Let's take a look.
In 1999, McCain chaired the Senate commerce committee at a time when the Florida-based Paxson Communications (an Iseman client) tried to acquire a television station in Pittsburgh. The sale was contentious, and FCC approval took much longer than usual.
McCain wrote to the FCC urging them to make a decision. Although he specified in his letter that he was not asking the commission to approve the deal, everyone knew that he favored Paxson.
Some feel that the Arizona senator took an unseemly interest in the Florida company -- which had donated $20,000 to his campaign, and which had allowed McCain use of its corporate jet.
Marcy Wheeler has discovered an interesting aspect of this tale: In 2004, just before the election, Paxson stations broadcast and heavily pushed the notorious anti-Kerry propaganda film Stolen Honor.
You may recall the controversy surrounding that hit piece, hosted by Carlton Sherwood, the flack for Reverend Moon. If you need a refresher, check out this earlier post. One particular line from the film's slime-filled narration sticks in the memory -- and in the craw:
Wait a second, I asked myself, did I hear that right? Was I or my fellow marines being accused of the same atrocities John Kerry had committed?Kerry, of course, had committed no atrocities whatsoever. (Reactionaries don't mind hurling the "baby killer" epithet at a Vietnam vet, as long as the vet is a Democrat.) Neither did he make any accusations -- although he did hear and discuss accusations made by others at the well-known "Winter Soldier" conference.
The rest of the show continued in that filthy vein. While publicizing the show on Fox, Sherwood falsely accused Kerry of labeling all American POWs as "war criminals."
Advertisers eventually convinced Sinclair broadcasting not to display the entire lie-fest, although Sinclair showed an edited version. Paxson ran Stolen Honor unexpurgated ten times before the election.
Vicki Iseman represented both Sinclair and Paxson.
John McCain refused to condemn the running of this partisan "documentary," even though it clearly violated campaign finance laws.
In a saner era, an outrage of this sort might have led to the loss of a broadcast license. Not only did the "straight talking" McCain refuse to complain to the FCC, he turned a blind eye to Sinclair's attempts to circumvent the law.
You see, a telecommunications company cannot own more than two broadcast stations in the same market. Sinclair used a front company called Glenncairn to skirt this regulation.
Marcy Wheeler takes it from here:
...the better part of the lobbying done in this period was done by Iseman and her colleagues (listed as $80,000 a year)--and done primarily through Congress, without contacting the FCC directly.
And at least according to what other lobbyists have to say about Iseman, her big asset in her lobbying portfolio was her access to John McCain.Three telecom lobbyists and a former McCain aide, all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that Iseman spoke up regularly at meetings of telecom lobbyists in Washington, extolling her connections to McCain and his office. She would regularly volunteer at those meetings to be the point person for the telecom industry in dealing with McCain's office.It sure makes you wonder how much that access contributed to Sinclair getting off so lightly for using a shell corporation to evade restrictions on media ownership, doesn't it?
2 comments:
Slimy.
Bob Boldt here...
Sometimes it’s hard to know what to wish for. At first I had hoped that crazy Rudy would not be knocked out of the box before he could become the nominee, because I was pretty sure that even a Hillary Clinton could have trounced “America’s Mayor” without breaking a sweat. Now it looks as if poor, dumb, old John McCain will not get the nomination either. At least not if the Republicans live in any kind of a rational universe where winning is still on the table.
So once again I’m left not knowing what to wish for. Should I wish for him to take himself out of the running in light of this new scandal? Any candidate with an IQ of 65 would now conclude that he was dead meat in the water ready for any Democrat to render him into chum in the lead up to the general election. Or should I wish for him to just soldier on spite of his disgrace - on to a humiliating defeat in November? I have to admit to favoring the second option. It would be such great fun watching Obama serve “Honest John” his privates on a plate before the laughing electorate. I would not want to be in the position of a Republican strategist right now. What’s left? Huckabee?
This is pretty amusing since even wimpy Bob Schieffer admitted the “story has legs.”
How long was the NYT prepared to wait to drop the dime on McCain? November 5th?
If the Republican leadership thinks that attacking that well known left wing subsidiary of Pravda, the NYT will work for more than one news cycle, they had better go back for another Dirty Politics 101 refresher from Uncle Karl.
It looks like this time the Democrats may even be beyond the capacity of a Diebold to keep them out of the White House in ‘08. I think it may even be beyond the considerable talents of a high priced Democratic strategist to screw this one up. I hope I’m right. This election has more twists and turns in it than a Mitt Romney position paper.
Lest you think I’m some sort of a moralist concerned with John McCain’s sexual conduct, let me assure you that I am considerably less troubled with what he did to Vicki Iseman than what he did for her. The only screwing I care about here is the screwing of the American taxpayer.
Peace,
Bob Boldt
Post a Comment