Paxson Refreshes McCain’s Memory

Rut Roh.

Bud Paxson’s memory seems to corroborate that of McCain’s former aides and McCain’s signed deposition, both of which suggest that McCain met with Paxson–and Iseman–personally before he sent his letters to the FCC. Or, to put it another way, Paxson says McCain’s little promises yesterday were false.

Broadcaster Lowell "Bud" Paxson today contradicted statements from Sen. John McCain‘s presidential campaign that the senator did not meet with Paxson or his lobbyist before sending two controversial letters to the Federal Communications Commission on Paxson’s behalf.

Paxson said he talked with McCain in his Washington office several weeks before the Arizona Republican wrote the letters to the FCC urging a rapid decision on Paxson’s quest to acquire a Pittsburgh television station.

Paxson also recalled that his lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, attended the meeting in McCain’s office and that Iseman helped arrange the meeting. "Was Vicki there? Probably," Paxson said in an interview with The Washington Post today. "The woman was a professional. She was good. She could get us meetings."

So Paxson effectively deems McCain’s performance yesterday a lie. Though I’m not sure how credible we should judge him, since he seems to think we have "thousands" of members of Congress.

Paxson saw no particular significance in the meeting with McCain prior to his penning the FCC letters. "Vicki Iseman, probably between myself and [Paxson Communications President] Dean Goodman at that time, took us in to see a thousand senators and congressmen," Paxson said. "She was our lobbyist. She was there and helped."

Paxson seems quite interested in defending the honor of Iseman. But the most intriguing detail, IMO, stains the honor of all involved.

The second letter came on Dec. 10, a day after the company’s jet ferried McCain to a Florida fundraiser aboard a yacht in West Palm Beach. The fundraiser was arranged by Hector Alcalde of Alcalde & Fay and was hosted by a cruise line that Alcalde had represented, Paxson said. Paxson said he attended the fundraiser.

As I suspected, Paxson flew McCain to a fundraiser in FL, organized by Iseman’s boss, and probably hosted at the house of the owner of Carnival Cruise lines. Paxson, Iseman, McCain, Alcalde–they all were there. In other words, this was Alcalde and Fay as a company sponsoring McCain’s campaign, not just individual clients of Iseman’s who had businses with McCain.

The stories about John Weaver chasing Iseman away have always suggested, to me, that her closeness (and her bragging about her closeness to McCain) created that perception that McCain was Alcalde and Fay’s Senator, not just Iseman’s. And the confirmation that this fund-raiser was about several of Alcalde and Fay’s clients, and not just Paxson, certainly supports that perception.

image_print
64 replies
  1. BlueStateRedHead says:

    Thousands of members of congress. Can’t calculate it myself, but I am guessing that to arrive at 1000+, one needs to go back to LBJ if not further.

    Busy day for you EW, thanks for the effort.

  2. sojourner says:

    EW, you have certainly been busy! How in the world do you keep up with all of what one person said to another?

  3. ProfessorFoland says:

    I’ve nothing constructive to add to the discussion, I just wanted to say about the last couple of days: Marcy, you’re ON FIRE!

    I like to imagine you’ve been cunningly storing all this up for the day when you knew some MSM reporters might check in around these parts to look for it…

    • freepatriot says:

      I like to imagine you’ve been cunningly storing all this up for the day when you knew some MSM reporters might check in around these parts to look for it…

      I like to imagine you’ve been running a blogger research sweat shop in North Korea or something. Nobody could be that informed about so many subjects, with such detail,and be able to post all of this stuff so fast

      I’m sure there’s a sweat shop some where, with a bunch of overworked and underpaid unfortunate souls poring over computer screens and “doing the google”, reading infinite archives and backchecking old newspapers, all while being guarded by soldiers wearing jack boots or something …

      Marcy Wheeler ??? she’s just an actor, hired to give a face to this attrocious left wing blogger operation that seeks to discredit reputable repuglitard crooks and liars

      I like to believe that, cuz there’s no way a single human could do all this. And that means if there ain’t a sweatshop, there’s only one other alternative:

      we’ve all been worshiping a MACHINE

      (wink)

  4. freepatriot says:

    if paxson remembers it different, THAT’S JUST HIS OPINION

    If the FEC chairman disagrees with john mccain, that’s just his opinion

    if you disagree with john mccain about Iraq, you don’t understand the military

    beginning to see a pattern here ???

