The Spectacle Blog
WASHINGTON, D.C. — “What the [bleep] is Politico doing?” said the man on the phone. “And how the [bleep] are they getting away with this [bleep]?”
Reporters rival sailors for their proficiency in profanity, and one of the most experienced political journalists in Washington was cussing a blue streak Thursday evening as he railed against the shoddiness of Politico’s reporting on the Herman Cain “scandal.”
Scare-quotes around the word “scandal” are necessary in that, as of Thursday night, Americans still had only vague suggestions of what it is Cain is accused of having done to women who worked at the National Restaurant Association during his tenure as president of that organization in the late 1990s.
“Five days!” yelled the veteran reporter on the phone. “Five days and what have we got? Nothing! What the [bleep] were they thinking about, running with a piece of [bleep] story like that?”
The excrement to which my friend referred was the 2,100-word article Politico published Sunday, the lead paragraph of which read: “During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.”
So far, so good — this is true, as Cain himself has confirmed, but the shortcomings of Politico’s article become obvious to anyone who reads beyond the first paragraph. All of the sources cited for the accusations against Cain were anonymous, and the accusations were described in such general terms that readers were left to wonder, “What exactly did Cain do?”
Despite the dribbling out of “details” this week, we still don’t have the names of the accusers or anything like a coherent narrative of what Cain allegedly did. This was shocking to my friend the veteran journalist, who bent my ear for 45 minutes with blistering denunciations of Politico’s shoddy reporting. “What have they got? They got nothing,” he said, finally managing to speak two consecutive sentences without a cuss word.
After that call ended, I finally got a call-back from Cain’s campaign chief of staff, Mark Block. I’d called him hours earlier to get his reaction to a PJM article that seemed to provide some details of the accusations. But long before Block called back, PJM had issued a correction that reduced the big scoop to the revelation that lobbyists like to have parties at a restaurant called Ciao Baby Cucina. And, like my friend the veteran journalist, Block wanted to talk about Politico’s shoddy reporting. Block said someone had e-mailed him the code of ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists. “I haven’t had a chance yet to forward it to the reporter and the editor at Politico, but if they lived up to the code of ethics, they both should resign,” the pack-a-day campaign wizard said.
“We’re not playing their games anymore,” Block said. “The American people are sick and tired of the cesspool in Washington, D.C. We’re not responding to any more inquiries, any more questions — period, end of story.”
This morning at breakfast, I picked up The Washington Times and saw Wes Pruden’s column, which absolutely nailed it:
Politico, the political daily of liberal pedigree that set the hounds on Mr. Cain, has not said what he is guilty of, or when, or where, or who says so. Innuendo is enough. Politico says it has a half-dozen sources “shedding light on different aspects of the complaints.” Once upon a time, a reporter trying to get a story merely “shedding light” on “aspects” past a gruff old city editor would have been thrown down the stairs if the gruff old city editor was having a particularly bad day.
Having spent a decade working in Pruden’s newsroom, I can attest that he would have summarily fired anyone who even suggested that his newspaper publish anything as shoddy as what Politico published on Sunday. Throwing the fired employee down the stairs, however, might be considered “harassment.”
The other big headline today was in the Washington Post: “Cain rises in Post-ABC poll despite scandal; most Republicans dismiss allegations.” Clearly, Block is onto something when he says Americans are sick and tired of the “cesspool” standards of D.C. media — and even some in the D.C. media are sick and tired of it. The question now is why more reporters aren’t beginning to ask questions about Politico? Why aren’t the Washington Post and the New York Times and other respectable news organizations investigating how and why Politico dropped this stink bomb of thinly-sourced innuendo in the middle of the Republican presidential primary? Who tipped them, and what kind of agenda are they pursuing?
Who, what, when, where, why and how — somebody once taught me that these are questions journalists are supposed to ask. And somebody needs to start asking those questions about Politico. Stephen Engleberg’s criticism in Pro Publica is a good starting point, but it’s only a start.
The question of motive has been raised: Was this attack on Herman Cain done at the behest of his Republican rivals? Or has Cain gotten a rude introduction to Team Obama’s Chicago-style methods? Between epithets and obscenities Thursday night, my veteran journalist friend voiced his own suspicion that the White House was behind the Politico story. Cain is “their worst nightmare,” he said. “He’s the American dream — they gotta be scared to death of that guy.”
