lonestarnot! Is it Abramoff a new book out about McCain and the Abramoff investigation

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

which puts McCain in a terrible light.... It seems that McCain was pissed off with Abramoff for his support in the smear campaign against him in South Carolina by Ralph Reed

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080908/pl_politico/13230_1

Book attacks McCain's Abramoff inquiry

Eamon Javers Mon Sep 8, 5:56 AM ET

A new book released the day after Sen. John McCain accepted the Republican presidential nomination attacks one of his trademark political successes: his investigation of now-jailed lobbyist Jack Abramoff in 2004 and 2005.
ADVERTISEMENT

“The Perfect Villain: John McCain and the Demonization of Lobbyist Jack Abramoff,” by former Boston Globe freelancer Gary S. Chafetz and put out by small independent publisher Martin and Lawrence press, aggressively puts forth the case that McCain’s investigation into Abramoff wasn’t the high-minded reform crusade he has made it out to be on the campaign trail, but rather was pure political payback.

Abramoff had been one of the financiers of evangelical leader Ralph Reed’s brass-knuckled efforts to defeat McCain in the 2000 South Carolina Republican primary. Shorly after McCain lost that campaign to Bush, he quit the race.
---------- SNIP----------
Peppered with new quotes from Abramoff—who met with Chafetz while in federal prison in Cumberland, MD—the book alleges that McCain withheld the vast majority of emails he confiscated during the inquiry, many of which could be exculpatory to the former lobbyist or damaging to McCain allies.

But Chafetz goes further than almost all of the few remaining Abramoff defenders, arguing that McCain deliberately twisted the results of his investigation to paint Abramoff in the worse possible light—and that McCain’s own actions to benefit his political contributors are similar to the very misdeeds he accused Abramoff of committing.


---------SNIP-------------

At the end of this article, interesting passage

One section of the book relies heavily on documents he found on a Web site that purports to have transcripts of interviews McCain gave while in captivity. In them, the prisoner of war gave his jailers details about the circumstances of his capture, his missions over Vietnam, and quotes they could use for propaganda purposes.

[dkf]

1. That last part is very odd.

How does that fit into this book?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

2. I haven't a clue but it's supposedly there.

[abumbyanyothername]

4. I am pretty sure that McCain admits this fact

I only saw snippets of the CNN story, but what I saw he seemed to be admitting giving information to the North Vietnamese under duress of torture. I don't think the Obama campaign will try to make anything of this. Nor should they.

Palin can be painted as a liar or at least a chronic puffer.

Both McCain and Palin are vulnerable to criticism as hotheads that you don't want with their finger on the button.

[alcibiades_mystery]

3. Oh stop it

There is no miracle. There is no saving grace. There is no deus ex machina. There is hard work, pounding the pavement, and more hard work.

And more hard work.

[Blue State Bandit]

6. Amen.

Behind every perceived miracle, is someone's real sacrifice.


But I will still recommend this OP in the hopes that this book will instigate corroboration from other sources.

[karynnj]

5. The last part is dangerous and will justify labeling this book a smear piece.

The fact that he added information that he had absolutely no knowledge of and likely could not validate will discredit him. This means that anything that he says about Abramoff that is sole sourced to him is useless. Even on that, he is not an unbiased, objective reporter, he is one of the few remaining Abramoff supporters - accusing McCain of doing the same to benefit his contributors does not make Abramoff better. Actually finding clear evidence, as the NYT started to do, that McCain actions were improper is needed. Another point is, that at this point, Abramoff himself is a pretty poor source - especially if he sees McCain as one of the people whose investigation led to his down fall. Abramoff is not a good guy to have on your side now.

Let's say John Kerry had run again and was the nominee. Would you accept "documents found on a web site" and suddenly believe the charges of the SBVT? We all know that in 2000, Rove and Bush used McCain's service against him as well. Anything legitimate that is public would have been given more coverage. ACCEPTING THIS IS WRONG.