A "secret" allegation is much more powerful than one that's in the open, and weak evidence seems much more convincing when only insiders know about it
This is exactly why it remains secret. Bet you dollars to donuts it's a not-very-well substantiated rumor about one of the Democratic candidates that was planted by right wingers. That's why it's showing up in Pajamas media, and why it came from the LA Times.
Also, whatever this is, there's still time for it not to distort the election. If it's false, it gets debunked and dissipates. If it's true and damaging, the candidate drops out and someone else takes over. But sitting on it until we're in the primaries is wrong either way.
2: You know, if it's as described -- an 'everybody in the MSM knows' kind of thing -- shouldn't Saisegly and similar know? And why aren't they talking?
4: of course not. Because it's been leaked specifically to those credulous fools who'll believe they're being ethical by sitting on it.
Okay, are you ready? Hillary's husband is a philanderer!
It's true! Don't go telling everyone.
6--
right--and similarly, it's doubtful that it could be a rumor about giuliani having an affair. that would just be a grass still green story.
now--the fact that mitt was caught blowing kaus' favorite goat, that might surprise people a bit more.
shouldn't Saisegly and similar know? And why aren't they talking?
I wondered that, but 1) it depends on who "everybody" is and 2) I happened to briefly share an office with someone very well-connected in the Democratic consultant class, and he liked to gossip with me for some reason, so I heard some bombshell rumors and I didn't tell a soul because I thought that I shouldn't spread unsubstantiated rumors and didn't want to betray a confidence. Which is to say that I was behaving exactly as these reporters are behaving and Tweety gets it exactly right.
I learned the Jeri Ryan story that caused Obama's likely opponent to have to withdraw weeks ahead of its release from the late Steve Gilliard. I agree that somebody should say what they know, and that Rosenbaum is right about the crap this is.
What I love are the piles of comments there stating that it must be about a Democrat because the media always just sits on those stories, while rushing the ones about Republicans to print. It's like they've been living on a different planet for the last 15 years.
This isn't just about the Edwards rumor?
10: but see, that's exactly why it works. Gets the troops all excited about how dirty the Dems are, making the the ground all that much more fertile for whatever unlikely smear campaign the GOP would like to seed.
Alternate realities go all they way down. This I have learned from blogs.
The guy says specifically that it isn't.
12: that's another way it works, that is.
Oh, I see that now. I searched in the page for 'Edwards' and it jumped straight to the comments for some reason.
When I was an 18-year-old intern at CNN, I knew the name of Bush pére's mistress. (Jennifer something, if memory serves.) Don't all of you remember how that story dominated the news cycle in 1990?
Alternate realities go all they way down. This I have learned from blogs.
And in specific, the discussion of "o-earnest," I'm guessing.
I assume it's about a Republican, and, specifically, about Mitt.
18: ROM-NEE SPACE KNIGHT HAS FORSAKEN EARTHLY PLEASURES
18--
i already broke that story, in comment 7.
I'll confirm it. It's true. I slept with all of them. And I feel so let down by their performances that I'm selling my Viagra stock.
ogged, as a blogger you are ethically obligated to spill it.
Ooh, yeah. Screw the ethical issues, I want to know! Besides, all those worries won't mean a hill of beans once drudge has printed it. Then it's a story about the story.
I can only imagine insiders getting excited about scandals concerning Hillary or Obama. None of the other candidates have enough stature to matter that much. I'm sure this is foolishly narrow of me. But I did help follow potential scandals for a news team in the 92 election.
17: SPY published the Bush's mistress story (yeah, Jennifer. Wasn't she a diplomat?) in 1991, I think, but no one picked it up that I recall.
17 -- J F/tzgerald was my mom's best friend in high school, and they still see each other several times a year. My mom believes the denials. She also wants to believe the denials.
George H.W. Bush came in here and didn't trash the place, and it is his place.
26: NY Daily News also ran a bit about her sinecure at the state dept in 92.
There was no way we were going to run with that story, but everyone wanted the details at their fingers in case it somehow became the focus of coverage.
From USA Today, August 12, 1992. Memories:
Jennifer, Gennifer
Now it's George Bush's turn in the tabloids.
The latest dirt: An alleged tryst in 1984 between then-vice president Bush and an aide, Jennifer Fitzgerald, reported in Tuesday's New York Post.
The source: A former CNN reporter who says former U.S. ambassador Louis Fields, now dead, told him in 1986 that he arranged the rendezvous.
Bush says it's a lie.
Rumors about Bush's alleged affair have been around for years, but no one has found enough evidence for a story. Now the media will disgorge notebooks from the failed investigations.
That's exactly what they should do. Not to titillate or pander, an option wisely rejected earlier, but to help voters separate fact from rumor.
The same approach was used when Gennifer Flowers, an Arkansas state employee, claimed she'd had a long affair with Gov. Bill Clinton.
Voters have their own obligation: Weighing a possible scandal against every other facet of a candidate's profile:
What does he have in mind to bring down the deficit? How will he protect the country's security and bring about prosperity? How well does he perform under pressure? What kinds of people does he surround himself with? Is what he says different from what he does? Does he have a coherent health-care plan and a way to pay for it?
Whether voters see allegations of marital infidelity as insignificant or as potentially fatal blots on a candidate's character, they have a right - and a responsibility - to decide based on the facts.
Again, talk about class consciousness. How much do you want to bet that part of the reluctance to treat that as a scandal was not wanting to screw up nice people's lives. Bill, Hillary, and Gennifer weren't 'nice people', so messing with their lives doesn't mean anything.
Jennifer Fitzgerald. I think that the information in this article counts as a preponderance of evidence.
26 -- It was all around; obviously, I noticed more than most people would, but found myself talking about it pretty regularly.
Sorry Charley, didn't see your post, someone can fix my comment if they want.
Jim Henley had something a while back about how "everyone knew" that Bush had fallen off the wagon and was consequently estranged from his wife. If it's true that Bush is back on the sauce and the media knows it but won't tell us then that's a much much bigger embarassment than any of this sexual rumors stuff.
In 1992, Fitzgerald is 60. No pictures that are likely to move papers, so what's the point of running the story?
34 -- It's out there, I wouldn't worry about it.
36 -- Yes. In addition, people (editors) were genuinely afraid of B. Bush, I think.
35: I can't believe Bush is actually off the wagon. If that's true, and an unreported 'open secret', something truly terrible should happen to the people who know and aren't saying.
This White House is amazingly good at convincing the newspapers not to say what they know, so I would absolutely not take the lack of coverage as evidence either way. I'm sure in the Bush-is-off-the-wagon case it goes something like, a) your evidence is no good, b) you're harming national security, c) if you run with this we will bury you.
If I were Bush in these circumstances, I'd damn well be drinking heavily. Evidence: I'm not Bush, and I'm drinking heavily anyway.
Churchill was a drunk, and he did fine. U.S. Grant was a drunk, and he crushed the perfidious Secesh. Lay off the drunks, OK?
See, some people can't handlt alcohol, and some people can't handle sobriety. If I could talk to Bush when he had a little buzz on, and then again when he was totally plowed, and finally when he woke up hung over, I'm sure I could deprogram him.
There is a good reason to be skeptical of stuff that "everyone knows". I once heard Marvin Kalb talking about the ethics of not publishing rumors, and he confidently asserted that "everyone in the press knows" that Terry Waite was dead. This was in early 1990. Waite was released from captivity in late 1991.
See, if thetan engrams are loosened with alcohol, you can dislodge them more easily. .
U.S. Grant was a drunk, and he crushed the perfidious Secesh
There is an anecdote, perhaps apocryphal, about some of Lincoln's aides complaining about Grant's drinking. Lincoln is said to have asked if they could find out what brand of whiskey Grant drinks and buy some for his other generals.
35, 39, 40: You do hear this one a lot, from, yeah, "everyone," but it's not as if rumors become reportable facts by process of accretion. I think a certain (healthy) amount of self doubt—"Did I really see that?"—plagues the journalists in question. The pressure of 40a) isn't going to come from the White House, it will come from editors at the paper going all the way up.
And there just isn't the appetite on the left to man a Ken Starr special investigation, whether by the media or the Congress.
Saisegly has just denied knowledge of what the rumor under discussion is. Damn, I was hoping it could be extracted from him in confidence.
Sausagely's been turned, you see. He's chatting up the rumor with his friends in the biz as we speak.
it's not as if rumors become reportable facts by process of accretion.
Sometimes they do, though. After a while you realize "this rumor has been heard by so many people, and people who might have provided evidence to the contrary and would have benefitted by doing so have said absolutely nothing to indicate that it's not true, so it is extremely likely that the rumor is true."
Of course, I'd have to have Bush spreadeagled in four point restraints in order to make the drunken persuasion effective.
He might not be telling you all he knows. Someone better bring thumbscrews to DC.
Lincoln is said to have asked if they could find out what brand of whiskey Grant drinks and buy some for his other generals.
I think Lincoln is also to have said to have laughed when he heard the rumor and wished he had said it.
Saisegly has just denied knowledge of what the rumor under discussion is. Damn, I was hoping it could be extracted from him in confidence.
Maybe it involves Saisegly.
Damn, I was hoping it could be extracted from him in confidence.
Oh, sure, like he'd believe you now.
I think I would have heard about a sex scandal by now.
After a while you realize "this rumor has been heard by so many people, and people who might have provided evidence to the contrary and would have benefitted by doing so have said absolutely nothing to indicate that it's not true, so it is extremely likely that the rumor is true."
But this is how John Kerry shoots himself and explodes a Swift Boat and denies that he's stopped beating his wife. Some rumors actually don't dignify a response.
Someone better bring thumbscrews to DC.
Flophouse residents will take care of UnfoggeDCon party favors, but thanks.
Some rumors actually don't dignify a response.
Apparently it involves one of Saiselgy's roommates, not him.
"Romney wives caught in tryst with artblogger"
Someone better bring thumbscrews to DC
Better to use waterboarding, since you'd have a colorable defense in court that it's not really torture.
Applying the logic of some of the commenters in the original PJM post, I'm going to say that it must involve a Republican, because otherwise it would already be on Drudge.
And because the threshold for an MSM publication to report on rumours of plain vanilla heterosexual adultery is so low, I'm going to further speculate that it involves either a homosexual encounter, group sex, or some kind of fetish.
Rosenbaum is right about the crap this is.
If I'm reading that column correctly, Rosenbaum knows what this rumor is ("this rumor the LA Times is supposedly sitting on is one I never heard in this specific form before. By the way, it's not the Edwards rumor, it's something else"). Why the hell doesn't he reveal it? Tweety is right. Rosenbaum's either dumb enough to let himself be fed some rumor, or, more likely, he's actively participating in its dissemination.
I liked Rosenbaum's columns a lot once--I still like a lot of his stuff--but like Hitchens and Simon, he's another (or was for a while) one of those "the left left me" guys. I'm suspicious of his motives here.
Got it. There's both a racial and a homosexual issue, and it affects both Democrats and Republicans.
Guiliani had an affair with Obama.
If I were Bush in these circumstances, I'd damn well be drinking heavily
There is a scene in "To Have and Have Not" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0037382/ in which Walter Brennan is interrogated first by plying him with liquor. Although talkative, he fails to spill the beans. Then the perfidious frogs withold the liquor, and the jig, she is up!
I bet the rumor is something unbelievable unimportant and not damning of anyone's character in the least, but so catchy and memorable that it could single-handedly catapult a candidate to victory or defeat for no rational reason at all. Like if someone's college sweetheart went on to have an affair with Ozzy Osborne or something.
Or something that is completely irrelevant and not even controversial, but would, if revealed, force all reporters to spend weeks on a pointless wild-goose chase that nobody wants to go on. Like "John McCain was the Lindbergh baby".
I think Rosenbaum gives away the game here: "And I must admit it really is was juicy if true."
Do you see it? It's "juicy." Or "Jewcy." Clearly, the rumor is that someone is a Secret Jew. But who? To the best of my knowledge, this practice of necessary such secrecy arises during the Inquisition. So we're talking about someone who claims to be Catholic. That is: Giuliani. Note also that "juicy" can also be read as "Juucy" or "Giucy."
It's all so simple when you think about it.
I enjoy how the following comments in the thread linked in #64 were made by the same person:
I'll flat out tell you that anyone working at the LATimes has a credibility problem with me when it comes to any story with a hint of politics or conflicts with PC Liberal biases.
I totally believe that the Times would sit on a story, and believe they have in the past because it would hurt the Democrats.
Stories such as Willie Brown making racist jokes and the press corps laughing along with him instead of reporting on his racism.
I also used to work for Hugh Hewitt's producer at another radio show, but knew that the Times was biased.
I have said this about the LATimes in public and broadcast forums: "I would not use the LATimes for catbox liner because my cat would think that the box would already be full."
Sounds kind of sympathetic and rational, right? Those damned biased PC liberals!
Posted by the same person 24 minutes earlier:
I, too, speculated on another blog that it was the Hildebeast having a gay affair. My guess it is eith either Ellen DeGeneres or with Rosie O'Donnell.
Those PC biased liberals at the LA Times probably wouldn't let this guy have a regular opinion column, and if they did they would probably insist on editing it for content and tone!
The Secret Jew thing is so 2004.
Someone claiming to be privy to the rumor commented on the post about this over at Saiselgy's:
The rumor is definitely floating around.
All I can say is that it involves a GOP candidate and sexual relations with two Y chromosomes.
Creepy. No one has two Y chromosomes.
The relations took place directly with the chromosomes.
Argh!
But how do they know the genetic profile of Romney's boyfriend?
Presumably the total number of Y chromosomes of the participants involved was two?
Although it would be a great way of raising the stakes on the "being caught with a live boy or a dead girl" list of sins that doom a candidacy by going all the way to "being caught with a fetus that had no hope of even making it to term."
Maybe Duncan Hunter got a genetic screening.
Huh. It turns out that an XYY is phenotypically normal.
70, 72 and 77: My highschool biology teacher mounted a successful campaign to get the misinformation about the XYY phenotype being dangerous and criminally inclined, taken out of a textbook.
That's really awesome of your biology teacher, BG.
Huh. I knew about XXY, but not XYY. Neat!
79: And it wasn't like he was a big liberal or anything. He was one of the football coaches. Not an intellectual at all, but there was absolutely no evidence supporting the claim, and he was pretty much a straight shooter on science.
81 was I. I'm writing on a laptop that I borrowed from arthegall. I knew that that would happen one of these days.
So both XXY and XYY are normal? Maybe XYYs aren't necessarily destined for a career in audacious crime, but surely the extra chromosome must have some measurable effect. Someone must have studied this, so spill the beans, already.
83: They tend to be taller than average.
XXY identifies with Klinefelter's syndrome.
Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin.
If this comes out, I'm totally voting for her in the primary. Hottt.