And this points back to the real scandal this week, as expressed in a question by Jeff Goldstein at the Protein Wisdom blog: “What did Politico know and when did they know it?”
View all comments (38) | Leave a comment
Related Blog Posts
More Blog Posts by Robert Stacy McCain
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/11/04/whiskey-tango-foxtrot-politico
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Stan| 11.4.11 @ 11:06AM
Something that no one has even considered here. That the George Soros minions planted that story with the blessings of the CREEP (Obama). This is something that would not beyond the realm of the whole Obama support apparatus.
Pretzel for the Gas Jets| 11.4.11 @ 11:43AM
That would be more believable later in the season, when it would throw the whole nomination race into disarray. For it to happen now is bad news for anyone who doesn't want to run against a strong Conservative challenger, i.e. bad news for Romney in the primaries and bad news for Obama in the general. If Cain is out there's still time for support to rally around Perry, who would go into the primaries much stronger than if Cain were in the race splitting the Conservative vote. If the whole thing turns out to be nothing then Cain goes into the primaries stronger than ever.
Corey| 11.4.11 @ 2:38PM
Perry?? sorry, if Cain is wounded, I'll go to Newt. ... Perry would get manhandled in a debate with Obama. No way would I want him to be the nominee, I rather take my chances with Romney than Perry.
Bumr50| 11.4.11 @ 11:09AM
Now they're banking their hopes on this gem of a deal, which if it goes through, Cain should sue the pants off of the NRA.
"Bennett said that if the association approves a waiver to the confidentiality requirements, he would release a one-page statement on behalf of his client. But, he said, he will not divulge her name and said “she does not intend to appear publicly.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/po.....0939.story
Why would ANYONE believe ANYTHING that this "anonymous woman" says?! There is no reason for her NOT to LIE, and a million people with a lot of money willing to help her.
There is absolutely no accountability for her, and the only thing that this could do is slander Cain leaving him again without a target to defend himself from.
The American people simply aren't that stupid.
Dan Collins | 11.4.11 @ 11:42AM
I've got a poorly sourced rumor, but I decided to run with it.
David W| 11.4.11 @ 4:21PM
There is a video I saw on the internet (yes, I know, the internet is alway true and accurate) that has some guy claiming that he did something with Mr. President while he was still Senator. Of course, if the guy had claimed it was with Perry or Boehner or Newt or even Sarah Palin it would be all over the news....
Trinacria| 11.4.11 @ 11:42AM
What?! Liberal journalists have no integrity? Stop the presses!!!
Ralph Gizzip| 11.4.11 @ 11:56AM
You're mistake is in assuming the NYT and WaPo are respectable.
Lesser Weevil| 11.4.11 @ 12:00PM
Thanks for the note of sanity. You call it a "s anal" but your colleague Tavin says that it is a disaster and quotes someone else calling it a catastrophe. Hillyer also seems to have a bad case of the vapors. Sheesh.
Lesser Weevil| 11.4.11 @ 12:09PM
Sorry, "scandal".
Clint| 11.4.11 @ 12:36PM
"Joel Bennett, the lawyer for one of the women who accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment during his time as head of the National Restaurant Association said he expects the association to respond this afternoon to the woman's request to release a public statement telling her side of the story, he told National Journal in a phone interview.
The woman settled the dispute with the NRA in exchange for a cash payout and an agreement not to publicly discuss the situation. But after Cain flatly denied the allegations, Bennett came forward on the woman's behalf asking the NRA to allow the woman to tell her side of the story.
"My client is trying to respond to that and obviously does not agree with that," Bennett said of Cain's characterizations."
TexasMom2012| 11.4.11 @ 3:00PM
She already broke the agreement by issuing a statement via her lawyer... From everything I have read, the "settlement" is more in the range of a severance package used to get rid of bad employees not a damages settlement. I hate anonymous sources. There should never again be a major political story released without a single solitary named source. And I would have an editor for each party vet the story prior to releasing such drivel.
Clint| 11.4.11 @ 3:18PM
Tell it to her lawyer, Joel Bennett & see what he tells you.
"I'm sure my client stands by the allegations she made in 1999," attorney Joel Bennett told ABC News in an interview that will air first tonight on World News with Diane Sawyer. "But her privacy is her primary concern."
Bennett sat down for an interview in his cramped Georgetown law office as he and his client waited for word back from the National Restaurant Association about their request to be released from a confidentiality agreement that has prevented her from saying anything about her allegations against Cain. As part of the agreement, she was paid a reported $45,000. Now in her fifties, she works in communications for a federal agency and lives in Maryland. "
David W| 11.4.11 @ 4:24PM
When I was laid off in 2009 my severance was around $20,000. I would have to assume that if I had a possible legal action against them I would have left with much more money than that. I'm just saying that if there was really something to it the amount might be a tad more than $45,000 (just saying).
Occam's Tool| 11.4.11 @ 7:32PM
Yes, I always believe Plaintiff attorneys. That'swhy 90% of medical malpractice cases are LOST by Plaintiffs.
Clint| 11.4.11 @ 12:37PM
Meanwhile, pollster Chris Wilson — who said he polled for the National Restaurant Association during Cain’s tenure, and whose firm has more recently done work for an outside super PAC supporting Perry — told Oklahoma radio station KTOK that he had witnessed harassment by Cain toward a very low-level staffer who was maybe two years out of college.
“I was around a couple of times when this happened, and anyone who was involved with the NRA at the time knew that this was going to come up,” Wilson told interviewer Reid Mullins.
TexasMom2012| 11.4.11 @ 3:03PM
But what kind of harassment? Did he raise his voice? Did he sternly lecture her about poor work habits. Did he say he liked her dress? It is bogus to accuse Cain of harassment without providing any details of the alleged incident.
Clint| 11.4.11 @ 3:21PM
"Bennett sat down for an interview in his cramped Georgetown law office as he and his client waited for word back from the National Restaurant Association about their request to be released from a confidentiality agreement that has prevented her from saying anything about her allegations against Cain. As part of the agreement, she was paid a reported $45,000. Now in her fifties, she works in communications for a federal agency and lives in Maryland. "
Occam's Tool| 11.4.11 @ 7:34PM
$45,000 is a chickenshit settlement. I could yank that out of my personal checking account today and not worry about it. Give me a break, Clint.
If it's under $50 K , it's a settlement for nuisance purposes. Grow up, son.
CalMark| 11.4.11 @ 3:25PM
Pay no attention to Clint. He's one of AMSPEC's resident Paulbots. He believes in scorched earth against any candidate named "Ron Paul" (excuse me, DOCTOR Ron Paul) in the mistaken belief it will get his hero above single-digit support.
CalMark| 11.4.11 @ 3:26PM
Whoops...
"against any candidate ^not named 'Ron Paul' "
Clint| 11.4.11 @ 5:26PM
Pay No Attention To RINO-CINO Flunkie Stooge Colliefornia Markie. He Voted For Romney In The GOP 2008 Primaries.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.
CalMark| 11.4.11 @ 6:19PM
Who would you have had me vote for, dingbat?
Huckabigot?
Occam's Tool| 11.4.11 @ 7:36PM
Perry supporter spreads dirt on Cain; Paulbot reports it.
Clint| 11.5.11 @ 11:43AM
RINO-CINO Tool Job & His Israel Firster BibiBot Fellow Travelers Said That They Would Vote For The RINO-CINO Frontman,Mittens Romney.
We Are Being Set Up By These RINO-CINO Flunkie Stooges For The Ruling Elites' Frontman Mittens Romney.
These Are The RINO-CINO Flunkie Stooges Who Gave Us The Serial Traitor To Conservatism, John McCain Of McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy,McCain-Lieberman,Gang Of 14, Opposing Bush Tax Cuts Of 2001 & 2003,TARP.
Now They Are Trying To Give Us RomneyCare,TARP, Cynical Flip-Flops On Abortion, Gays, Refuses to Sign Pro-Life Pledge, Illegal Immigrants, "Little Chain Saw Al" At Bain, Crony Capitalism Campaign Money Trail.....
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.
Solo| 11.4.11 @ 12:41PM
Here's a question:
What did women do years ago, prior to Sexual Harassment Laws, to deal with this "horror"? Hmmm?
Are women so fragile and timid that they have no idea how to defend themselves against some pushy letch? Even if he is her boss.
Bonus question:
How is someone to know the difference between a welcomed flirtation and an unwelcomed "harassment" prior to having acting on it?
