Vicki Iseman Suing New York Times Over McCain Affair Story

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Vicki Iseman Suing New York Times Over McCain Affair Story stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

DENA POTTER | December 30, 2008 05:44 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It

RICHMOND, Va. — A Washington lobbyist sued The New York Times for $27 million Tuesday over an article that she says gave the false impression she had an affair with Sen. John McCain in 1999.

The newspaper stood by the story.

Vicki L. Iseman filed the defamation suit in U.S. District Court in Richmond. It also names as defendants the Times' executive editor, its Washington bureau chief and four reporters.

Iseman represented telecommunications companies before the Senate Commerce Committee, which McCain chaired. In February, as McCain was seeking the Republican presidential nomination, the Times reported that McCain aides once worried the relationship between Iseman and McCain had turned romantic.

The article said that both McCain and Iseman denied any romantic relationship, but the lawsuit says most readers would find that obligatory.

"That The New York Times would make such aggressive and sensational allegations and insinuations in the face of on-the-record denials by Ms. Iseman and Senator McCain only reinforced the message to readers that The New York Times in fact believed that Ms. Iseman and Senator McCain had indeed engaged in an `inappropriate relationship,' a relationship that was romantic, unethical, and a conflict of interest," the lawsuit says. "Otherwise, reasonable readers would conclude, The New York Times would never have printed the story at all."

The Times maintained its defense of the story in a statement Tuesday.

"We fully stand behind the article. We continue to believe it to be true and accurate, and that we will prevail," the statement said. "As we said at the time, it was an important piece that raised questions about a presidential contender and the perception that he had been engaged in conflicts of interest."

Story continues below

Richmond lawyer W. Coleman Allen Jr., who represents Iseman, said she waited until after the presidential election to file the suit because she didn't want it to become a distraction.

The lawsuit claims that other media outlets were investigating McCain's ties with Iseman and that the Times was so concerned about being scooped that it printed a story "to pack the maximum sensational impact with the minimum factual support." The lawsuit contends she suffered an "avalanche of scorn, derision, and ridicule" that damaged her health.

The lawsuit cites accounts from other media, political pundits and the Times' public editor, Clark Hoyt, that interpreted the article as meaning that McCain and Iseman had an affair.

In what the lawsuit calls the most damaging passage, the article said two former McCain associates had warned him that he was risking his career, and that he "acknowledged behaving inappropriately" and "pledged to keep his distance" from Iseman.

The story also pointed to a fundraiser that Iseman and McCain attended in Miami in 1999, when they flew back to Washington along with a campaign aide on the corporate jet of one of her clients.

"Ms. Iseman's relationship with Senator McCain was entirely professional, ethical, and appropriate," the lawsuit states, adding that it "was not different in kind from the cordial yet professional relationship that hundreds of lobbyists have with hundreds of members of Congress."

Keith Werhan, a constitutional law professor at Tulane University, said key to Iseman's case will be how the court defines her _ as a public figure or a private figure. Public figures have to meet a higher standard of proof, and show malice by a news outlet.

Werhan also said the Times could be protected if it accurately quoted McCain's former aides about their perceptions of his relationship with Iseman.

"If all those statements are true, then it seems to me the Times is not at fault for reporting that," Werhan said.

"It's essentially hard to win a defamation suit," Werhan added. "The idea is the First Amendment has its thumb on the press' side of scales."

Iseman's lawsuit was first reported by Virginia Lawyers Weekly.

___

Associated Press Writer Steve Szkotak contributed to this story.

RICHMOND, Va. — A Washington lobbyist sued The New York Times for $27 million Tuesday over an article that she says gave the false impression she had an affair with Sen. John McCain in 1999. Th...
RICHMOND, Va. — A Washington lobbyist sued The New York Times for $27 million Tuesday over an article that she says gave the false impression she had an affair with Sen. John McCain in 1999. Th...
Filed by Danny Shea  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
392
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)
- akw I'm a Fan of akw 8 fans permalink

She's got a darn good attorney.......he's the dean of a law school and he has written books on and argued Supreme Court cases about the first amendment in the media. He knows his stuff, and the NYT screwed up big time on this one. Their own editor admitted that the story was garbage.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:42 AM on 12/31/2008
- JZ735 I'm a Fan of JZ735 22 fans permalink

The Times has fallen far, and it has suffered as a result...ever see that awful ad for their Weekender plan? All the people potrayed are EXACTLY why the once Mighty Gray Lady has fallen so far...a few years ago, I took a course in copy editing from a Times editor at Columbia...the dim bulb had no clue about editing, and the class was frustrated and some of us outraged by his stupidity and ignorance of basics.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:17 AM on 12/31/2008

As far as the Times' culpability here, every square inch of their butts is legally covered; they were reporting on the McCain campaign, and the actions within, and the reasons given for them by their operatives. Iseman and McCain were confronted with the operatives' accusations, they denied them, and their denials were printed. For Iseman's lawyer to say (essentially) "Oh,we know what they REALLY wanted readers to think!" is a stretch, and a non-starter.

The only tactic Iseman's lawyer can pull out of his hat is to find a lynch mob of a jury that hates "The Liberal New York Times" and wants a chance to punish them for imagined "liberal" offenses.

And that just may work.

Sleazoids. I hope the Times is ready to fight thi$ in perpetuity (and it probably wouldn't be a half bad idea, either, to hire a phalanx of private eyes, to find out whether they really did boff each other. Would THAT be precious, or what? :-)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:31 AM on 12/31/2008
- JZ735 I'm a Fan of JZ735 22 fans permalink

The Times wrote a bogus story...period...end of sentence...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:53 AM on 12/31/2008
photo

Doubt it. McLump was doing her. Take that to the bank.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:55 AM on 12/31/2008

Oh good, Jay-Z, then we can just cancel the trial and send her the check. Right?

All the Times has to prove is that high-ups in the McCain campaign: [a] shoved her out of the way because they were afraid she was getting some of that sweet POW nookie; [b] and then ratted her out to Times reporters. Like the Times reported.

As this has already been independently corroborated... no "bogus story". But thank you for ending your sentence. Until you have some new observation based on something other than snarling, right-wing catechism ("the Liberal New York Times!")... make it your last? Thanks. Happy New Year.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:53 PM on 12/31/2008
- saxmaniac I'm a Fan of saxmaniac 6 fans permalink

First rule of law school: never sue empty pockets. Her esteemed attorney is going for the bucks, on contingency. Hope the Times wins.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:47 AM on 12/31/2008
photo

Where has she been hiding all these months? I thought she'd been renditioned.

And, oh yes, he did.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:19 AM on 12/31/2008

Another smart woman that we can all be proud of! This story has been long forgotten and now this woman is bringing her so called painful untrue story back to the surface. Lets rehash it again but this time lets make even bigger headlines by paying her money to help her get rid of the pain! McCain seems to really enjoy his flakey women!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:22 AM on 12/31/2008
photo

major twit.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:09 AM on 12/31/2008

You just resent it that people are waking up to the fact that libel laws are enforceable.

Perhaps you should be worrying about stuff YOU'VE posted.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:04 AM on 12/31/2008
- VOTER I'm a Fan of VOTER 195 fans permalink
photo

"Perhaps you should be worrying about stuff YOU'VE posted." Et tu?

You really need to send your postings to Fixed Fox where
opinions and nasty comments count as NEWS.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:05 AM on 12/31/2008
- Lotus19 I'm a Fan of Lotus19 8 fans permalink

This coming from a one-woman smear campaign.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:22 PM on 12/31/2008
- Daniboy I'm a Fan of Daniboy 19 fans permalink

NYT"S busted McCain but didn't know anything about Edwards. Is that one reason they are going broke?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:04 AM on 12/31/2008

The papers are going broke because the internet has forced them to give away their content for free. Researching news stories costs a lot of money. And it didn't help that hedge funds and other stockholders were forcing them to cut corners by demanding absurd profits.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:18 AM on 12/31/2008
- VOTER I'm a Fan of VOTER 195 fans permalink
photo

Question: Are you being paid to post?

Checking your profile, I was surprised to find 800+ out of
1,700+ comments all opposing Caroline Kennedy.

Few if any posters are obsessed with one person or topic unless
they are being paid for their postings.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:32 AM on 12/31/2008
- Melissa I'm a Fan of Melissa 24 fans permalink

Good for her. I hope she wins every cent. The NYT and others should have been investigating wall street and PONZI schemes instead of this kind of junk.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:20 AM on 12/31/2008
- badtimes I'm a Fan of badtimes 11 fans permalink

Potential conflicts of interest at McCain's level are only junk if you're a beneficiary or highly partisan.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:59 AM on 12/31/2008

1. The New York Times did not "bust" McCain, and never claimed to in the article (READ it!);

2. I wasn't aware that they are "going broke"; do YOU have a "scoop", here?

3. And speaking of "scoops", is it your position that, if the Times had "scooped" whatever tabloid found out about Edwards' dalliance first, this one "scoop" would have saved them from such a bankruptcy?


The profound ignorance of dittoheads should be studied by anthroplogists.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:39 AM on 12/31/2008
- JZ735 I'm a Fan of JZ735 22 fans permalink

The story was sheer garbage, about as bogus as Judy Miller's WMD claptrap.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:54 AM on 12/31/2008
- Daniboy I'm a Fan of Daniboy 19 fans permalink

The new Senator from Illinois is a lobbiest! Whats so bad about lobbiests?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:00 AM on 12/31/2008
- PaHairO I'm a Fan of PaHairO 7 fans permalink

Spelling at the level of a 2nd grader tends to diminish your argument. FYI.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:22 PM on 12/31/2008
- mediamarv I'm a Fan of mediamarv 38 fans permalink
photo

Good thinking.... start the New Year out by re-acquainting the public with this story which was swept away by the RNC during the election.
More reasons to love those quirky Republicans.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:49 PM on 12/30/2008

I don't think the RNC swept away the story. The Times dropped it like a hot potato in the face of widespread criticism from within the news industry.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:19 AM on 12/31/2008
photo

you don't remember how this woman dropped off the face of the earth after the story?

it most certainly was swept away

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:10 AM on 12/31/2008
photo

she is just looking to get paid

like most of the hundreds of lobbyists that have hung out with mccain over the years

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:09 AM on 12/31/2008
- Subversive I'm a Fan of Subversive 12 fans permalink

"Deposition with Sen. John McCain. Sen. McCain, do you know the plaintiff?"

"Who?"

"The plaintiff, Vicki Iseman."

"You mean the pretty , er, the lobbyist? No; not much. Well, maybe a little."

"Senator, I remind you you're under oath."

"Which one?"

"Your oath to tell the truth."

"I always tell the truth; I'm a senator."

"If we could get back to Ms. Iseman..."

"She was just a woman I met last year and we hit it off. I saw her from time to time at Washington functions. She liked to talk about communications and sports and that stuff. I just sat back and let her talk, you know. She had a pretty smile and great legs, er, I mean, a great personality. Am I being recorded?"

"Yes. Continue."

"Well, I thought she'd make a great vice president. So I asked her..."

"No, Senator, we're not talking about Gov. Palin; we're talking about Vicki Iseman."

"Who?"

"The lobbyist. Blonde...fortyish."

"Maybe if I saw a picture..."

"Do you remember your relationship with her?"

"We didn't have a relationship. She would come around a gab about pending bills and we'd have drinks--she liked the hard stuff, you know. I remember she got really schnockered after a few highballs and fell asleep in my office..."

"All right, Senator, thank you. Bill, call the Times and tell them we're ready to settle."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:10 PM on 12/30/2008
- pc51 I'm a Fan of pc51 17 fans permalink
photo

The story was not true. There is no way NYT's can win - they will settle out of court-watch and see.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:12 PM on 12/30/2008
photo

if they settle out of court, it does not necessarily mean the story wasn't true

and how do you know the veracity?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:20 PM on 12/30/2008
- VOTER I'm a Fan of VOTER 195 fans permalink
photo

She, also, runs the risk of having her own life's experiences being
put on display.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:24 PM on 12/30/2008
- NotMcCain I'm a Fan of NotMcCain 81 fans permalink
photo

What's not true? That McCain was surrounded by lobbyists who called the shots for his campaign?

That his aides were worried about an inappropriate relationship developing with Iseman?

The first is -definitely- true. And the second has been backed up as well.

The NYT was careful not to say there WAS an affair. Only that the APPEARANCE that there might be one, had aides worrying--and acting to keep Iseman away from him.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:39 PM on 12/30/2008

Do you think that the Time's fancy footwork, where they avoid saying outright that there was an affair but instead imply that one took place in every conceivable way, will protect them from this suit? The law looks past "clever" writing in deciding whether somebody has been defamed.

They didn't have this story nailed, and decided to run it anyway -- which is something reputable papers never do -- and they deserve whatever they get from the Court.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:07 PM on 12/30/2008
- VOTER I'm a Fan of VOTER 195 fans permalink
photo

Well, she needs to bring John McCain into court and he can then declare this entire story
is a NYT fabrication.

Right?

If John McCain says he wasn't cheating on his wife, we would certainly believe him.............

ROFL...........

