Important extemporaneous McCain "Scandal" (Media Scandal??) notes:
1. McCain's denial was SO complete (i.e. not only did he fully deny any/all impropriety of any kind) that he even denied ever speaking to any of his staff about this woman, this issue, Ever.
Did he - ironically - go too far?
Now if the MediaMob can prove he spoke about this with one of his staffers even once (maybe he genuinely forgot?), he will appear guilty.
So now the NY Times - oh, and every other media source on earth - is going to chase down all these staffers, and hammer them relentlessly with questions as to whether any of them ever had such a conversation with McCain about "the lobbyist".
If they can find One who says Yes, trouble for McCain.
Knowing as they do that their reputation may be horribly damaged if they cannot impeach McCain's denial, think the NY Times will somewhat, ah, Aggressively, pursue this option?!
2. The profound story within the community of journalism is this: is there a story (i.e worth printing) here? Perhaps.
But since when does the NEW YORK TIMES put on page one a story accusing one of America's most powerful men - maybe about to become President of the United States - of infidelity and corruption ON THE BASIS ON A COUPLE ANONYMOUS SOURCES?
Are there newspapers that do this? Yes - they are right next to the disposable shavers and chewing gum at the supermarket checkout counter. Not the New York Times.
At least not until now.
A brave new day for "journalism"?