McCain vs the NYT

Michael Goldfarb has some harsh words for the NYT: Partisan Paper of Record

Today the New York Times launched its latest attack on this campaign in its capacity as an Obama advocacy organization. Let us be clear about what this story alleges: The New York Times charges that McCain-Palin 2008 campaign manager Rick Davis was paid by Freddie Mac until last month, contrary to previous reporting, as well as statements by this campaign and by Mr. Davis himself.

In fact, the allegation is demonstrably false. As has been previously reported, Mr. Davis separated from his consulting firm, Davis Manafort, in 2006. As has been previously reported, Mr. Davis has seen no income from Davis Manafort since 2006. Zero. Mr. Davis has received no salary or compensation since 2006. Mr. Davis has received no profit or partner distributions from that firm on any basis — weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, bi-monthly, quarterly, semi-annual or annual — since 2006. Again, zero. Neither has Mr. Davis received any equity in the firm based on profits derived since his financial separation from Davis Manafort in 2006.

Further, and missing from the Times’ reporting, Mr. Davis has never — never — been a lobbyist for either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Mr. Davis has not served as a registered lobbyist since 2005.

Again, let us be clear: The New York Times — in the absence of any supporting evidence — has insinuated some kind of impropriety on the part of Senator McCain and Rick Davis. But entirely missing from the story is any significant mention of Senator McCain’s long advocacy for, and co-sponsorship of legislation to enact, stricter oversight and regulation of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — dating back to 2006. Please see the attached floor statement on this issue by Senator McCain from 2006.

To the central point our campaign has made in the last 48 hours: The New York Times has never published a single investigative piece, factually correct or otherwise, examining the relationship between Obama campaign chief strategist David Axelrod, his consulting and lobbying clients, and Senator Obama. Likewise, the New York Times never published an investigative report, factually correct or otherwise, examining the relationship between Former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson and Senator Obama, who appointed Johnson head of his VP search committee, until the writing was on the wall and Johnson was under fire following reports from actual news organizations that he had received preferential loans from predatory mortgage lender Countrywide.

Blogger Doug Ross on his own has done a heck of a lot more investigating than the NYT on the Obama-Fannie Mae connection; the NYT can’t seem to realize Obama’s one of the top-3 beneficiaries of Fannie Mae largesse, and that Raines & Johnson are Obama’s economic advisors.

But then, we’re still waiting for NYT investigations on Obama and Rezko, Auchi, and William Ayers, and Obama’s other problematic friends, and for a 3,000 word expose on Joe Biden’s mental acuity as they did with Sarah Palin’s husband driving record of 20 years ago (and other similar stories).

Can McCain win this war with the NYT? Maybe, maybe not. But it was high time the campaign hit the NYT hard.

UPDATE
Jim links to Hennessy’s View, who plots the numbers of Fannie/Freddie contributions per year in congress, and Obama really cashed it in.

Digg!

Share on Facebook

Tags:

One Response to “McCain vs the NYT”

  1. Original Pechanga Says:

    Our friend Ed called this whining on his show today. There may be some of that, but it’s important to make in known that the NYT is NO longer a journalist’s paper.

    They were ready quickly to denigrate bloggers and yet, the bloggers are doing the work that the “journalists” WON’T DO.