Did NY Gov's Office Leak LIES About Caroline Kennedy?

[RFKJrNews]

MUDSLINGIN’


Tongues have been wagging since Wednesday about Caroline Kennedy’s “mysterious” midnight departure from the race to fill Hillary Clinton’s senate seat. Speculation and rumor has run rampant as to what was behind the move, and Kennedy’s “personal reasons” for ending her aggressive senate bid.

Some factions of Camp Kennedy and the New York Times initially tried to float the notion that Caroline dropped out due to her concern for Senator Edward Kennedy’s health. That, however, was swiftly refuted by sources close to Ted Kennedy, who himself was reportedly furious at any such reason being given.

Loosely translated, that’s the old lion roaring: “look, I might be sick, but I ain’t dead yet! Now cut out this nonsense and let me get some rest. I just had another seizure, for the love of Christ! Or hadn’t you heard?” (Well, actually, the whole world heard…being that it happened at President Obama’s inaugural luncheon, that one would be pretty hard to miss.)

Not surprisingly, a spokesman for Caroline Kennedy quickly got out there and told reporters that Caroline’s reason for ending her senate bid had absolutely, positively, nothing to do with Ted Kennedy’s cancer battle.

Allrightey, then! Glad we got that one straightened out. But if Ted’s illness isn’t the reason, what is?

Caroline refused to give an answer, but did say that she was getting sick and tired of all the ”mudslinging” going on. (Hey, if you’ve ever tried to get mud stains out of a pricey designer dress, you understand why she’s steamed.)

But wait a minute…mudslingin‘? Who’s slinging mud on Caroline, and what for? And what the heck was being said?

KNEECAPPED!

Less than 24 hours after Kennedy’s sudden about-face, the New York press (particularly the Post, who broke this series of controversial stories) started throwing some curious little tidbits out there. No actual proof being offered, of course. (Like, zero. Got a document you’d care to share, Mr. Dicker? Or are you simply content to cast aspersions without a shred of evidence to back your borderline libelous claims?) Stories began to leak about the so-called “real” reasons for Caroline’s hasty retreat: did she “forget” to pay her taxes? Did she “overlook” the legal status of her nanny? Was she…(gasp!)…having an extramarital affair?

As it turns out, these leaks were flowing from the loose lips of some unnamed, anonymous source “close to Gov. Paterson.”

Mmm-hmm.

Political operatives who have worked with him over the years say that the “source close to the governor” is often Paterson. An aide to the governor says he “seriously doubts” that Paterson was the source of the Post’s story. Regardless, Kennedy’s camp was livid. “We know there’s no vetting issue,” one of her allies told New York Magazine. “I know what’s in the disclosure form, and up through Wednesday at three o’clock, there had been no discussion of a vetting issue, no complaints from the governor’s counsel. And for him to include the idea of a marital issue is beneath contempt. There’s no marital issue!”

Fred Dicker, the reporter who supposedly “has the inside dirt” on Kennedy, made the rounds of every TV news program on planet earth this week. Perhaps his most memorable appearance was on Fox News, where he got knocked around a bit by, of all people, Bill O’Reilly (whose hero, believe it or not, is former NY senator Robert F. Kennedy):

(VIDEO CLIP AVAILABLE - SEE LINK BELOW)


And from the left side of the political spectrum, Chris Matthews also questioned the source of this reporting, which reeks of outright character assassination (would that make the NY media accessories after the fact?):

(VIDEO CLIP AVAILABLE - SEE LINK AT BOTTOM OF THIS STORY)



NOT-SO-SWEET CAROLINE?

SO SEZ `DA GUV

On Thursday, things got even uglier: Gov. Paterson himself took a swing at Caroline Kennedy at a private event the night before he tapped Kirsten Gillibrand for the Senate. (Well, hey, at least this time he had the cajones to say so himself, instead of sending one of his anonymous snarky minions to kneecap her). At the event, Paterson told guests Kennedy had been “nasty” to him and shown “disrespect” with how she bowed out, attendees told The New York Post.

