New York Times Spreading Rumors To Help Obama?

J.J. Jackson* | October 2, 2008

The New York Times has really fallen on hard times. It is so bad that they have decided to hitch their wagon to Barack Obama in hopes that if the Messiah gets elected he won’t beat them over the head too hard. The latest claim by the mainstream media is that McCain’s advisor, Rick Davis, received money from Freddie Mac for what sources call no, “substantive work for the company in return for the money”.

The Times article states:

WASHINGTON: One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain’s campaign manager from the end of 2005 through last month, according to two people with direct knowledge of the arrangement.
The disclosure contradicts a statement Sunday night by McCain that the campaign manager, Rick Davis, had no involvement with the company for the last several years.

Davis’s firm received the payments from the company, Freddie Mac, until it was taken over by the government this month along with Fannie Mae, the other big mortgage lender whose deteriorating finances helped precipitate the cascading problems on Wall Street, the people said.

They said they did not recall Davis doing much substantive work for the company in return for the money, other than speak to a political action committee composed of high-ranking employees in October 2006 on the coming midterm congressional elections. They said Davis’s his firm, Davis & Manafort, was kept on the payroll because of Davis’s close ties to McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, who was widely expected by 2006 to run again for the White House.

The McCain camp has fired back and as much as I hate to defend John McCain, I must:

Today the New York Times launched its latest attack on this campaign in its capacity as an Obama advocacy organization. Let us be clear about what this story alleges: The New York Times charges that McCain-Palin 2008 campaign manager Rick Davis was paid by Freddie Mac until last month, contrary to previous reporting, as well as statements by this campaign and by Mr. Davis himself.

In fact, the allegation is demonstrably false. As has been previously reported, Mr. Davis separated from his consulting firm, Davis Manafort, in 2006. As has been previously reported, Mr. Davis has seen no income from Davis Manafort since 2006. Zero. Mr. Davis has received no salary or compensation since 2006. Mr. Davis has received no profit or partner distributions from that firm on any basis — weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, bi-monthly, quarterly, semi-annual or annual — since 2006. Again, zero. Neither has Mr. Davis received any equity in the firm based on profits derived since his financial separation from Davis Manafort in 2006.

Further, and missing from the Times’ reporting, Mr. Davis has never — never — been a lobbyist for either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Mr. Davis has not served as a registered lobbyist since 2005.

Though these facts are a matter of public record, the New York Times, in what can only be explained as a willful disregard of the truth, failed to research this story or present any semblance of a fairminded treatment of the facts closely at hand. The paper did manage to report one interesting but irrelevant fact: Mr. Davis did participate in a roundtable discussion on the political scene with…Paul Begala.

Again, let us be clear: The New York Times — in the absence of any supporting evidence — has insinuated some kind of impropriety on the part of Senator McCain and Rick Davis. But entirely missing from the story is any significant mention of Senator McCain’s long advocacy for, and co-sponsorship of legislation to enact, stricter oversight and regulation of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — dating back to 2006. Please see the attached floor statement on this issue by Senator McCain from 2006.

Why is the NY Times doing this? Most likely it is to cover up for Senator Barack Obama who took over $100,000 from Fannie Mae AND has as his supporters both Jim Johnson and Franklin Raines who helped run those companies into the ground.

This later tidbit is information that is entirely provable but always seems to get thrown in later on in stories after the McCain bashing headlines which are meant to lure readers into thinking that it is not Obama who is corrupt unless they read on. There are hundreds of things to be critical of McCain over but our media seems more content to ignore those.

Contributor's website: http://www.libertyreborn.com

*Content posted by a user may not be completely written by that user. Content from another source is cited in either block quotes, with quotes or with a link to the original material. Content from other sites is posted for commentary and news purposes under fair use. Each user is responsible for their own postings and a particular posting should not be construed as being endorsed by this site or it's owner.