Let's Review: Lack of Substance to Intern "Charges"

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

Bush is reeling, on the ropes after 1-2 weeks solid PR pummeling the likes of which has not been seen during his presidency. The Democratic primary process is beginning to release the pent up energy and anger of the anti-Bush vote. The announcements of David Kay start an avalanche of negative stories. Now AWOL in the news. The Democratic Party is coalescing behind the candidacy of a front runner.

Now, out of the ether, comes a story out from Drudge. Drudge admittedly does not cop to the standards that most "journalists" purport to as far as accuracy, checking sources. Hence the frequent "rumor has it" preceding the stories on his site. He is primarily an internet rumor clearing house and doesn't seem to pay a penalty for the many stories he does get wrong because he doesn't claim to be a real journalist. He does not even "report" that there was an affair, just that major news outlets are investigating something. He has no sources that are named. There are no specific allegations (i.e. affair, etc.). Really, just innuendo, and anonymous at that. The Right Wing talk shows echo the story (blowing air on the embers) but there obviously is not enough substance or credibility to the story to warrant reporting the story in the larger outlets.

The Telegraph, another RW paper prints more anonymous innuendo without any specifics. The only people on the record are the woman in question's parents, who are negative on the candidate, but they do not allege an affair. "What happened is much nastier than what is being reported." No named source, and what is being reported?

The spin on the RW talkshows is that the "spark" for this story somehow came from the General, and they cite an "off the record" remark made to TWELVE reporters (?) about an intern scandal. The Rush/Hannity's go out of their way on their shows to say that THIS STORY IS FROM THE DEMOCRATS, FOLKS (as do many 5 post wonders appearing on DU suddenly to discuss the story). They cite no actual proof that the story originates from the Democrats. The RW talkers spin their typical fantasy about the Clintons fomenting this as some ploy for Hilary to wreck the front runner and climb back into the convention, having recognized her strategy of sitting this election out as a mistake.

Let's examine the allegations about the General starting this. If he had solid information about something like this, and was the type who was inclined to try and win by putting mud on his opponent, it makes no sense that he would hold the info, get out of the race, and sling mud one day later. If he was inclined to sling this mud, having spent millions and several months of his life campaigning, he would sling the mud and hang around the contest for at least another week or so and see if he could get any gains. Also what is this about off the record comments to a room full of reporters. None of it makes any common sense.

OBVIOUS CONCLUSION:

This attempt at a smear is an obvious opening shot from the trademark Rove smear machine. The Rove M.O. is there. An anonymous floated rumor (remember push polling against McCain, black love child allegations by anonymous phone pollsters). Difficult or impossible to trace back to the shrub campaign, so it either does a lot or a little damage to the candidate but very little potential to backfire and damage his guy.

It is "revenge" for the AWOL story getting floated (with great success, I might add) by McAuliffe and co. (I might have to change my opinion a little on his usefulness.), and started by Michael Moore. Shrub and co. DO NOT DO WELL being on the defensive, and are certainly not used to it. It's their attempt to climb off the ropes and get back to the attack where they are used to being. The imperial, "don't dare question us" presidency.

It's clear that the shrub campaign has begun in earnest. This smear. Commercials for Medicare prescription plan already on TV. Lame appearances trailing the Democratic primaries. (I suspect that these were planned well in advance, with Rove expecting poor performances from the Dems and the shrub appearances underscoring to people that they want to vote for him. Now quite the reverse.) 200 million $ of Repub contributor money going to work...

[KoKo]

1. Clark needs to come out and say he didn't say this to reporters. Has he

done that? I agree it's very odd that Clark would make a comment that Kerry has an "intern problem" and then give his support to Kerry the next day. If the RW is lying and Clark didn't say that to reporters why doesn't he deny the story or say he knew the RW was going to break the story and it was a lie so he used the reporters just to get the story to backfire on them?

Which is it? Clark used the Press to help Kerry by repeating a rumor he knew the RW was going to use, or Clark had heard the story and believed it and so told the press. But, he had second thoughts and decided he should drop out and give support to Kerry. :eyes:

This is very hard to understand.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

2. I also forgot to mention

that it would make no sense to endorse the guy while simultaneously doing something to make it a lot less likely that he would be elected president. Good point.

[diplomats]

4. He did

His campaign called the charge that Clark leaked the story "utter garbage."

[LandOLincoln]

5. What Clark actually said, AFAIK: "...internAL problems" could cause

Kerry's campaign to implode.

Not intern. InternAL. As in internal, meaning inside, within.

Emily Latella says: "Never mind." :spank:

[diplomats]

3. I also believe the Dems had nothing to do with this

Also consider this: It's no coincidence Drudge called the woman an intern (which I don't think is even accurate). It's an obvious attempt to associate this with Clinton and Monica, and since Drudge was right on that, it's supposed to get people to believe it even without any supporting evidence. Guilt by association, to be exact. I have no doubt now this is Rove at work. He needed to put something out there with all the problems Bush is having.

[Cat Atomic]

6. Old playbook. We're not even playing the same sport anymore.

They're using their old Clinton era tactics, tossing baseless accusations out into the public with their media machine, and hoping some of these sex stories "stick".

I truly think alot of Americans see their media machine for what it is now. Fox News, talk radio, the American Spectator and other rags, Drudge... these outlets really spent alot of their remaining credibility selling the Iraq invasion.

Beyond all that, we've got serious issues on the table this year. A stumbling economy, a disastrous occupation, blatant government corruption, etc. Alot of people are going to resent being talked down to with "intern intern!" smears.

[BillZBubb]

7. Transparent Rove/RNC smear job

No basis in facts, just distortion, innuendo, and fiction. You know, the usual Repug "facts".