  5. bmaz says:

    What shocks me is that Paxson squealed so fast and easy. St. McCain must not have been a good Pax boy lately…

    Freepatriot – Welcome to the machine. Have a cigar. You’ll go far. Buzz Click!!

    • Loo Hoo. says:

      I’m thinking the NYT has a whole string of people to corroborate the story. McCain had a chance to come clean/own up, and chose to behave like an 11 year old.

      The authority figures are getting to work.

      Poor John. Just didn’t have the strength to be honest.

      • freepatriot says:

        I’m thinking the NYT has a whole string of people to corroborate the story. McCain had a chance to come clean/own up, and chose to behave like an 11 year old.

        I’ve been reading the times Q & A on the article, and this question caught my attention:

        Q. Why did you wait this long to go with a story Drudge reported months ago thereby giving McCain time to put together a defense? What is the meaning of “romantic?” How do you know you are not being set up? Good reporting.

        — Carol Hamilton

        I got a question for this questioner:

        you think mccain spent months coming up with this response to this story ???

        He’s been caught in about 4 lies, and you think mccain meant to do that ???

      • bmaz says:

        Well, I’d hazard a guess that there is more than one cute, perky and 2-4 decades younger blonde that McCain, ahem, “lobbied” since he has been in Congress. If you know what I mean…..

    • FrankProbst says:

      What shocks me is that Paxson squealed so fast and easy. St. McCain must not have been a good Pax boy lately…

      I don’t really think he “squealed”. I think he just answered the phone when the press called, and he gave honest answers to their questions. Did he meet McCain? Yep. From Paxon’s viewpoint, nobody did anything illegal, or even anything wrong. Why shouldn’t he be willing to talk about it?

      I have to say that I’m getting more and more curious about Iseman. Why’d she lawyer up? I’m wondering if her “relationship” with McCain was a lot less salacious and a lot more illegal.

      Another thing: Thus far, nobody’s been willing to tell us what she was saying about McCain back in 1999. My hunch: She was telling people that she had a very “close” relationship with McCain. Wink wink, nudge nudge. It would certainly be in her best interest to make her clients think she was having an affair with McCain–that would give her one hell of an edge as a lobbyist, no?

      • Phoenix Woman says:

        I have to say that I’m getting more and more curious about Iseman. Why’d she lawyer up?

        Yes! Why, indeed, did she immediately seek out legal help? That’s not the act of someone with nothing to hide.

        I’m wondering if her “relationship” with McCain was a lot less salacious and a lot more illegal.

        That’s what I’m wondering, too.

        Another thing: Thus far, nobody’s been willing to tell us what she was saying about McCain back in 1999. My hunch: She was telling people that she had a very “close” relationship with McCain. Wink wink, nudge nudge. It would certainly be in her best interest to make her clients think she was having an affair with McCain–that would give her one hell of an edge as a lobbyist, no?

  6. dday says:

    Conason wrote in Salon today about McCain’s sudden interest around 2000 in the deregulation of the passenger cruise line industry. That’s an interesting thread to pull on.

    • emptywheel says:

      Saw mention of that somewhere–absolutely. The whole firm owned McCain, not just Paxson. Thing is, so many of the issues Iseman was (is) working on were connected–all about consolidating conservative media.

  7. Dismayed says:

    I hope he did “lobbby” them. Hope he had a damn good time doing it. Doesn’t matter. Obama’s going to hand his old ass to him in November. I find any other outcome highly improbable at this point.

    • FrankProbst says:

      I hope he did “lobbby” them. Hope he had a damn good time doing it. Doesn’t matter. Obama’s going to hand his old ass to him in November. I find any other outcome highly improbable at this point.

      I do, too. But November is LONG way away. I’m not counting my chickens.

