Was McCain Boinking her?
Seems to me, when you drop your defamation lawsuit against the times when they alleged you were boinking Senator McCain…you could have in fact been boinking the straight shooter…
Nahhhhh, Liberal Bias I’m sure of it:
Iseman drops lawsuit against Times
Vicki Iseman has dropped her $27 million lawsuit against The New York Times, according to a staff memo obtained by Politico.
The memo, from Washington bureau chief Dean Baquet, is below.
To the staff,
Vicki Iseman has dropped her lawsuit against The Times, just weeks after it was filed. We paid no money. We did not apologize. We did not retract one word of the story, which was a compelling chapter in the tale of Senator John McCain and his political rise.
The story stands as a powerful examination of a presidential candidate who cast himself as an ethics reformer and scourge of special interests, yet seemed blind at times over the course of his career to appearances of conflicts of interest.
Who knows? I tend to think that she won, since defamation suits are so difficult to win. I don’t think we’ll ever know if they were intimate.
If your slandered you don’t give up you clear your name. Unless the other side has proof of what they said about you only then do you drop your suite.
(I’m going to draw sneers for this one…)
So, it took a Republican-CENTRIST male to cheat with a woman (as opposed to…ah, forget it)?
TT is right on this one. If she was so concerned about her good name, she would have not dropped the suit. She didn’t get a retraction, an apology, a dime from the Times. McCain has been silent about this.
As a member of the media, I can tell you that there is no way the Times would have run this story without being 100% certain of its validity. It likely had the paper’s lawyers clear the story first. There’s no way they would have exposed themselves to a defamation suit.
Smitty,
Larry Craig
Mark Foley
http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0209/Iseman_drops_lawsuit_against_Times.html
UPDATE: The Times has posted a joint statement and statement from Iseman’s lawyers. And below is the reader’s note that will appear in Friday’s print edition
A Note to Readers
An article published on Feb. 21, 2008, about Senator John McCain and his record as an ethics reformer who was at times blind to potential conflicts of interest included references to Vicki Iseman, a Washington lobbyist. The article did not state, and The Times did not intend to conclude, that Ms. Iseman had engaged in a romantic affair with Senator McCain or an unethical relationship on behalf of her clients in breach of the public trust.
sure it didn’t intend to.
It intended to present the story with their facts and allow the reader to draw a conclusion.
=’s boinkity, boink
The surge is working!
That’s funny. You’d think rich wingnuts would be lining up around the block to bankroll a suit against the NYT, and with plenty of “top gun” lawyers too.
I can only guess that Iseman didn’t think clearing her name was worth her time.
UI…
sorry, I meant to say that it took a centrist Repub to be a heterosexual cheat* vs. the fundamentalist righty repub who rebukes homosexuality, yet manages to be unfaithful in a homosexual way.
*-BTW, as Maria stated, though, the Times is refuting any connection to stating or inferring any infidelity. My chatter just had me laughing in my head. It’s a lonely place in there, you know.
McCain boinking anybody is just such an unappealing image.