Presidential Candidate Sex Scandal Looming?

[TwilightGardener]

Can't believe no one else picked up on this from Freepville and Pajamas Media, but then, I trudge through the sewers so you don't have to:

--snip--
Ron Rosenbaum October 29, 2007 11:42 PM Shocking Inside DC Scandal Rumor: A Media Ethics Dilemma

So I was down in DC this past weekend and happened to run into a well-connected media person, who told me flatly, unequivocally that “everyone knows” The LA Times was sitting on a story, all wrapped up and ready to go about what is a potentially devastating sexual scandal involving a leading Presidential candidate. “Everyone knows” meaning everyone in the DC mainstream media political reporting world. “Sitting on it” because the paper couldn’t decide the complex ethics of whether and when to run it. The way I heard it they’d had it for a while but don’t know what to do. The person who told me )not an LAT person) knows I write and didn’t say “don’t write about this”.

If it’s true, I don’t envy the LAT. I respect their hesitation, their dilemma, deciding to run or not to run it raises a lot of difficult journalism ethics questions and they’re likely to be attacked, when it comes out—the story or their suppression of the story—whatever they do.


I’ve been sensing hints that something’s going on, something’s going unspoken in certain insider coverage of the campaign (and by the way this rumor the LA Times is supposedly sitting on is one I never heard in this specific form before. By the way, t’s not the Edwards rumor, it’s something else.
--snip--
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/ronrosenbaum/2007/10/29/shocking_inside_dc_scandal_rum.php

Hmmm, whaddya think? Yes, it might just be RW garbage, but enjoy the speculation--my Halloween treat to DU.

[yardwork]

1. If it's coming from the right-wing, it's probably b.s.

Remember how the right-wing noise machine kept telling us that a sex scandal was going to break regarding John Kerry? Every month or two there was a new rumor. Drudge was one of the main outlets. They all turned out to be absolutely, transparently false - but they got people worried.

That's all the right-wing noise machine tries to do - stir up fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Ignore them.

[Cleita]

2. Is it a Democrat? Because if it's Guiliani, there isn't anything

out there that he can top from his past unless it's a gay scandal.

[TwilightGardener]

5. He won't say whether it's a Dem or a Repub. My money's on Fred Thompson--

he has done TERRIBLY out of the gate, has not raised funds, and isn't getting much press attention either.

[Kurovski]

38. I'd say Thompson too.

That damned Hollywood lifestyle.

I wish they'd come out with the stuff about Bush's sex life. Oh well, they will years from now.

[bluethruandthru]

67. Bush has a sex life?

EWWWWW!

[donheld]

97. Ask Jeff Gannon n/t

[youthere]

106. I can't picture Bush having a sex life....

that extends beyond humping the couch arm in the oval office and sniffing Cheney's crotch on occasion.

[w8liftinglady]

109. lol..I always figured he was so narcissistic,he couldn't

someone said he put a mirror over laura's face to conceive Jenna/Barbara

[bluethruandthru]

115. Actually, he did seem taken with

Angela Merkel (sp?) when he was giving her that impromptu back rub! :puke:

[TwilightGardener]

121. Yes--and what about his obvious lust for Condi?

[libnnc]

69. Gotta be Thompson

I'll bet he's left a string of young starlets from LA to DC

remember Nashville country star Lorrie Morgan?

thinking about that mis-match makes me shudder :scared:

[tekisui]

12. Reading the comments at the link in the OP

They are suggesting it must be a Democrat because LA Times is holding it due to ethics. And one comment made light that Rudy had a gay affair between wives, and the MSM is holding it until after the convention.

It could be a pub, maybe a GOP Senator running. It could be the same GOP Senator Larry Flynt has in his sites: McCain? Brownback?

probably just a bunch of nothing,

[TwilightGardener]

14. I don't see it being a Democrat. I just don't.

[tekisui]

16. If there is anything to it, I have my money on the GOP.

[OzarkDem]

66. Remember, it doesn't have to be true

facts have never stopped the news media from smearing a Dem candidate before, no reason to believe they've changed.

[CTyankee]

105. I do, if this is true. Unfortunately, I heard a somewhat similar

story out of Washington. However, my contact was only saying what HE was hearing and that can be a real tricky situation. I don't like the thought of one Dem candidate holding stuff on another Dem candidate, but that could be the case or it seemed that way from what my contact was saying.

OR this could just be a vicious made up story concocted by purveyors of garbage. It wouldn't be the first time that happened in Washington, DC!

[TwilightGardener]

110. Ugh--hope you're wrong--I'm sure you do too!

[Virginia Dare]

18. "Leading" Presidential candidate would discount Brownback..

nobody has mentioned Romney?

[tekisui]

20. Romney, that'd be fun.

[coalition_unwilling]

47. Maybe the nickname "Rubber Mittens" might take on a

whole new meaning (with apologies to Chevy Chase who I think coined the nickname on an SNL episode awhile back)

[Richard Steele]

61. :)

[TwilightGardener]

62. Ahhh! I KNEW that picture was forthcoming!!

:rofl:

[DearAbby]

95. You owe me a monitor

and keyboard :wow::spray:

[Freddie Stubbs]

114. "Presidential candidate" would discount Brownback

He dropped out a week or two ago.

[JDPriestly]

82. The Times would not hold a story just because it was about a Democrat.

I'm wondering about the "ethics" angle. Considering what was done to Bill Clinton, what aspect of a sex scandal involving a leading presidential candidate could involve and "ethical" issue. Either the author is using the term rather carelessly or the hesitation on the part of the LA Times involves something other than just embarrassing the candidate, something other than relevancy. This is very strange. "Ethics" means "the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation."

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/ethics

So, the issue might actually involve a family member of one of the candidates and not the candidate him- or herself.

[hvn_nbr_2]

56. It has to be a Republican. They have no ethical qualms regarding Dems.

Exhibit A: The Clenis.

[lvx35]

3. Complex ethics, eh? It must be a powerful person who could screw them.

That rules out a lot of them rigth there. It must be Guliani, or Hillary. That's my guess.

[Cleita]

9. Hillary cheating on Bill?

Boy that would be a new take on what goes around comes around especially if it's with another woman.

[lvx35]

15. I thought that scandal wasn't supposed to happen until her second term as president...

...She would be jumping the gun a little there!

[Renew Deal]

48. With Guiliani. This is HUGH!!!!!!!11111

[legaltender]

54. Hugh Who?

Hugh Downs?
Hugh Beaumont?
Hugh Jackman?
Hugh Hefner?

..or would you rather not reveal yourself?

[intheflow]

58. It's kind of an inside DU joke.

There are a lot of them that come up. The way to translate this kind of thing, check out the DU Glossary. There's an entry for "HUGH" in there.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[gateley]

63. And if it hasn't been added yet, don't forget ass nine. nt

[legaltender]

65. Ha ha, thanks.

Newbie here.

[kmla]

124. Yeah. Come on.

Don't be a moran!

I'm series!

We don't want to cast asparagus at anyone!

(all are freeperisms that have made it into popular DU-speak, in case you were thinking I'm slightly daft...)

;)

Welcome to DU!

[JDPriestly]

83. Welcome to DU.

[LSparkle]

4. What "Edwards rumor"? I'll bet it's Ghouliani

He's a serial philanderer, unlike Edwards who, from what I HAVE heard, is absolutely squeaky-clean (been vetted twice, once by Gore and then by Kerry for Veep).

[TwilightGardener]

6. There was a rumor a few weeks back that Coultergeist and the

National Enquirer floated that he had an affair with a filmmaker--filmmaker has since denied the rumor.

[Virginia Dare]

13. They tried that with Kerry too, remember?.

when that didn't float, they swiftboated him.

[TwilightGardener]

24. Yep--"cheatin" rumors failed twice now, but I'm sure they'll keep trying.

[yardwork]

27. Exactly. This is the same kind of crap coming around again.

The right-wing knows that mud sticks. They throw enough of it around, "some people" start to suspect that there must be something there. It's all part of their nasty strategy.