The governor’s attack came just hours after his office issued a statement wishing her well and disavowing quotes from a that mysterious unnamed, anonymous “source close to him” who had told The Post Kennedy had never been in true contention for the seat and was “mired” in personal issues. (The taxes, the nanny, the rumors of infidelity, etc.)

Whew, those New York pols sure can play some dirty pool, can’t they? Blackmail, rumor-mongering and outright slander are the name of this game, folks. If you don’t kneel and kiss the Governor’s ring, you just might wake up to find a decapitated horse’s head in your bed the next morning. You may also find that people you thought were your friends are now acting like another part of the horse’s anatomy.

Although the Post’s reporting often leaves much to be desired, and the Caroline Kennedy drama is no exception, there was one editorial they ran this week which hit the nail right on the head. (And interestingly enough, we noticed it is penned by an anonymous writer, giving no byline.) The real issue here was not Caroline’s tax, nanny, or other rumored problems; it was Gov. Paterson, who clearly seems to have a leadership problem:

“If Gov. Paterson is so inept that he can’t arrange so simple a transaction as appointing someone to fill a vacant senate seat, what hope does New York state have of emerging intact from the fiscal crises now besetting it?

Make no mistake: Paterson’s endless procrastination on the matter of a Clinton succession - compounded by weeks of confusing, often contradictory signals regarding his intentions - created the circus that roiled Albany yesterday.

The governor is said to have told Kennedy last week that she was his choice - but that he was going to “keep the suspense up” by creating “a little misdirection” until he was ready to announce it.

That’s not leadership.

That’s incitement to anarchy. “


---(END EXCERPT)---

Story continues at:

http://rfkjrforpresident.com/2009/01/24/op-ed-did-ny-govs-office-leak-lies-about-caroline-kennedy/

[EFerrari]

1. The solution to ridiculous hit pieces is not more of them.

[RFKJrNews]

2. Caroline has every right to defend herself against these allegations

They are very serious indeed, and very damaging to her reputation as a private citizen. Not to mention how this hurts her fundraising ability for worthy causes, the Democratic party, and the implied stain on President Obama because of their close relationship.

If the charges are false, she and Ed need to mount one of the most gigantic libel suits in media history against the NY tabloids.

If Paterson turns out to be the "anonymous source" of these stories, he should be exposed and perhaps even impeached.

If there are any FACTS to back up these allegations, the media and the Gov's office had best be bringin' some proof. Quickly.

Uuuuh....rumors of an extramarital affair....from Paterson, of all people?

The irony is just killin' me!

[EFerrari]

4. I agree with you and have been a fierce defender of hers from the beginning.

But there's no use getting into the gutter with Paterson or whoever is putting out this bilge.

[RFKJrNews]

8. Well, I don't know about you but

if I were a public figure, and someone put out false reports of me having an affair, I'd defend my good reputation.

My hubby wouldn't be too happy about that, either.

That is why libel laws exist -- to give the innocent legal recourse against such smears, and to hold the press to a standard of accuracy in reporting.

Slander laws exist for the same purpose, so that peeps can't just go around saying whatever they damn well please about you without regard for the injury it causes your reputation, to say nothing of the psychological, financial and social damage it does to you and your family.

Just to clarify the diffrence between the two - slander is for lies that are spoken, libel is for lies that are printed.

I agree with you that the gutter is not the place to resolve matters such as these. A court of law *is.*

[RFKJrNews]

12. A recent example is Ted Kennedy's supposed "love child" story

which was published by the National Enquirer, claiming Sen. Kennedy had fathered a child back in 1985 with a MA woman.

The woman sued the Enquirer for libel and defamation of character. She likely had a winning case, as DNA tests proved the father of the child was not Teddy. Not surprisingly, the Enquirer chose to settle the matter for an undisclosed sum out of court.

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071130/NEWS/711300316

http://wbztv.com/local/national.enquirer.kennedy.2.794647.html

Tabloids smearing the Kennedys is nothing new. But the Kennedys have every right (and in fact, a duty) to defend themselves against rumors and slanderous gossip being published as fact.

