McCain’s Favors for Iseman Involved Helping Far Right-Wing Families to Sustain their Shell Companies
When I noted that John McCain’s lobbyist gal had represented the two networks that would, in 2004, show the anti-Kerry propaganda piece, Stolen Honor, I admitted I didn’t know precisely whether or how John McCain had helped the second of these two networks, Sinclair Broadcasting’s shell company, Glencairn Broadcasting. Today, the NYT makes it very clear that McCain used the same kind of inappropriate, pushy tactics for Sinclair as he had with Paxson.
In late 1998, Senator John McCain sent an unusually blunt letter to the head of the Federal Communications Commission, warning that he would try to overhaul the agency if it closed a broadcast ownership loophole.
The letter, and two later ones signed by Mr. McCain, then chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, urged the commission to abandon plans to close a loophole vitally important to Glencairn Ltd., a client of Vicki Iseman, a lobbyist. The provision enabled one of the nation’s largest broadcasting companies, Sinclair, to use a marketing agreement with Glencairn, a far smaller broadcaster, to get around a restriction barring single ownership of two television stations in the same city.
I gotta say, "unusually blunt," coming from Mr. Straight Talk for Lobbyists Express is saying something. The article goes on to note that McCain was partnering with Conrad Burns on this matter–some real gutter diving for a guy who claims to be above corruption.
The NYT article suggests more about the relationship between Iseman and McCain.
For its part, Glencairn appeared to have been getting little support in Congress until it retained Ms. Iseman in 1998.
Edwin Edwards, who was the president of the company at the time, said in a recent interview that after retaining Ms. Iseman, he was able to get heard by Mr. McCain.
“We were pounding the pavement in Washington,” Mr. Edwards said. “We recruited help from as many people as we could. We knocked on every door just trying to get support.”
Labaton suggests–but doesn’t say it–that companies with business interests before McCain could hire Iseman as the best way to get entre to him. Buy Vicki Iseman and you get McCain. No wonder she was bragging about her access to him.
There are two things that Labaton doesn’t say, but that are fairly clear. McCain intervened to help Sinclair keep its shell company. This was no mere marketing agreement to help a struggling broadcaster survive, this was an attempt to get around the law.
Sinclair operates six LMAs through a company called Cunningham Broadcasting, previously known as Glencairn Ltd. Cunningham is controlled by trusts in the name of Carolyn Smith, the mother of Sinclair president and CEO David Smith, as well as two Sinclair vice presidents, Duncan Smith and Frederick Smith, and Robert Smith, a director on Sinclair’s board.
The FCC established LMAs in the early-1990s to assist failing stations or to help start-ups share costs for such expenses as maintenance and advertising with older, established broadcasters.
However, Schwartzman says Sinclair used these business arrangements for the sole intention of eventually acquiring the stations themselves. "Sinclair has operated these LMAs as little more than a fig leaf for all but owning them outright," he said. "They’ve been pressed on this but unfortunately this FCC has let them off the hook."
This is the kind of activity that–if its purpose were to channel money, rather than broadcast signal–would be called money laundering. McCain helped a company evade the clear intent of the law, and in so doing, really concentrate its reach for such a moment when it might want to use its stations as a propaganda vehicle.
And then there’s the sheer hypocrisy of it. Five years later, when Sinclair used its concentration to smear a military hero, McCain blamed that smear not on the motivations of the family running Sinclair or those bankrolling the propaganda, but on the concentration of Sinclair’s company.
"I do have an opinion that this is an issue that results when you have media concentration, which I have been opposed to," he said at a fund-raiser for Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.). "When you have media concentration – this is the largest TV owner with 62 stations – this is something that happens." [my emphasis]
As the NYT shows, Sinclair only achieved that concentration thanks to McCain’s inappropriate intervention.
Longknife McCain speak with forked tongue.
Nice post, emptywheel.
Someone needs to send a copy of this to NPR. Just heard them woundering aloud about the signifance of the NYT article about McCain and Iseman. The NPR are drawing the lesson that McCain needs to avoid ‘the appearance of inpropriety.’
“woundering” works for me. I heard that NPR piece, too, and was appalled. Same old, same old MSM, looking only at the shiny surface. Not a word in the air time about McCain’s apparent use of leverage for political pals. But lots of whuffling about whether his relationship to a female lobbyist was “inappropriate.”
I have news for the MSM: Anytime a senior senator gets too cozy with a lobbyist of any sex who represents businesses that bring pleas before the committee that the senator chairs, that’s “inappropriate.”
It seems the good old boy reporters haven’t learned anything in the last 8-10 years. It’s still wink, wink, nudge, nudge and lots of leering at the skirts.
wondering (although I like “woundering”)
Much like McCain’s use of federal election money. Go around the law in such a way as to appear clever, and for a propaganda vehicle. No interest in following the intent of the law whatsoever. Guy’s toast.
and M instead of N for impropriety. The snow blindness is wearing off finally. Have to go back outside and shovel the front walk now.
Still on vacation here in Costa Rica(back to the cold north on Monday). It is amazing what can happen when you go to the beach for 5 days. So, my question, what, if any entity, will investigate this legally? Does this go DOJ, FCC, or P.T. Barnum?
Much of it HAS been investigated by the (Bush-era) FCC. That’s the problem, they just blew it off. And I can’t imagine that Mukasey’s going to be much help.
Pura Vida, Matt. Clearly, option #3.
Nice to see that neither the NYT nor the WaPo are letting this go. McCain’s given only one press conference since the NYT’s piece was published, and we already know he told multiple lies, one of which he was called out on even before the press conference ended. Mr Straight Talk is in trouble, and his opponents–most importantly Huck–haven’t decided how to take advantage of it yet.
I can’t really see the NYT letting this go. For years now they have done Bush’s bidding. Here, they obliging sat on this story for months out of deference to St. McCain’s feelings. They finally run the story, not because of any sense of journalistic ethics or pride, but to avoid being scooped. After all they have done for McCain, Bush, and Friends, to have them turn on you and call you liberal (gasp!)… Well, that’s gotta hurt. And even a Gray Lady can exhibit a bit of pique when scorned.
I suspect Huck’s strategy is just to lurk until such time as they need to ditch McCain. He’s still got to worry that the party will opt for Mitt instead of him, and Mitt also won a fair number of delegates.
Huck had one interview in which he was exceedingly gracious about McCain’s integrity (which is nice since Huck likes to get in appropriate donations, too). I bet Huck enjoyed that statement.
I would think Mitt would need to get his timing right. If he goes too soon he will appear to be jumping on McCain when he’s down, if he goes too late, it might pass him by.
I have this sick feeling the convention is being lined up for Jeb.
PLEASE NO! Repeat after me “NO TO JEB, NO TO JEB”. The worst problem is that this country has a habit of ignoring the opinion if people of the state who had a presidential candidate as Governor.
Why is this dirt on McCain coming out BEFORE the primary? Like 911-Ghouliani, this is TOO EARLY! Wait until he is the Rethug’s only hope! I am convinced that is what those crooks are waiting to do to the Dem candidate.
say YES to jeb
maybe you don’t get this
a woman stood in front of my house and yelled obscenities to george bush for 5 minutes on February 5, 2008
270 people came to my garage, and not a single one spoke a good word about george bush
the bush name is ballot box POISON
let the repuglitards put jeb on the ticket
if that happens, some of you might believe me when I say the Democrats are gonna have 67 Senate seats and over 300 seats in the House on January 3, 2009
we’re DONE with the bush family
put a fork in em, they’re DONE
I have a sick feeling that you are right. It also opens the door to Bloomberg… UGH!
and they each got half a snowball’s chance in hell
does anybody realize how many legs the repuglitards will have to gnaw of to end up with jeb and bloomie spliting the vote
the repuglitard convention is gonna be better than midget wrestling
people love a circus, but they don’t choose a President from the clown acts
Captain Renault is shocked, shocked by this revelation! He would also note that McCain has done more for these fine feathered families than he has for the State of Arizona.
Mr. Straight Talk needs to hire Rove (if he hasn’t already) to smear the reputation of those who question McCain’s dogma, forthrightness and impeccable honesty. One thing about the GOP, they reuse and reuse their old war horses to great effect.
Dengre, over at DKos has written an article on McCain’s suppression of Abramoff documents, while the article is good, it seemed left unexplored- is there more to these documents and how can the public see them, seeing as now we know Mr. Straighttalk ain’t? Thanks in advance.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…..390/462347
YES!!! This is the blockbuster. Dengre says the 750,000 documents that McCain collected about Abramoff and the Bush Administration are locked up by a Senate deal. Can’t a prosecutor or the courts subpoena those documents?
Calling EW, bmaz, cboldt, Mary et al.! Calling TPM! This is the lynchpin! The keys to the kingdom! How can we pry these documents loose?
Bob in HI
Wow. If he went to Conrad Burns for help, it’s time to start looking at the PAC’s that sent both of them money about the time of hook-up.
Burns has some rather interesting PAC donations…
OT: Rayne, This morning I left a belated reply to your comment #39 on the “What’s Been Added . . ” thread upstairs. It’s #81.
Thanks — William Ockham and I both replied.
[humming] Bye, bye, blackbird…
Speaking of those PACs…
The American Freedom Political Action Committee is an Alcade&Fay PAC.
2008 cycle candidates receiving contributions include: Corrine Brown, Byron Dorgan, Chet Edwards, Thomas Harkin, John Murtha, Bill Nelson, and Arlen Specter.
They terminated this PAC on 2/12/2008. One of their last donations was $2500 to Bearingpoint Inc: Public Services Political Action Committee. That sounds like one of the company’s Iseman was lobbying for.
Looking at PACS makes my head spin. PAC money to another PAC and then that money to another PAC.
Are they all connected at the roots?
That’s how they “washed” the money, Chrisc. More than likely you will see an inbound amount to a person from RNC, to, that matches an amount outbound from a PAC, making it very difficult to trace the intent.
You’re on the right track. There are more PAC’s like that one. Might want to look and see what bills were floating around that correlated to donations, too.
Okay, off to run more errands. Buon appetito…
Marcy, you do consistently great work. Thank you.
What do you know…Lowry and Mark Mays of ClearChannel have been donors to Conrad Burns.
Damn, I don’t have time to chase the correlation, either. Hope one of you is curious enough to see if any of Iseman clients also made contributions to Conrad Burns about the time that McCain and Burns hooked up on this crap.
Bon appetit, kids!
Clear channel and Mitt Romney invovled in that buyout? I hate it that all the proggressive stations are hard to find on the radio dial as their signal strength is weaker. the conservative broadcast with a lot more power.
Does anyone have a link to FCC law? I was involved in the opening of cellular in 1980 which has an A and B carrier in each area (wireline and non wireline)like LA Chicago etc. Since that time a lot of funny dancing has gone on and those lines seem very blurred with the subs like the ones McTorture promoted, later to exploit. A good reporter might contact the losing competitors in that game to get to the real story which has gone unreported by MSN. I am guessing the same is happening to those carrier of hand held and lap top portable signals which is a huge huge market and has big ads money.
That needs linking with the desperate drive for immunity…these stories overlap into who wants immunity and what they did that needs legislative cover. Joe Lierman is holding hands on this one with McTorture 100 year war.
NPR doesn’t do in-depth news any more than any other electronic media.
The other day, after we had read all afternoon about Michelle Obama’s little proud-of-my-country statement, two NPR reporters spent several minutes discussing her statement and repeatedly misquoting her, leaving out the word “really” and wondering if this would be the gaff that sinks Obama’s candidacy. The report stunk. I’ve noticed that NPR doesn’t seem to do any breakthrough reporting anymore, and they certainly steer clear of anything that will cause them to be challenged by the GOP when it comes time for congressional funding. They learned their lesson.
Is there any connection between McCain’s support for right-wing media conglomeration, and the sudden turnaround on right-wing radio supporting McCain in his travails, or at least trying to shoot the very late messengers at the NYT (and not the WaPo or Drudge)? Rush & Ingraham et al have been surprisingly pro-McCain considering their previous condemnations of St. John as worse than Hillary. Or perhaps they are just trying to defend the Republican Party indirectly and not really endorsing McCain by attacking the left-wing media. McCain has become the NoTalk Express, saying that he will no longer talk about the matter, but he has very little ability to change the subject other than his friendly reporters helping him out. If McCain manages to stagger through this, I would not be surprised to see some swiftboating on him about his many plane crashes while a Navy flier, or the Forrestall incident arising again to utterly destroy him if he doesn’t back out. To me, the issue is who will become the Republican Sargent Shriver – turning to Mitt or Huck is too divisive, Santorum or Frist don’t have the national profile or too much baggage, which leaves Colin Powell or Pataki off the top of my head.
Don’t know about the current response. But certainly, the media’s unwillingness to call this what it is–support for consolidation of the media–may well explain the larger love affair with McCain in the media.
NPR, the NewsHour, the BBC, they have all tried to play this story as bad for the Times and good for McCain. It is really bizarre that the one thing the profession of journalism does not want to do is commit an act of journalism.
McCain and the lobbyists will not go away. The blogosphere will keep the story going and the MSM plus the above will lamely follow along grumbling and badmouthing the blogs all the way.
marksb, when I recall that Scott Simon used to real journalism (from El Salvador massacre sites) and then hear what he’s become on Sat AM, I want to cry.
On a happier note – good to see you about – hope all is well for you.
Nah, I don’t think so. McCain’s conglomeration work dated back to late 90s; the chumps you refer to just started chirping in so they could pound on the “liberal New York Times”.
Thanks Kirk. My doc, after sticking various optical tools down my throat and feeling up my lymph system on Thursday said something along the lines of “clean as a hound’s tooth”. Which I take, from his grin, to mean goodness. Says there’s far too much cancer and far too few satisfactory recoveries. And everyone should check out this article on Health Net getting their weenie whacked to the tune of nine mil for canceling a woman in the middle of breast cancer chemo. Cold, indeed, and now the tables are turning.
I saw that too and smiled.
I was refused a mammogram and ultrasound when I should have been diagnosed in 1997. A friend who knows how the HMO in question operates says it was almost certainly a bonus-for-denying-care situation. Then by the time I was diagnosed in 2002, it was too late to sue.
It’d have been nice to make them pay 9 million for that, certainly.
Fieger would have found a way!
Rayne, William Ockham and Minnesotachuck (and any other heavy duty techies) I left a question at the end of the last Renzi thread that I have some personal interest in. Thanks!
FYI, responded, although I know nothing specific about the firm in question. Products are a bit out of my league, but there are lots of questions to ask.
I too left you a comment on Symmetricom/Timing Solutions.
Thanks. 2004 would have been Sym. TS was an independent private corp until being bought out last year. I think the nook portion is Sym. The TS stuff I can discern has to do with satellites and digital FO cable (some huge ones of which apparently run underneath the southern AZ desert. If you recall my theories on our indicted congressman’s father’s company down there, you can probably see what I am trying to piece together (and also ask questions smart enough that my BIL might answer them, at least vaguely).
The export violation was Datum (which Sym bought out and inherited their liability).
EW, I’m so glad that you were able to survive– and thrive (evidence: This blog)! Your reporting/muckraking has meant a lot to me. Keep up the good work! If you don’t mind sharing, are you totally in remission now, or do you still feel like the sword of Damocles continues to hang over your head?
Bob in HI
Oh, as far as they know, I’m fine–it’ll be five years on May 2.
that is great news.
Amen. Many good thoughts to you.
EW, somehow in the months of reading your blogs I missed the fact that you were a BC survivor. Best wishes! My wife’s best friend (she was my good friend too) passed away a week ago today, after an heroic fight. Helping out with the memorial service and some of the issues she left behind is one reason why I’ve been in and out all week. She, too, should have been diagnosed earlier. 6-8 months before her diagnosis (4 years ago next month) she was experiencing some discomfort and saw her primary physician. She (the doc) did a manual exam and after couldn’t find anything suggested that perhaps she needed a different bra size. Later when she had the mamogram she was determined to be “Stage 3+”.
Sorry to hear about your friend, really sorry.
I’m just lucky my body seemed to be fighting the cancer reasonably well, since I went five years. I was stage 2+ when diagnosed, but given the time it coudl have been worse.
That is why we need universal health care NOT FOR PROFIT!!! There should never ever be an insentive for not doing ALL the preventive medicine. From a fiscal point of view it also makes sense to stop these kinds of illnesses before they go systemic. 2 (mams a year) Stupid bastards run this country…
I need to go read the Dalai Lama’s book on “Heaing Anger”. Breathe, center, focus on the rational side of the cortex. Sorry for the outburst. The poor are so screwed in America. We are lucky to have our MD heroes in the free clinics and guys like Kirk working in County facilities which are no fun. Was Michele Obama administering one of such?
No no. From a fiscal point of view, it makes very good sense to let things go to stage 2. The hospital that treated me would have gotten about 40,000 to treat me when I first found the lump, even assuming relatively aggressive treatment bc I was so young. As it was, they got at least 75,000, not counting the MRIs they’re getting me for.
I went to a conference for young women with BC once–they called us consumers, not patients.
Hey EW that is great news gald to hear it hpe to see you and MR EW soon
great news, mark!
EW – first of all, I hope you are well.
…. one of our UCLA transplant nurses left the mother UC to go work at HealthNet.
She worked in the HN component that handled their “Americans Overseas” cases.
She saw HN calculate that the (lawsuit) costs of denying care to one their insured who’d fallen ill in Russia was less than the likely costs of care.
So they basically hung their insured out to die.
And our excellent, ethical nurse came right back.
She said the (clinical) employees she met there called the place “HealthNOT”
Great work EW.
From the Dengre article at dKos on Abramoff:
cboldt or anyone: Can you explain this “agreement”? Who “agreed,” and how can it be undone? Doesn’t this agreement obstruct justice?
Bob in HI
it can be UNDONE by calling the members of this committee and asking them WHAT THE FUCK ARE DOING
this is a senate committee, so start calling your senators
and then call your congresscritter, and ask him why he is allowing the senate to hide evidence of criminal behavior
congresscritters are only answerable in ONE PLACE
the Voting both
let these criminal mutherfuckers have it
The right wing nut jobs got traction against Clinton because of “perjury” in a civil deposition. Not because of the sex. Why isn’t McCain now in the same spot?
It appears he told the truth in the deposition; it was in unsworn statements to the press where he lied. Perjury requires a material falsehood under oath. By the way, Clinton, of course, did not perjure himself in the Jones deposition. He played fast and loose, and the idiots doing the examination were too stupid to ask the germane followup and narrowing questions; but he did not criminally perjure himself. This was another right wing meme that the whole world ignorantly bought off on.
BMAZ:
How do we know told the truth in the deposition? Has he backed off the denial in the press statement? I won’t hold my breath for the MSM to follow-up on this.
Just my guess because it was an admission against interest and it kind of fits….
Aw jeez guys; I cannot believe you haven’t told me about this gem before! Oh my. Programmer’s Attorneys Rely on ‘Geek Defense’
Shriek!! (I guess that’s with laughter.) I was still trying to absorb that the dude’s name was really Sturgeon, when I came to the end …
Yeah, I might have left out the best line in the story:
Oh yeah. This one’s pretty good, too…
considering that inter alia “things” include soaked floorboards and a notable lack of interest in the search for his missing wife.
Make suitable changes at “coders” and “Hans” and you’ve got a pretty good if mild commentary on people who thought McCain, e.g., should be running for President.
Rayne (and WO too) – Questions in order. Most all. Don’t know on Cs. Possible on 3p or CO, but these are good guys. Not politically attached, they just do what they do. Brother in law was a principle of the original corp that sold all this to the currently named entity last year; he’s still there for a couple of years.
If you’re sure they’re up and up, it’d be a decent investment opportunity. Demand will be stable for some time.
BTW, are they square now with their restatement? no other surprises? Seems odd they don’t track the NASDAQ or S&P; might actually be a better bet for this reason if the market is discounting them too heavily.
No clue on any of the investment stuff (I am struggling to invest in a new roof after all the rains we have recently had here). But my BIL (a real good guy), the other main principle, and their small unique (and 100% privately held by them) company did quite well when they sold out to the bigger public corp. whose name you now see. Don’t know about the new owners, but haven’t heard anything bad. I am more curious as to how what they do fits in with all the TIA/TSP junk we discuss to see if I can glean any insights.
Why don’t they just run Bandar Bush? He owns them anyway…..
well, somebody’s gotta go out there …
where’s ron ziegler when you really need him ???
WO, MadDog, Rayne and Minnesotachuck et al. – This here is basically what I am still trying to piece together; or maybe better put, have a renewed interest in trying to piece together. With all the datamining and domestic surveillance we now know about, I think it is a pretty decent question what the hell is going on in that enterprise in Sierra Vista.
Bmaz,
I read your link. Very interesting indeed. Keep digging and stay safe. Claus
Ungracious choices invite instructive consequences. McCain might have learned that with the smear he invited with his support of the Sinclair Smiths.
The panicked McCain furious pushback is on.
This is bizarre pushback, though. Paxson has said he met with McCain. McCain has previously testified UNDER OATH that the two of them talked. Now Goodman is saying that he (Goodman) never met with McCain, and therefore he doubts that Paxon did? Am I the only one that fails to see the logic of this?
Ya just gotta see this tripe released by the House Repugs on FISA…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDg19STeVqs
Tuttle – the time lag from the mainland to the islands must be getting bigger; we first saw that two or three days ago. I like this one better.
Sorry, I just saw it at Booman today… I saw that one you posted at TPM today, and laughed my okole off!
Marcy you hooked me with “Anatomy of Deceit” when you were on the Next Hurrah. I get more germaine revelations from emptywheel and the gathering of great poster it is the best info or time spent.
I still believe that an impeachment investigation is the best wayto air the BUSHCO dirty laundry.
No no was tougue in cheek humor I take it. So we all greatly appreciate yhe perdonal sacrifice you have to make. Thank you so so much from both sides of mu brain.
Here’s Red State Update’s take on Mac Daddy…!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/
Hey, EW. I didn’t know you’d had a cancer scare. Thank stars you are well now. America needs a new patriotic song. One for you and Jane.
While I’m venting, can I please call bullshit on one of McCain’s talking points? He claims that he wrote letters urging the FCC to speed up their review of some deal, and he says that this is okay, since he didn’t try to influence their decision to accept or reject the deal.
Yes, he did. He signaled to the FCC that this deal was important to him, and he wanted the decision made quickly. In Washington, that can only mean he wanted a “yes” decision. Had he wanted a “no” decision, he would have written them a letter telling them to drag their feet as much as possible.
Whoo boy:
Charlie Black, who serves as McCain’s chief political adviser, “is chairman of one of Washington’s lobbying powerhouses, BKSH and Associates, which has represented AT&T, Alcoa, JPMorgan and U.S. Airways.” Though he is currently playing a prominent role in the McCain campaign, Black “is still being paid by his firm.”
On Friday, Black told the National Journal that he doesn’t think his continued lobbying is a problem for the anti-lobbying image of his “client,” John McCain:
No problem at all for Good Time Charlie. He does all of his lobbying from his cell phone while riding around in the Straight
CockTalk Express. Seriously.Gotta appreciate multi-tasking, I guess.
I think the title of ew’s post assembles some important features of the McCain campaign in 2008. It is worthwhile, as well to review the tv media ownership dynamic historically as the dotcom expansion taper began, synchronizing with the then approaching 2000 campaigns, with respect to the kinds of disputes and spectrum plans fcc was anticipating at that time. Reed Hundt’s tenure ended, and Kennard’s was to brook the chasm between the Clinton and Bush presidencies; soon it became clear where Powell intended to take the agency. Having both television market oversight and internet planning watchdogging emanate from the same commission is a way to balance fcc’s portfolio; so some measure of the easing of Paxson’s road to micromonopoly was riding that inevitable wave of consolidation, yet in a way, for Kennard’s span, which would continue to foster controls on wider oligarchism in public media. There is more to find in this topic; it is excellent timing that already it has denatured McCains’ facade of imperviousness to influence peddling. My reading of his campaign regulatory reform is its actual content is similarly vacuous, simply if one compares the title of the final law to the effects intended by the details of the law contents.
fyi, Just left this as #95 on Rick Renzi thread:
re usefullness, immediate or future, of personnel placed in position:
L. Fletcher Prouty [played by D.Sutherland in movie JFK] wrote The Secret Team in the 1970’s outlining just this scenario. Reading it will preclude doing repetitive spadework. The nuggets are there to be used.