  8. bmaz says:

    Who else they got to prop up? Bob Dole is rested and ready I guess. Maybe Ron Paul will get the favorite son nod in Texas and go on a roll…

    • FrankProbst says:

      Who else they got to prop up? Bob Dole is rested and ready I guess. Maybe Ron Paul will get the favorite son nod in Texas and go on a roll…

      I agree with you to some extent. 2006 knocked out all of their standard bearers. But I’m still a bit amazed that they couldn’t find even one attractive, semi-articulate Republican in his 40s or 50s to run for President. I look at their candidates, and I feel kind of like I did when the last pope was elected. “THAT’s the best you’ve got?!”

        • cinnamonape says:

          I kinda wonder if a religious broadcaster aware of Paxson’s lobbying efforts but ideologically closer to the Huckabee campaign basically broke ranks and ratted on them. Maybe Dobson…or someone with Family Broadcasting?

        • freepatriot says:

          I kinda wonder if a religious broadcaster aware of Paxson’s lobbying efforts but ideologically closer to the Huckabee campaign basically broke ranks and ratted on them. Maybe Dobson…or someone with Family Broadcasting?

          or it could be related to this:

          Jack Abramoff: John McCain’s other Lobbyist problem…

          props to dengre at DKOS

          McCain went after Abramoff with a vengeance. Before Jack and his team could organize a defense McCain subpoenaed ALL of Jack’s records. Now Jack could stall on papers, but not electronic files. Those really belonged to his employers: Preston Gates from 1995 to 2000 and Greenberg Traurig from 2000 to 2004. These firms were tied to the scandal and McCain held their fate in his hands.

          snip

          Stone made it clear that Norquist, Reed and Abramoff knew McCain was on a mission of payback and that they were the targets:

          snip

          A funny thing happened to McCain’s payback investigation—reality intruded.

          As the details of the scandal emerged it quickly became clear that this was bigger web of corruption than anybody thought (well except me, I had been following Jack for year by 2004—and I knew it was and is a massive scandal). It quickly became apparent that the Abramoff scandal—if fully investigated—would defeat George W. Bush in 2004 and throw Republicans out of power in the House and Senate. By mid 2004, McCain was slow-walking his “investigation”. After Bush was re-elected it picked up a little steam in 2005 but went dark again as the 2006 election approached.

          and here’s the answer about the abramoff papers:

          McCain has an agreement with the Democrats that the Abramoff documents held by the Indian Affairs Committee can not be released unless both sides of the aisle agree to release them. In other words, McCain has a hold on releasing any of these documents.

          I’m telling ya, I got a nose for this stuff, and Dengre agrees

          Obstruction of justice and intentionally covering up the Abramoff scandal is John McCain’s Abramoff problem.

          it’s like the repuglitards got caught in a perfect storm of corruption

          and senator mccain, we intend to have a look at those files you been hiding …

      • Loo Hoo. says:

        Why would a youngish semi-articulate republican run this year? If such a person existed, which doesn’t seem the case…

        • freepatriot says:

          Why would a youngish semi-articulate republican run this year? If such a person existed, which doesn’t seem the case…

          chronic stupidity ???

          I still ain’t figured out how senator buttjuice* resisted the temptation

          he’s young, dumb, and repuglitarded. He speaks in complete sentences most of the time, so he fit’s your above described profile. Anybody know why he didn’t take one for the team ???

          *you don’t wanna know

          told ya not to look …

  9. prostratedragon says:

    Sure hope this is either Abramoff (which at the moment it sounds like), or just the Times somehow getting lucky. Will his campaign make it through next week?

  10. freepatriot says:

    bob dole says you guys are being a little hard on bob dole

    bob dole doesn’t like it when people are a little hard on bob dole

    bob dole says liddy dole doesn’t like it when people are a little hard on bob dole

    I’ll stop now, cuz it just gets a little pornographic after that

    what ???

    they started it …

  11. freepatriot says:

    okay, so I might have been the one who mentioned the santorum

    but I wasn’t the one who started talking about bob dole’s little hard on

    (ducking and running)

  12. Dismayed says:

    These newer digs are mighty fine and all, but posts just get away too darn fast. We need a longer active listing of post by title only somewhere front and center, so that they don’t get “out of sight, out of mind so quick” Discussions on TNH used to go on for days sometimes over a week. Here they are lucky to make 36 hours.

