US presidential hopeful Senator John McCain sought to minimize damage to his "man of character" image and his presidential hopes, vigorously denying and denouncing a newspaper report suggesting an improper relationship with a female lobbyist.
"It's not true," the likely Republican nominee said of the report that implied a romantic link with telecommunications lobbyist Vicki Iseman and suggested McCain pushed legislation that would have benefited her clients.
"At no time have I ever done anything that would betray the public trust," said McCain, a four-term senator and a hero of the Vietnam War.
He described the lobbyist as a friend.
McCain and his wife, standing together at a news conference on Thursday, said they were disappointed that the New York Times ran its front page article, and his campaign referred to a "smear campaign" and "gutter politics" in the midst of the presidential race.
The allegations in Thursday's report in the Times -- and a story in the Washington Post -- contradict core themes of McCain's campaign -- that he would bring honor and integrity to the White House as well as a record of challenging business-as-usual Washington ways.
Even the suggestion of marital impropriety -- though rejected by both McCain and his wife -- would seem to risk further damaging his acrimonious relationship with the social conservatives whose support he desperately needs in the general election campaign against a fired-up Democratic Party.
In a twist, however, there were early signs that the brouhaha might actually help McCain solidify the Republican base.
Conservative pundits who are some of McCain's harshest critics could have jumped on the issue to question the strength of McCain's family values. Instead, they went after the Times.
"There is nothing in it here that you can say is true," Rush Limbaugh told his radio listeners.
He accused the newspaper of "trying to take him out."
Another conservative voice, Laura Ingraham, contended the newspaper was trying to "contaminate" the Republican candidate with an "absurd attack."
By Thursday afternoon, the senator had begun a fundraising appeal based on the story.
"The New York Times ... has shown once again that it cannot exercise good journalistic judgment when it comes to dealing with a conservative Republican," campaign manager Rick Davis wrote to supporters. "We need your help to counteract the liberal establishment and fight back against the New York Times by making an immediate contribution today."
"We think the story speaks for itself," Times executive editor Bill Keller said in a written statement. "On the timing, our policy is we publish stories when they are ready."
At the very least, the episode gives Democrats an opening to try to exploit McCain's decades-long ties to Washington even though he's known as a lawmaker willing to stand up to special interests and reduce the influence of lobbyists.
It's a reputation that he has carefully honed in the aftermath an influence-peddling scandal decades ago. The Senate cited him for "poor judgment" in that matter but took no further action.
The Democratic National Committee said on Thursday in a statement: "After 25 years in Washington, the real John McCain is just like the other DC insiders he rails against on the campaign trail. John McCain's `do as I say, not as I do' approach to ethics and lobbying reform can be called a lot of things. `Straight talk' isn't one of them."
Several Republicans unaffiliated with McCain's campaign doubted it would have a long-term effect.
"The fact that it was the New York Times and the lack of sufficient detail undermines the credibility of the story," said Christopher LaCivita, a Republican strategist in Virginia, noting that the Times is considered a liberal boogyman for the Republican Party's rank-and-file.
"Barring anything coming out that's new, I don't see this having much impact on McCain because his character is so well established," LaCivita said.
"Most Republicans will look at this is the New York Times sliming Republicans,'' agreed John Feehery, a Republican consultant who was an aide to former House speaker Dennis Hastert. "If there is going to be lasting damage, it's going to be with independents."
Aware of the high stakes, McCain officials acted quickly. The campaign distributed statements deriding the story, deployed senior advisers to spread that message on TV news shows and arranged a news conference for McCain and his wife of nearly 28 years to personally address the matter as they campaigned in Toledo, Ohio.
"I'm very disappointed in the article," he told reporters.
Added Cindy McCain: "My children and I not only trust my husband but know that he would never do anything to not only disappoint our family, but disappoint the people of America. He's a man of great character, and I'm very, very disappointed in the New York Times."
In the article, months in the making, anonymous McCain aides were quoted as having urged McCain and Iseman to stay away from each other in the run-up to his failed presidential campaign in 2000. In a separate story in the Post, John Weaver, a longtime aide who split with McCain last year, said he personally met with Iseman and asked her to steer clear of the senator some eight years ago.
Both stories said aides worried about the appearance of McCain having close ties to a lobbyist with business before the Senate Commerce Committee. The stories also said McCain wrote letters and pushed legislation involving television station ownership that would have benefited Iseman's clients.
McCain said he was not aware of Weaver's meeting and no staffers had indicated to him they were concerned about his association with Iseman.
"If they were, they didn't communicate that to me," McCain said on Thursday.
He called Iseman a friend, and said he wasn't any closer to her than to other lobbyists.
"I have many friends who represent various interests, ranging from the firemen to the police to senior citizens to various interests, particularly before my committee," he said.
Efforts to reach Iseman for comment were unsuccessful.
McCain had briefly addressed the issue -- and defended his integrity -- in December when questioned about reports that the Times was investigating allegations of legislative favoritism.
"I've never done any favors for anybody -- lobbyist or special-interest group," he told reporters after the Drudge Report Web site posted a story online that said his aides had been trying to dissuade the newspaper from publishing a story because, the aides said, it wasn't factual.
McCain aides say they were taken off guard on Wednesday afternoon when they learned the paper would publish the story. They suggested the Times was prompted to publish the story after learning that the New Republic magazine was readying an article about newsroom debate over the story at the newspaper.
I came to Taiwan to pursue my degree thinking that Taiwanese are “friendly,” but I was welcomed by Taiwanese classmates laughing at my friend’s name, Maria (瑪莉亞). At the time, I could not understand why they were mocking the name of Jesus’ mother. Later, I learned that “Maria” had become a stereotype — a shorthand for Filipino migrant workers. That was because many Filipino women in Taiwan, especially those who became house helpers, happen to have that name. With the rapidly increasing number of foreigners coming to Taiwan to work or study, more Taiwanese are interacting, socializing and forming relationships with
Earlier signs suggest that US President Donald Trump’s policy on Taiwan is set to move in a more resolute direction, as his administration begins to take a tougher approach toward America’s main challenger at the global level, China. Despite its deepening economic woes, China continues to flex its muscles, including conducting provocative military drills off Taiwan, Australia and Vietnam recently. A recent Trump-signed memorandum on America’s investment policy was more about the China threat than about anything else. Singling out the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as a foreign adversary directing investments in American companies to obtain cutting-edge technologies, it said
The recent termination of Tibetan-language broadcasts by Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) is a significant setback for Tibetans both in Tibet and across the global diaspora. The broadcasts have long served as a vital lifeline, providing uncensored news, cultural preservation and a sense of connection for a community often isolated by geopolitical realities. For Tibetans living under Chinese rule, access to independent information is severely restricted. The Chinese government tightly controls media and censors content that challenges its narrative. VOA and RFA broadcasts have been among the few sources of uncensored news available to Tibetans, offering insights
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS