Just landed in San Francisco to the news of McCain's maybe affair [nearly a decade ago] with a [now] 40 year old lobbyist.
I'm with Josh Marshall on the jumbled, over-lawyered nature of the Times piece.
To me what's odd is that the story cuts in different directions depending on the truth at hand.
- Either he was schtupping her, in which case her profession is largely irrelevant.
- Or he wasn't, in which case he was just schmoozing inappropriately lot with a corporate lobbyist.
I think the former is more likely, in particular given how aggressively the lawyers allowed the Times to play up that angle in the lead. But the story as it stands fails to deliver more than innuendo, which I think gives the McCain camp some time to get ahead of this story, and play the victim of a hit-job by the Times….
If it's the later? I don't know, doesn't that just prove he's a true Republican after all?