Does it change based on whether or not "She" finds you attractive, also?
IN other words.....if she finds you attractive, then it's a welcomed flirtation. If she doesn't find you attractive, the exact same behavior now qualifies as "Sexual Harassment".
It's a little like the liberal's attitude on abortion.
If she wants the child, it's a "baby" and deserving of legal protections.
If she doesn't want the child, then it's a "blob of inanimate tissue" and can be discarded with no more consideration than one lends to a clipped fingernail.
In summary, then:
There are no objective criteria by which to make these determinations. It's whatever she wants it to be at the moment and can change its status retroactively, if necessary.
And we call this a "Nation Of Laws"?
Hog wash!!
TexasMom2012| 11.4.11 @ 3:09PM
I, for one, pretended that I did not understand the course innuendoes and jokes. Worked just fine for me in an all male office where I was the only female and the youngest in the office, age 20, circa 1983. Never really bothered me but I grew up in the last
generation to really believe the old saying "sticks and stones may break my bones but WORDS will never hurt me". Now we have the ridiculousness of speech that might "offend" someone being restricted. Hogwash, grow a pair, get a life and get over your self importance.
Occam's Tool| 11.4.11 @ 7:35PM
Yup, the definition of sexual harassment turns EXCACTLY upon the question of does she find you attractive. Then again, so does rape.
Xavier| 11.4.11 @ 1:18PM
Mr. Obama selects the companions for his frequent golf outings from among his male junior staffers. Does this practice create a "hostile work environment" for the female junior staffers?
socraticsilliness| 11.4.11 @ 3:04PM
Bill Clinton, the feminists and dems taught us these things are nothing more than bimbo eruptions. So, let's move on.
Jack| 11.4.11 @ 3:52PM
Well, you did not really expect the media to let their golden boy President have to face a conservative black leader did you?
We are 12 months out from the general election; can you imagine how nasty the Left will play as we get closer to the 2012 election?
And just so you know in the future, it is okay to use wtf now. We made it part of our name at http://mywtfblog.com and have not had a single complaint. Once Obama came out with Winning The Future, the letters have become mainstream.
goldwater girl| 11.4.11 @ 4:25PM
Personally, I think all of this PC practice in the workplace has created an environment for worthless employees to extort money from their employer, as they are being booted out the door. The militant feminists ramped up this type of activity, encouraging all their followers to have some kind of grievance. I grew up with 4 brothers and there's not an offensive word that I haven't heard or used. Since when did women become so fragile? Put your big-girl panties on!
David W| 11.4.11 @ 4:27PM
I want to add something. Today, what would happen to an exec in a company if he or she said something as simple as the following to an employee, "I do not support homosexual marriage?" Would the odds be good that the employee, especially if a homosexual, would file a harassment complaint??? Perhaps the company would give the employee a financial incentive to get the hell out so as to remove the unhappy employee.
Jeff Powell| 11.4.11 @ 7:06PM
Of course Obama is behind this. Obama has concluded that Romney will be his opponent, and is running his campaign on the class warfare meme to take advantage of Romney's pedigree. None of the other potential Republican candidates "fit" the scenario, so Obama is "helping" by sliming the non-Romneys if their poll numbers get too high. Remember, sliming opponents is this President's specialty.
J Story| 11.4.11 @ 10:10PM
I hope the lawyers for Cain and his campaign see they can put together a solid lawsuit against the politico and its journalists -- and get the lawyer for the anonymous accuser disbarred. These kinds of attack will continue into the election cycle unless they can be stopped cold with some very expensive counterattacks in court. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom of character assassination.
steve bennett| 11.4.11 @ 10:36PM
Sue the bastards!!
Ross Kaminsky | 11.5.11 @ 10:35AM
Tremendous article, Robert.
johninflorida| 11.6.11 @ 8:11AM
"Why aren't the Washington Post and the New York Times and other RESPECTABLE news organizations investigating how and why Politico dropped this stink bomb of thinly-sourced innuendo in the middle of the Republican presidential primary?"(emphasis mine)
Respectable??? Gimme a break!
The citizenry (at least those who are paying attention) are finally beginning to paint with a broad brush. If you're a "respectable" journalist and don't condemn (on the record) these guys, you'll be consigned to the dustbin right along with them!