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:13 PM on 12/30/2008

The story was NOT about Vicki Iseman and John McCain doing the nasty.

But that is what the R's got Outraged [tm] about, repeatedly and loudly, until it became conventional wisdom that that WAS what the story was about. And then the MSM bandwagon rolled, weeping and gnashing its teeth about how sleazy the Times was, for writing a story about something they didn't write a story about.

Classic Rove.

One more time (I know, it's futile...): the story was about how the McCain campaign was in disarray, and how they went into panic mode over this lobbyist, whom the Times might well have been suggesting was a tad too close to McCain... but only because of his well-documented favoritism toward her client, Comcast.

And the reason the McCain campaign panicked, according to the story, was that they were worried that the two of them WERE having an affair. THIS WAS THE CONFESSED FEAR OF THE MCCAIN TEAM, NOT THE ACCUSATION OF THE NEW YORK TIMES.

Which makes it a legitimate-as-hell political story.

(And again, the Times went to both parties, and printed their denials . They dotted every i.)

This was a "media scandal", driven totally by managed perceptions and conventional wisdom. The story itself was legally blameless. If the Times loses this suit, it will be via jury nullification.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:16 AM on 12/31/2008
- JZ735 I'm a Fan of JZ735 22 fans permalink

Of course it's not true...it's as true as that publication of a certain Mayor of Paris trashing "Like You Know" Caroline...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:58 AM on 12/31/2008
- zigzag1 I'm a Fan of zigzag1 8 fans permalink

She hid better than Osama Bin Laden during the election. Who paid for that?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:04 PM on 12/30/2008
photo

And why, if there wasn't at least the APPEARANCE of impropriety, which is all the Times story suggested....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:26 PM on 12/30/2008

She stayed hidden because nobody was looking for her.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:14 AM on 12/31/2008
photo

I hope Vicki spends lots of her money on the suit. Trial attorneys need work. The press needs a good story to run, headlines to publish, and a good scandal to keep the public focused on McCain. Plus McCain needs the attention. After all, he's fading fast. People barely remember him as anything more than Palin's running mate. And Vicki? Now remind me, who is she again?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:02 PM on 12/30/2008
photo

another bleached blonde who caught McCain's eye

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:18 PM on 12/30/2008
photo

Hey he likes the type....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:27 PM on 12/30/2008

A private citizen whom you never heard of until the New York Times published that stupid story.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:08 PM on 12/30/2008

... did you forget her job as lobbyist? For a major company. That McCain wrote favorable policy for?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:00 AM on 12/31/2008
- VOTER I'm a Fan of VOTER 195 fans permalink
photo

A woman on Cindy McCain's Hit List.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:25 PM on 12/30/2008
photo

the story is true

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:56 PM on 12/30/2008
photo

Juicy details, please!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:18 PM on 12/30/2008

After she finishes with the New York Times, maybe Vicki will come after YOU.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:08 PM on 12/30/2008
- VOTER I'm a Fan of VOTER 195 fans permalink
photo

LOL

Right!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:15 PM on 12/30/2008
photo

very funny

What no one seems to get is that THE STORY, if you bother to read it, is true.

People are assuming that the Times said that she and McCain were having an affair. the article did not say that. The article mentioned some goings on between the two using accounts of insiders. Now, the reader can infer what they want from the story. BUT when I say THE STORY was true, I am saying the times story is true, not that there was a certain affair

get it?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:04 AM on 12/31/2008
- PaHairO I'm a Fan of PaHairO 7 fans permalink

G L O R I A !

GLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOREEEEEEYAAAHHHHHH !

Taking it kind of personally, are we ?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:25 PM on 12/31/2008
- zigzag1 I'm a Fan of zigzag1 8 fans permalink

Secretary to high paid lobbyist in two years, typical career path for millions of women

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:46 PM on 12/30/2008
- zendem1 I'm a Fan of zendem1 116 fans permalink

McCain said, "I'm suspending my campaign to deal with these completely false allegations." Then somebody nudged McCain and told him that he was no longer running for President. "What..so did I win?", asked the confused Senator.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:34 PM on 12/30/2008
photo

I'll only note that she waited until after the election....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:33 PM on 12/30/2008
- zendem1 I'm a Fan of zendem1 116 fans permalink

Yep. Because she was in hiding until after the election, and being subsidized by anonymous donors.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:37 PM on 12/30/2008
photo

Hiding is right. Not a peep. Talk about lying low....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:38 PM on 12/30/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect