Times Has to Awkwardly Acknowledge What It Was Trying to Say in McCain-Iseman Story

By
Iseman, pre-vengeful. Photo: Getty Images

Vicki Iseman, the lobbyist who was linked to then-presidential candidate John McCain in February in a Times report about conflicts of interest, is now suing the paper for "falsely communicating" that she “had an illicit ‘romantic’ and unethical relationship" with him. But, see, the Times didn't technically write that. This is the paper's rebuttal from today:

The article did not directly say that Ms. Iseman and Mr. McCain had had a romantic relationship. But it did say several aides of his had been “convinced” that he had grown too close to Ms. Iseman and that he might be damaged if the relationship became known.


Yeah, um, this is like that time you told Becky in junior high that someone said her boyfriend was tonguing Kimmy Carlyle under the bleachers, and then the boyfriend found out and got all mad at you, but you didn't say he was definitely doing it, you just said someone else said it. Which is like, totally a different thing, right? And anyway, he totally was making out with her, you're pretty sure, so who is he to get mad? You were just trying to be a good friend. UGH. Junior high is the worst.

Lobbyist Sues Times, Citing Report of McCain Ties [NYT]
Earlier: The ‘Times’ McCain Debacle: Just What Huckabee Has Been Waiting For?