    Perhaps the menu could be set up to where you roll glide over a title and the preview comes up. I actually like the preview feature also. That way you could have both without giving up add space, which I certainly understand is needed as well. Just a thought.

  13. freepatriot says:

    this is off-topic, but I don’t wanna go back to find the thread where it belongs

    speaking about refreshed memories:

    that party at Jose Conseco’s ??? the one that roger clemens says he wasn’t at ???

    photographic evidence seems to have surfaced to prove otherwise …

  14. cinnamonape says:

    The purpose of McCain’s direct interference was in Paxson’s effort to purchase the Non-commercial TV station WQEX-Pittsburgh from WQED. Paxson was eventually told by the FCC that they could not b’cast proslytizing material and programming must be substantially educational and sectarian-neutral. In addition the Commission warnd Paxson that fundraising on NCO stations must be limited to station-development purposes, and not to the other interests of the licensee or the programmers.

    Thus no on-air fundraising for churches or ministers or missionaries, etc.

      • cinnamonape says:

        I think that Paxson thought they had this “great idea” to circumvent the glutted commercial radio spectrum by buying up college radio and TV stations (and struggling PBS stations) on the cheap. They would then make them money-machines by constant Pat-Robertson-like pleas for support for various causes. It would be an “indulgence” machine. The FCC, then led by a former Stanford-University college DJ smelled a rat, and they issued these pre-emptive rulings [BTW This same Commissioner pushed for low-power radio stations, which McCain (Chair of the Commerce Committee) also supported but insisted that commercial stations have the absolute power to pull their plugs if they “suspected” there was any interference]. Bush of course, appointed his cronies to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, so the desire to shift stations to the religious b’casters was lessened since they could get stuff aired by insisting on “balance”.

        Actually there were, and still are, a lot of religious stations out there on the Non-Commercial radio dial doing illicit fundraising and even political campaign activities…but that was under Michael Powell. The current guy is just as bad!

  15. bigbrother says:

    You are hitting a donnybrook tonight…they started it… Made me laugh and I needed it. I love… will his campaign lasy until next week.
    who needs impeachment investigations as long as McTorture is running. Go John baby

  16. TheConfidenceMan says:

    Um … Gus Boulis? Cruise ship lines? Florida? 2000?

    I’m having a *very* difficult time restraining myself from indulging in gross speculation here …

    I’ll add my two bits to the unspoken picture: note that Alcalde & Fay represents several Florida-based air-transport concerns as well.

  17. cinnamonape says:

    Someone needs to get the McCain legislation and activities (earmarks, tabling, etc.) during the period 1998-2000 and establish whether Alcade clients were the focus of McCain’s activities.

  18. obsessed says:

    EW:

    Have you seen this?

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/…..390/462347

    It’s like … McCain, as chairman of Indian Affairs, started the Abramoff scandal as payback against Jack, Reed & Norquist, who had screwed him in 2000 … but he didn’t realize that he was opening up a Pandora’s Box so vile that it would cause Bush to lose in 2004, so he slow-walked the crap out of it until after the 2004 election.

    In other words, McCain covered up Abramoff to save Bush!

    Or so it seems to my sleep-deprived little pea brain.

  19. obsessed says:

    Am I not thinking clearly or could Obama beat McCain senseless with his role in protecting Bush’s 2004 campaign from the Abramoff scandal?

    I mean … isn’t this almost bad enough to cost him the nomination, even at this late date? It’s certainly infinitely worse than the Iseman thing, no?

    • freepatriot says:

      I wanna know who the Democrats are that agreed to this deal ???

      shouldn’t take long to find these bastards

      time to start calling some Senators and asking some questions

      LUCY, YOU GOT SOME SPLAININ TO DO !!!

  20. Hmmm says:

    OK, I’m confused. Until today McCain was the R’s apparent nominee. Now there are multiple simultaneous attacks on/near him, including Renzi who we discover is Cheney’s guy and tied to data mining running all the way back to John fricking Poindexter. And at exactly the same time the PAA/FISA thing is stalled, no less. So. If this is coordinated (not that I assume it is), then who’s behind it? If it’s not The Revenge of Abramoff but some group on the R’s side, and if this succeeds in knocking McCain out of contention, then who is the R’s new designated nominee? Does it move back to Romney, or what?

      • klynn says:

        There has been much written that it will be Colin Powell…I’ll try to go back and find some of the write-ups and link…

        I do hope that the Abramoff connection comes out and ties into McCain, Bush, Cheney…GOP money laundering for the election…

        • klynn says:

          EW,

          I do hope that the Abramoff connection comes out and ties into McCain, Bush, Cheney…GOP money laundering for the election…

          I know you are working on this.

          I have an image that you have this “strategy wall” covered with post-it’s charting timelines on all the controversies with strings connecting events from the different timelines and that you are so close to “making” the final connections…

          Your amazing speed for analysis on the information that dribbles out is simply beyond comprehension. Thank you!

        • emptywheel says:

          I’m not touching Abramoff, not now anyway. There’s something concrete about ISeman that goes to the heart of the Republican strategy on media. I’m going to focus on that, thanks.

        • phred says:

          There has been much written that it will be Colin Powell

          That would be hilarious. Oh yeah, Obama, well, we can trump your historic run with our own experienced historic candidate! I think I would die laughing.

    • emptywheel says:

      IMO it’s not coordinated. I think the Iseman stuff was planted by Mitch McConnell last fall in an attempt to make sure his chosen candidate (don’t know who that was–probably Fred until Fred proved to be so comatose) won.

      Remember when McCain hired Bennett, he was trying to avoid a South Carolina–that is, an attack from his Republican opponents.

      So Bennett succeeded in stalling this and even in getting NYT to endorse McCain.

      But then TNR pushed it into the open–using the same tactics as Drudge, really, but coming from a source that NYT actually cared about.

      So now the tip that was supposed to sink McCain may well be sinking him too late. I suspect if it gets too much worse, they’ll jettison him and pick Mitt or someone like GOvernor Crist or Pawlenty or Pataki. But I don’t think this was supposed to work this way.

      • phred says:

        I agree with your assessment on the timing and intent of all this. It definitely reads like a Republican hit piece. And it would have successfully tanked McCain had it come out before the primaries began. Now, it’s just going to complicate the R’s strategy for November. They desperately need someone likable enough to both R’s and independents to not get blown out in the Congressional races. I don’t think anyone is seriously contemplating the possibility of winning the Presidency at this point.

        If it was McConnell, it will be richly ironic that the R’s Senate Minority Leader may have effectively shot his own party’s electoral prospects in the foot with this little maneuver. I wonder if he will retain his leadership position (assuming he is re-elected, I think he’s up this fall isn’t he)?

        • emptywheel says:

          Oh yeah, he’s up, and not doing so well approval wise, either. He’s basically hanging in there by funnelling more tobacco cash to KY, which is ironic considering the underlying reason why he hates McCain so much.

        • phred says:

          Well, lets hope he doesn’t stay in the Senate long enough to endure the humiliation of having his own members turn on him ; )

        • emptywheel says:

          Scared you, huh? I imagine they wouldn’t pick Jeb, not with BUsh’s approval at 19% and sure to fall as the economy gets worse. So then they pick a governor of a state that they might be able to win. McCain sucks in MN, particularly against Obama. But with Pawlenty, who knows? OH, MO, CA, AZ, NM are all out. CO is a possibility, but that only keeps them even with 2004, in a year where Obama has a shot at several of the swing states we lost in 2004. So MN and FL have to be good options.

  21. ProfessorFoland says:

    I keep hoping that the romantic angle of the story pans out. I really want to believe that McCain was just trying to help out his girlfriend. It would mark a return to the kind of petty corruption I’ve really missed over the past seven years.

  22. rkilowatt says:

    Just Googled santorum and boosted my education. Masterful use of creative language to handle a monster. JelloJay needs a contest to morph it into something more effective.

    I am late to the party of linguistic skill. Can a another reader start the game?

Comments are closed.