Typical Gossip From J-Mart and the Gang at Politico; Update: Politico Won’t Reveal Source of Gossip; Update II: Mark Levin Comments

Although I haven’t decided as of yet who I’ll support for President in 2012 and Herman Cain can certainly defend himself, I feel compelled to comment on last night’s unsourced hit-piece by the Democrat blog, Politico.  As far as I can tell, there are two theories as to why Politico ran with a story that is essentially nothing more than unsubstantiated gossip.  The first and most obvious conclusion is that Herman Cain was gaining too much traction in the polls, and someone in the Obama Administration leaked the “information” to the powers that be at the liberal tabloid who were subsequently moved to create controversy in an attempt to blunt Cain’s momentum.  On his radio show today, Rush Limbaugh explained why the Left would feel so threatened by Cain and thus, why Jonathan Martin and the rest of the Obama Team at Politico would smear him in this manner, via Real Clear Politics:

The Politico and the mainstream media has launched an unconscionable, racially stereotypical attack on an independent, self-reliant conservative black because for  him that behavior is not allowed. Now, if we had…

I want to look at a couple things today from a different perspective. What would the left be doing right now if, let’s say, there were an assault on Obama of this nature. Let’s say that some conservative publication ran a story exactly like this: Unnamed sources, 15 years ago, with every detail of Obama sexual harassment. What would the Democrat national committee and what would the media be doing? They would be going after the women. They would be targeting these women, and they would name names, and they would destroy them. That is what the Democrats and the media would do. They would set out to find out who these women are that talked to the conservative publication and they would destroy them.

They would call these women racists for trying to destroy a black politician. They would claim that they’re working for the Republican National Committee. They would claim that these two women (or these women, whoever), had been hired by the Republican National Committee to engage in this smear and lie campaign against Obama. They would go after these women. They would destroy them. They would make the women the bad guys. They would dig into every minor thing in these women’s lives that they have ever done. They would trash them, they would make them prove the unprovable — because this is war, and that’s how they fight it. Anything goes, as far as they’re concerned, and they cannot allow a black or an Hispanic to rise to the top of a political establishment that is not Democrat.

None of this is even debatable, of course, and the points Limbaugh made on his show today were echoed by many others, Stacy McCain and Erick Erickson among them. Another theory about Politico’s hit-piece, about which McCain hints, is the possibility that this innuendo was leaked to the Politico by the campaign of one of Cain’s GOP rivals.

Cain’s supporters are furious and there is widespread suspicion that the Politico story was the result of opposition-research by Cain’s GOP rivals.

That’s certainly plausible, and if true was undoubtedly leaked by a Republican rival who is a) is threatened by Cain; b) has the resources to employ sufficient opposition researchers to play in the mud; and c) has a reasonable expectation that Politico would be amenable to helping out his campaign by running with a thinly sourced (if sourced at all) hit-piece on Herman Cain.  I’ll leave it up to readers to draw their own conclusion which campaign most closely fits that description, and which campaign would benefit the most from changing the subject after a rough week just concluded.

In any event, regardless of the source, Politico’s ultimate goal is to do what is necessary to help Obama win re-election, and they see a Herman Cain (and any actual conservative) as a threat.  After Politico’s hit piece ran, all three legacy media networks ran with it as their lead story this morning.  This was particularly odd since the Politico hit-piece didn’t even specify anything other than fuzzy generalities by unnamed sources.  Indeed, Jonathan Martin, the co-writer of Politico’s yarn, was laughably evasive this morning when he was interviewed by other members of Team Obama at Morning Joe, via Newsbusters:

Heh, would you buy a used car from this joker? To sum up Martin’s position, he’s is perfectly fine with running a front page hit-piece which then gets picked up by the entire Democrat Media Complex as a lead story, but when asked by a friendly host at MSNBC to provide even one detail, he can’t.  Call me skeptical, but am I out of line in believing that Jonathan Martin is, not to put too fine a point on it, full of crap? This, after all, isn’t the first time we at C4P have noted Martin’s proclivity for suffering from that particular affliction.

There’s has been plenty of additional idiocy from Martin to which we referred in the past.  Whether it’s ginning up bizarre controversies out of thin air (see here and here), lying about non-existent slights by Governor Palin to Glenn Beck, Steve King, Chuck Grassley, Mark Levin, and Sean Hannity, to name a few, or laughably biased reporting, Martin is nothing more than a third rate flack for Obama.  He’s certainly not a  credible reporter. I associate myself with Governor Palin’s characterization of the guy:


The Governor’s right.  Martin is a “punk” with a penchant for creating and spreading BS.  Again, I have not decided to support Herman Cain or anyone else as of yet, but regardless of who the GOP ultimately nominates, you can be sure that this kind of crack “reporting” from Jonathan Martin and the rest of the gang at Politico will be a staple of Obama’s re-election campaign.  Exit question: I have no idea whether there’s anything to this Politico hit-piece, but can anyone give me a concrete reason to believe Martin’s latest musings or, for that matter, anything he’s ever written?  If so, I’m all ears.

Update: Via the Daily Caller, when Politico was asked if the tip for their hit-piece on Cain was provided by one of Cain’s GOP rivals, they provided what can best be described as a “non-denial denial”:

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Monday pressed reporter Ken Vogel of Politico on  whether the publication relied on opposition research from one of Cain’s  rivals.

“Politics are politics as you said, and certainly there are people that are  digging up opposition research,” Vogel said. “I’m just not going to do anything  that would identify — that would point to the identity of our original  source.”

“We don’t think that the original source is as important as the actual  information,” Vogel said.

The reporter said Politico “got a tip and it was from someone outside. We  managed to corroborate all the details and more. We have to be clear here that  this tip was sort of a general tip.”

I don’t know when or if the information as to the source of the tip will come out, but if it does, the campaign who leaked it to Politico will be in deep doo-doo. What do you think? Who would benefit the most from a Cain implosion (in Iowa, for example), and who has the desire to be president at any cost…and the financial resources to dig for this kind of gossip toward that end?  You can watch the video here.

Update II: Mark Levin took time on his radio show today to comment on the Politico piece.  Click the image below to listen:

(18853 Posts)

Leave a Reply