[no_hypocrisy]

7. Giuliani and Christine Latagano is old news.

[OKNancy]

8. Won't believe anything until I see it, however

who says it's a Democrat?

Sex scandal would have to be Rudi or Fred... lol
It would be a scandal if anyone would fuck them

[TwilightGardener]

11. Hollywood = Fred Thompson. If the LA Times has it, it makes sense it would be a "local" boy.

[lvx35]

17. Oh, really good point.

Add that one to my list. Hillary, Guliani, Thompson.

[OKNancy]

22. Sounds logical

and his press has been piss poor.

[TwilightGardener]

30. The way this blogger tells it, the rumor is well-known and is affecting

how "insider" reporters are covering this candidate--to me, that screams Thompson. There have already been gay rumors about him (Andrew Sullivan/Wonkette covered it), and he's reputed to be a notorious old horndog--he's even admitted to it.

[yardwork]

31. I don't believe this rumor, and I don't believe that the LA Times would sit on the story.

[TwilightGardener]

33. I'm just wondering about this guy's motives for passing this on--

we'll have to wait and see what the LA Times does, I guess. Otherwise, healthy skepticism is in order. But if it's a Dem, I'd sure like it out NOW before the primaries.

[yardwork]

52. Actually, I was wondering why you posted the rumor here.

[TwilightGardener]

55. Ooops--you caught me! Obviously I have sinister motives by revealing

a rumor about a story about an unnamed candidate from an unidentified political party. I slink away in disgrace...(slinking away)

[yardwork]

57. When you put it that way, it makes me wonder even more.

[tabasco]

74. We need a roach motel around here.

It's hard to believe these people have nothing better to do.

[TwilightGardener]

86. You talkin' bout me? Seriesly? You better come down here and say that, I'll kick your

sorry ass to North Platte and back.

[coalition_unwilling]

50. LA Times took a big hit locally when they ran the story about

Shwarzenazi's sexual harassment of underlings right before the recall election. Of course, just like with Clarence Thomas\Anita Hill, the allegations were impeccably sourced; however, the Times' airing of the story right before the recall allowed the public to focus its fury on the LA Times and not on Schwarzenazi where it really belonged.

Wonder if l'affaire Shwarzenazi is having an influence on the decision to hold this story?

[OzarkDem]

68. Good point, no newspaper would be afraid of Dems

if they're having second thoughts, worried about retribution, it would be the GOP they fear.

[DearAbby]

96. Sounds logical...the paper would hardly fear

Democratic retribution, unless they are worried about a censure, therefore they can auction off the letter ala Limbaugh and laugh about it later, as they are running to the bank.

No, it has to be GOP. Those fuggers know how to apply pressure and get even. Good logic there.

[krispos42]

116. Yeah, but the LAT didn't have any choice

The recall election happened lighting-quick, and came out of the blue. Hell, Arnold had decided NOT to run while he was in the Green Room at Leno's show! The normal process was short-circuited.

[ProgressiveFool]

71. no kidding

if it is Thompson, they better run it before he gives up and goes home...

[Stardust]

93. I totally agree with you. LAT would scoop the story in a NY minute!

BOOM! my one thousandth post!!!! :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[TwilightGardener]

98. I'm honored that you wasted it on my tacky gossip thread.

[Renew Deal]

46. Duncan Hunter?

Not big enough.

[TwilightGardener]

51. Yep--LEADING Presidential candidate, not bottom of the bottom tier.

Hell, a sex scandal might HELP Duncan Hines at this point--get him some coverage, at least.

[JDPriestly]

85. Thompson may be "local," but he is not a "leading candidate."

The leading candidates are Brownback, Romney, Giuliani, Hillary or Obama. Assuming this rumor has any truth at all I would expect one of the candidates to drop out soon -- for family reasons. If this rumor is true, the candidate knows who he or she is and will know that he or she had been discovered. Of course, it could be about something that happened long ago. And the other person, the non-candidate involved, could be someone who would be devastated by the release of the information. That may be the "ethical" problem.

