in-crosshairs-for-report-on-mccain-and-female-lobbyist/
title= Fit to Print? New York Times in Crosshairs for Report on McCain and Female Lobbyist
publisher= Fox News
accessdate=2008-02-21] He said the story was done hastily because it feared the embarrassment of an imminent "New Republic" article reporting on internal dissension about the story. [cite web
date= 2008-02-21
last= Kessler
first= Glen
url= http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/21/mccain_camp_takes_on_the_new_y.html
title= McCain Camp Takes On the New York Times
publisher= The Washington Post
accessdate=2008-02-21] [cite web
date= 2008-02-21
last= Sherman
first= Gabriel
url= http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=8b7675e4-36de-43f5-afdd-2a2cd2b96a24
title= The Long Run-Up
publisher= The New Republic
accessdate=2008-02-21] Talk show host Rush Limbaugh said, "This is what you get when you walk across the aisle and try to make these people your friends. I'm not surprised in the least that the NYT would try to take out John McCain." [cite web
date= 2008-02-21
last= Szep
first= Jason
url= http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSN1931768920080221
title= McCain could gain from report on lobbyist link
publisher= Reuters
accessdate=2008-02-22] Jay Ambrose, an opinion columnist for the "Boston Herald", summarized their sentiment by writing, "One of the first rules of decent, principles-abiding journalism is that you don’t print rumors. That is nevertheless what The New York Times [NYT] just did in a smear job on John McCain...." [cite web
date= 2008-02-22
last= Ambrose
first= Jay
url= http://news.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view.bg?articleid=1075170&srvc=home&position=rated
title= All the rumors unfit to print
publisher= "Boston Herald"
accessdate=2008-02-22] "San Francisco Chronicle" columnist Debra Saunders chimed in with, "The paper set out to shine a spotlight on McCain's ethics, but it ended up turning a harsh light on its own ethical lapses." [cite web
date= 2008-02-22
last= Saunders
first= Debra
authorlink= Debra Saunders
url= http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/22/EDJUV6KCB.DTL
title= New York Times sullies itself with McCain story
publisher= "San Francisco Chronicle"
accessdate=2008-02-22]

Some liberal commentators and critics of the Republican Party have also questioned the purpose of the story. Jonathan Alter of "Newsweek" said the article lacked physical evidence, noting, " [L] et‘s face it, people are more interested in sex than they are in telecommunications lobbying activity." [cite web
date= 2008-02-20
last= Alter
first= Jonathan
authorlink= Jonathan Alter
url= http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23275773/
title= 'Countdown with Keith Olbermann' for Feb. 20
publisher= MSNBC
accessdate=2008-02-24] John Dean argued that, if false, the article is both unfair and damaging, suggesting that legal recourse was possible. [cite web
date= 2008-02-22
last= Dean
first= John
authorlink= John Dean
url= http://writ.news.findlaw.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=/dean/20080222.html
title= The New York Times Story Linking John McCain with Lobbyist Vicki Iseman: Should It Have Been Published?
publisher= FindLaw
accessdate=2008-02-24] Journalist Hanna Rosin, writing in Slate, said the "Times" rushed the story to publication and left key questions unanswered, writing "Either write the cheating story or don't. As it is, it just looks like a lame story where they quote a bunch of anonymous old campaign sources but don't have any actual evidence of the affair themselves. And they make it much easier for McCain to just stomp on the story." [cite web
date= 2008-02-20
last= Rosin
first= Hanna
authorlink= Hanna Rosin
url= http://slate.com/blogs/blogs/xxfactor/archive/2008/02/20/its-about-vicki-stupid.aspx
title= It's About Vicki, Stupid
publisher= Slate
accessdate=2008-02-25] Also writing for Slate, Michael Kinsley criticized the "Times" for semantic acrobatics in "defending itself with a preposterous assertion that it wasn't trying to imply what it obviously was trying to imply". [cite web
date= 2008-02-25
last= Kinsley
first= Michael
authorlink= Michael Kinsley
url= http://www.slate.com/id/2185134/
title= McCain and the Times: the Real Questions - My apparent concern about the appearance of the possibility of the appearance of a possible affair.
publisher= Slate
accessdate=2008-07-21]

In defense of the article, reporters for "Politico" wondered that if the story was about McCain's possible 2008 presidential opponent, Senator Barack Obama, whether conservatives may have been more curious about the details of the story which they felt had substance, [cite web
date= 2008-02-24
last= Allen
first= Mike
coauthors= VandeHei, Jim
url= http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8649.html
title= Why the right reluctantly defended McCain
publisher= Politico
accessdate=2008-02-25] a sentiment echoed by "The New Republic". [cite web
date= 2008-02-24
last= Sheiber
first= Norm
url= http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_stump/archive/2008/02/24/why-are-conservatives-so-delusional-about-the-mccain-story.aspx
title= Why Are Conservatives So Delusional About the McCain Story?
publisher= The New Republic
accessdate=2008-02-25] Times editor Bill Keller defended the story saying the facts were well vetted and the timing was a result of waiting until the story was ready. Other Times editors defended the use of anonymous sources saying they knew their identities and that they provided thorough and consistent stories. [cite web
date= 2008-02-21
last= Abramson
first= Jill
authorlink= Jill Abramson
coauthors= et al.
pages= page 2
url= http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/business/media/21askthenewsroom.html
title= The McCain Article
publisher= The New York Times
accessdate=2008-02-25] However, Clark Hoyt, the ombudsman for "The New York Times", criticized the article for its lack of details and independent proof. [cite web
date= 2008-02-24
last= Hoyt
first= Clark
authorlink= Clark Hoyt
url= http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/opinion/24pubed.html?em&ex=1203915600&en=0cc088c86203723a&ei=5087%0A
title= What That McCain Article Didn’t Say
publisher= The New York Times
accessdate=2008-02-24]

Follow-up article

On February 23, The New York Times followed up their original article with an article on McCain's efforts to help a client of Iseman's before the FCC. According to the article, "In late 1998, Senator John McCain sent an unusually blunt letter to the head of the Federal Communications Commission, warning that he would try to overhaul the agency if it closed a broadcast ownership loophole." [ [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/23/us/politics/23lobby.html?pagewanted=print Files and McCain Letter Show Effort to Keep Loophole] By STEPHEN LABATON February 23, 2008 "New York Times"]

Former staffer to President Bill Clinton and current Hillary Clinton supporter Lanny Davis said the article "had no merit." Stating that he did not support McCain's bid for the White House, Davis, who had himself lobbied for the same cause Iseman lobbied McCain for, said that McCain only wrote a letter to the FCC to ask them to "act soon" and refused to write a letter that supported the sale of the television station the article talked about. [cite news | title = McCain disputes report of lobbyist relationship | url=http://washingtontimes.com/article/20080222/NATION/813344605/1002| accessdate = 2008-02-25 | date = February 22, 2008 |publisher = The Washington Times| author = Ralph Z. Hallow and Jennifer Harper ]

References

External links

* [http://www.opensecrets.org/lobbyists/lobbyist.asp?txtname=Iseman%2C+Vicki&year=a&txttype=l List of companies Vicki Iseman lobbied for]