Of course, these laws don't just exist to protect public figures. Every citizen has the same right to defend their character.

[hfojvt]

5. there's a whole bunch of maybes in the entire story

Maybe Paterson said this, maybe Paterson is the source of the leak, maybe the tabloid newspaper made the whole thing up or pulled it off the blogosphere. Maybe he said, maybe she said. Not a lot of substance there, just hearsay of allegations made by hearsay.

[democracy1st]

3. One thing I know for sure Gov Paterson is a flat out joke!

[RFKJrNews]

6. Caroline

got swiftboated.

A real journalist needs to get to the bottom of this. I know that's a novel idea in the press today, where investigative journalism is an endangered species.

[tsuki]

15. Investigative journalism=a trip to the fax machine for the talking points. nt

[RFKJrNews]

17. Yeah, journalism is *such* hard work...

all that walking back and forth to the printer to "rip and read" the news is just sooooo exhausting.

Reaching over to pick up the phone and make a few phone calls is too much exertion for a fat, lazy bastard.

And actually getting out of the office to beat the street and knock on a few doors is WAY more effort than we should expect from these coddled infants.

(Spoken from 20+ years of experience as a journalist and editor in print & broadcast newsrooms large and small)

[Cha]

7. I hope it comes out in the

near future..just who put out these smears against Caroline Kennedy in the media. It seems like it would be possible to follow the connections.

I've been in protective mode on DU as far as Caroline's concerned ..just like I would in real life if somebody said the things about Caroline that's been posted here.

[aikoaiko]

9. As a former NYC area person, I can only shake my head

at all the drama.


She said she wanted the position, but then drops out and gives no explanation.

There should be no surprise that people are speculating and grasping at straws. Her being coy only creates more drama.

I assumed that she was told she wasn't going to get the seat and was given/took the opporunity to withdraw.

If she wants the seat, she can run for office.

[EFerrari]

10. Caroline Kennedy has not been the source of the drama

but nice try to hang it on her.

[aikoaiko]

13. She wasn't the only one, but her withdrawing after her surprising everyone by throwing in her hat...

...without explanation is creating drama.

For decades she avoided invitations to get involved with elected politcal office so it was surprising to many to see her want to be considered for the Senate seat. And then to withdraw without a decent explanation?

[EFerrari]

16. If you have any doubt whatsoever that she's been targeted, go look at the spam:

http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news;_ylt=A0oGkjmR7HxJy2AAxMBXNyoA?ei=UTF-8&p=Caroline%20Kennedy%20statement&fr2=tab-web&fr=yfp-t-501

[aikoaiko]

18. I don't know what you trying to show me - articles and columns about her withdrawl and future?

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

19. No, I'm trying to show you that there is an effort on to make her look terrible.

It will be a while before we can sort out what happened. Someone is revving up the spam and I myself wonder who.

[aikoaiko]

20. I dunno, it looks like standard NY Camelot interest/speculation/gossip etc.

This kind of attention to and interest in her is one of the things that made her a viable candidate. She came with a political gravitas that few have before actually elected into office. Of course she is smart and has done good work too, but it was her political influece that made something special to NY.

[RFKJrNews]

21. Notice how the majority of articles about Caroline have had a negative tone

...from the start. Practically from the moment she announced she was interested in that senate seat, she suddenly went from being the media & Democratic party's little darlin' to a.... (fill in your chosen nasty insult here).... and some of it is just really ugly.

But to kneecap her after the fact, when she had already withdrawn quietly from the selection process, makes no sense and is just LOW.

Lower than low to imply that she hasn't paid her taxes (the NY tax office finds no irregularities there), questioned the legal status of her household help, and worse, saying she's fooling around on her husband. If untrue, it's definitely slanderous, and potentially libelous as well.

These are not charges anyone would take lightly, whether a private citizen or a public figure.

I mean, how would YOU like it if you were competing for a promotion at your job, and one of your rivals for that promotion told the boss, your co-workers, and anyone else who would listen those sorts of things about you? Perhaps even implying that you're the office slut, cheating on your husband? Ouch! Would it cost you a chance at the promotion? You bet it would. Would it damage your rep at work? Yep. What if they posted those rumors on the internet to f--k with you as well? Would it hurt your chances of getting another job? You bet. Would you be pissed? Most assuredly.

Would you exercise your rights under the law to restore your good reputation? That's your choice and your legal option.

[acmavm]

11. I had to stop and be impressed by the hypocrisy of some idiot sack of shit

in the governor's office who was saying that an 'extra-marital affair' kept her out of the running.

Hell, it didn't keep the governor out of office, did it?

[RFKJrNews]

14. Exactly. Tax issues, nanny issues, and marriage issues

...certainly have'nt kept ANYONE out of public office.

Actually, the seem to be requirements for getting INTO office these days. lol:)

[RFKJrNews]

22. Paterson backtracking like all hell now; "blame game" begins

The Ny Daily News is now reporting that Gov. Paterson has changed his story for the *third* time in three days about who leaked what.

First, it was an anonymous source “very close to the Governor.”

Then, Paterson reversed his position and said his office had NOTHING to do with those nasty little rumors about Caroline’s taxes, nanny, and private life.

But now, Gov. Paterson has backtracked AGAIN, saying wait…oh, yes, his memory is starting to improve….it just “might” be some paid PR flack who made those mysterious calls to the NY press late last week smearing Caroline.

And the Gov. finally seems to realize that slandering an innocent woman is very serious business indeed. So he’s uh, “investigatin’…”

And Mayor Bloomberg is mad as a hatter, calling the attacks on Caroline “reprehensible,” while the Kennedy family is “Apoplectic.”

Nuclear? I certainly hope so!

Text of the NY Daily News story below:

“People close to Gov. Paterson who trashed Caroline Kennedy after she gave up on the Senate were “reprehensible,” Mayor Bloomberg charged Monday.

“I thought that the stuff that I saw in the papers was totally inappropriate,” said Bloomberg, whose aides backed Kennedy’s bid behind the scenes.

“It’s as good an example of cheap dirty politics as you could ever find, and I thought it was reprehensible.

“I have no idea where it came from, and no, I don’t know her personal life well enough to know whether there’s anything there whatsoever.”

The Kennedy-bashing also angered Assemblyman Vito Lopez, the powerful head of the Brooklyn Democratic committee.

“As a supporter of Kennedy, the manner in which office handled the Kennedy nonappointment left a lot to be desired,” Lopez said.

Last week, Kennedy withdrew her name from consideration for the Senate seat, which went to upstate Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand. Soon after, a source close to Paterson told reporters JFK’s daughter was “facing some potentially embarrassing personal issues.” Among them, the source said, were a tax problem, a potential nanny problem and marital strife.

Appearing with Gillibrand in Hyde Park, Dutchess County, Paterson initially denied the attacks came from his administration. He then backtracked, saying there have been a series of “contradictory” leaks through the Senate selection process.

“This is a pretty serious thing and actually one that I would condemn,” Paterson said.

“I would love to know who is responsible, but at this point, I’ve been unable to determine that.”

The Daily News reported Monday that Paterson signed off on the attack strategy pushed by a paid consultant, over the objections of some of his aides.”

Looks like it’s CYA time, folks. Scurrying like cockroaches now that the lights are on.

Unfortunately for Gov. Paterson and the irresponsible NY press, it’s too late. The damage to CK’s reputation is already done, and no amount of backtracking or “investigatin’” can undo it.

The only thing that can undo it is if Caroline gets a full retraction/apology from the media for passing this garbage off as fact, and/or takes a libel suit to the courts to clear her good name.

As for Paterson, methinks he’s toast, anyway. But he must be made to account for the actions of his staffers (yes, independent PR consultants count, too). As Caroline’s father JFK once said after a famous debacle that other people screwed up for him (the Bay of Pigs), he’s “the responsible officer of the government.” Thus, ALL responsibility falls squarely at his feet.