[TwilightGardener]

87. I still think Thompson qualifies as "leading" because he is placing

second in national polls. He's just not running very hard--almost as if he already expects not to win. His staff have left in droves--very abruptly in most cases. He just seems the most likely for a scandal. Rudy too, but if he's even more of a personal-life mess than we already know, God help him. I think you're right about the ethical dilemma--it may not have an impact on someone's ability to govern, but will rip apart a family, if they don't already know. But, we'll have to wait and see if any story ever emerges--could just be hot air, or the LA Times may decide not to run it at all.

[Atman]

10. Hillary's husband got a blow job from an intern!!!

:rofl:

.

[SoCalDem]

28. OMG.. NOW you've gone and DONE it !!!

:rofl:

[SidDithers]

19. If "everybody knows", how come there's no name?...nt

Sid

[Virginia Dare]

21. I read "everybody knows" there's a story...

not necessarily what the story is.

[lvx35]

23. Well, looks like somebody who knows has to go ahead and leak that name...

...and if there too damn lazy I guess we'll just have to do it for them...;)

[Cooley Hurd]

25. pajamasmedia.com is Michelle Malkin's crappy blog...

...so it's likely YET ANOTHER lie about a Democratic candidate.:puke:

[TwilightGardener]

32. You would think, but they're not breaking it--if it was a Dem, they'd find out the story

and run with it themselves.

[Cooley Hurd]

35. But, if it's a repug, you wouldn't hear a peep out of them...

...nonetheless, thank you for the heads up, wienerdoggie!:hi:

[TwilightGardener]

43. LOL! How could I resist salacious gossip like this?

:hi:

[leeroysphitz]

64. Mmm mmm.... Salacious!

[mwb970]

122. Has Malkin driven by anyone's house lately?

That could give a clue.

[book_worm]

26. I just hope it isn't Edwards--or any Dem for that matter.

[B Calm]

29. Trust me no newspaper would sit on this, unless it was about a republican!

[hedgehog]

37. On the other hand, I think they pretty much sat on Whitewater until

after Clinton was nominated.

Yes, Whitewater was a phony issue, but wouldn't you have rather had it all out before the primaries instead of after the nominating convention?

[B Calm]

102. No.. They are going to make up shit anyway, before or after...

[Renew Deal]

34. Connected to Larry Flynt at all? One of the senators...

:shrug:

[Yavin4]

36. So, You Can Start Wars Based on a Lie, But You'd Better Not Have Sex.

You can start a war that kills hundreds of thousands of people based on lie, but you better not fuck the wrong person.

[Buns_of_Fire]

39. "Hillary Clinton Seen in the Company of Known Thespians!"

Of course, no one would fall for that.

Would they?

Snopes Messageboard

[robinlynne]

40. Don't feel sorry for the la times. They have been firing all their good reporters.

[Alexander]

41. It's Fred Thompson's gay scandal.

The reason they are probably afraid to run it is because his campaign is doing so terribly right now that he doesn't need assistance in destroying his presidential bid.

[book_worm]

42. I would laugh if it was Rudy Gouliani--that would sink him.

[TwilightGardener]

44. That would be great. If it was Thompson, it won't have much impact on the race at this point.

[Jacobin]

45. Well, everyone knows Rudy is a whoremonger

Could that be it?

There would only be surprise in the media mentioning a RW candidate's dalliances.

[Venus Dog]

49. I've thought for a long time that Guiliani is AC/DC

and with the amount of individuals/groups out to get him - even his own son, my bet would be Rudy has been caught on camera!

[MH1]

53. If they've thoroughly vetted it they should report the facts

If they've debunked it they should consider reporting the debunking. (to hopefully head off someone else running with it as true)

Now, before either party gets too far down the road with that candidate.

Of course if the facts are uncertain they should just keep researching.

JMHO.

[dkofos]

59. If there isn't one, they will make one up.

[H2O Man]

60. Stephen Colbert .....

He reportedly was seen in a movie theater, watching an old Pee Wee Herman flick. Please don't say that I told you this. It's "hush-hush," until Bill O'Reilly exposes it.

[DearAbby]

99. Oh No! Not Colbert!

Did they catch him alone in a dark theater watching and enjoying PeeWee's Big Adventure? This could ruin him! :wow:

[Nimrod2005]

70. Hillary lesbian lover is going public?

[Kurovski]

72. " 'No, She's MY Girl!' Insists Thrill-Hill's Gal-Pal of Seven Years."

[Blashyrkh]

79. My first thought.

[KoKo]

73. Are you saying Hillary is going to be OUTED? Noooooo!

Don't say that .......!

[lala_rawraw]

75. Sitting on a story is a bit more complex that people realize...

It requires that every party involved in the story (reporter, researcher, editors, laywers, etc.) to "sit on it." If the story is very high level (for example, a national security story), there are far less people involved in the process (reporter, senior/managing editor and lawyer). In any case, a great many times the lawyer in the mix will ask the paper to "sit on the story" until they can firm it up because it could lead to a serious legal problem. The reporter might want the story "sat on," for example, if they feel their sources would be face problems by the timing of the story (allowing time for sources to secure legal council or prep their family or go into hiding, etc.). And editor might sit on a story for a whole host of reasons that are complicated by both the lawyer and the reporter and even the source. In other words, sitting on a story does not always mean "refusing to run it" or having "an internal ethical debate," which are of course also possibilities. I am just saying to assume those are the only reasons is not accurate in terms of how such decisions are made.

Also, if I felt so strongly that a story should run and felt that my editor and/or anyone else was inserting their political influences into the mix, I would leak the story to a reporter I trusted. This is done all the time. Think the film "The Insider" in which you see that type of example. There are reporters who are willing to forgo the scoop because the story is more important. There are others who are not.

Finally, if the friend on the street (gawd, this reminds me of Novak doing the "his wife works at the cia on wmd... everyone knows it..." crap) knew not only the scoop, but that the LA Times had it, and that the sourcing was solid - let alone everyone else knowing it... I might ask that friend just how they knew such a thing. Reporters do not leak their own stories unless a). as I pointed out above, they feel it an ethical imperative, b). they are not real journalists (rather, paid shills), or c). they are insane. The industry is far too competitive and reporters far to territorial (trust me on this) about their stories, scoops, research, sources, etc. For the editor, the same thing applies in terms of motives... that is to say, a, b, or c. That leaves the possibility of someone in between like copy person, researcher, etc., but if that many people are involved, then it is not going to be a highly important story... in news outlets, no matter the size, you create firewalls of information sharing so that very few people know what you are working on if it is a sensitive or big, important scoop. Any lawyer leaking anything would be in serious ethical and legal trouble... so who has leaked this from the LAT and why? And why does this friend on the street who claims everyone knows and is also a big time "media insider" not "out" the story? Why are they passing it along to various people for it to spread as rumor online, without specifics?

The entire thing is suspect for me because it fails to account for how such a prized scoop escaped the LAT, assuming there is a prized scoop to begin with. While many people might know the rumor, as the friend conveys, no one on the outside of a news organization would know particulars of a story unless someone in that news organization wanted it known or the story was so unimportant, that everyone actually knew and did not care about sharing it.

[Kurovski]

77. Thanks for the insider insight, lala. (nt)

[lala_rawraw]

103. my pleasure:) nt

[Blackhatjack]

78. You're exactly right " Any lawyer leaking anything would be in serious ethical and legal trouble"

However, the lawyer sees the potential for legal liability and risking client assets in a different light than the media personnel. One wrong move could jeopardize an entire news organization, and often the lawyer advising on that move is the firewall between success and disaster.

Stories are 'scoops' because someone capable of recognizing the story and in a position to publish it keeps it to themself until the time is right to disclose.

I agree with Larisa, I think this is not such a prized scoop but rather just a rumor.

[lala_rawraw]

104. wonder if the blogger in question...

is being fed crap? if so, why?

[and-justice-for-all]

76. Rommey's polygamy...nt

[Blaze Diem]

80. Maybe its Hillry & Laura Bush? hmmm Someone posted pics of

the duo somewhere on DU today.
Looked like a couple of longtime friends.
Its weird but..I'm just saying

[MiniMe]

81. Better for the GOP (assuming that it is a GOPer) if they get it out now

If whoever it is wins the primary, and then it gets out, that person and party is screwed.

[WilliamPitt]

84. Don't forget the "Kerry intern" baloney from way back when...

The media people know full well that a real, juicy sex scandal can make a career (see: Isikoff).

That means caution is required.

But, yeah, I'm curious. My money's on Rudy; he's done it before.

[TwilightGardener]

88. There's no logic to this being Rudy, unless he happens to have some

gay affairs to cover up--somehow, I don't get that vibe from him. If it was female trouble, he could have confessed it right along with his other sins--what's one more sordid tale on the heap? Plus, he's not strongly DC-connected, and the story sounds like this person was pretty well-known there. Gotta go with a Senator on this one.

[WilliamPitt]

89. Not sure.

Third wife indicates wandering habits. Also, he's courting the far-right GOP base; he can't admit to this, as his previous indiscretions are already hurting him enough with those voters.

[CK_John]

90. Could it be a candidates wife? n/t

[TwilightGardener]

92. Judy Nathan or Jeri Thompson, if so--they've got a few marriages

between them, and are married to nasty old coots. But I have a hard time believing that the cheating spouse of a candidate is going to be big enough news for the LA Times to break (if this has any truth to it at all). That would come out in other outlets, I would think.

[C_U_L8R]

91. Thompson in the bathroom with....

.... and there were diapers involved

[alfredo]

94. Mike Gravel

[Ellen Forradalom]

100. Joe Biden sleeps with his teddy bear

[alfredo]

107. Is it a girl teddy bear or a boy?

[Lorien]

101. If it were a Dem they wouldn't be sitting on it

it would be headline news.

[Buttercup McToots]

108. So who is it?

I hate this....
It's like when you were a kids...

I know something you don't know.
:popcorn:

[pdxmom]

111. If there is such a story and "everyone knows", I think the main thing

pointing to it being a Repuke is that Drudge hasn't put anything out there about it. We all know that Drudge happily runs ANYTHING anti-Dem on his page, and happily posts unconfirmed rumors like that. The fact that he has nothing says to me it's something that the right does not want to see out there.

And I don't think it's "ethics" that are keeping it from being reported. It's the corporate protection of the Repukes.

[Didereaux]

112. If LAT sits on it, then it's a REpug! BIG story would be if ROMNEY n/t

[TwilightGardener]

113. If there's any truth to this, and it's a GOPer, I hope they drop the bomb next September or so.

[Raffi Ella]

117. .

I'm reading on the Gossip blogs that this is about Hillary.Apparently her gorgeous assistant is also her lesbian lover and has been for awhile...


ETA:
link to her picture/story here:

http://www.gossiprocks.com/forum/latest-gossip/54494-la-times-sits-explosive-hillary-clinton-story-lesbian-affair-younger-staffer.html

[Buttercup McToots]

118. Whoa...

How come I've never heard this stuff?

I was hoping it was Mittens...

[Raffi Ella]

119. I hadn't heard this either until today.

I don't know what to make of it.

If it's true?She's married for Christs sake not to mention she's running for freakin' President - WHAT is she thinking even contemplating having an affair much less a lesbian affair!lol,the right wingers and Hillary haters are going to have a ball with this one.

wonder if it's true though...I read about her assistant not long ago in one of the fashion magazines...she's with her a lot because she is crucial part of her campaign team so I'm not surprised she answers Hills phone for her.I don't know what to think.

[Buttercup McToots]

120. I guess we will find out...

:eyes:

[Carni]

123. This Hillary/lesbian crap has been circulated for YEARS

But don't forget that back in the day she also killed Vince Foster (who she was having an affair with of course--per the freepers and company)

I guess killing Vince Foster turned her into a Lesbian...or maybe it was all those people Jerry falwell said Bill killed as illustrated on the infamous
"Clinton dead list"

This is just more salacious GOP bullshit.

[Kurovski]

125. Everyone knows

that Vince Foster was really a woman.

Sheez...where ya been?