'This won't go away. What happened is much nastier than is being reported'

[Evilmav2]

'This won't go away. What happened is much nastier than is being reported'

By Adrian Blomfeld in Nairobi and Andrew Alderson
(Filed: 15/02/2004)

Alex Polier, the twenty-four year old journalist who could end Senator John Kerry's hopes of becoming the next president of the United States is alleged to have had a two-year affair with the front-runner for the Democratic nomination. Last night the rumours were in danger of becoming a full-blown scandal.


Alex Polier, 24, is alleged to have had an affair with John Kerry
"This is not going to go away," one American friend of Miss Polier said yesterday. "What actually happened is much nastier than is being reported."

The allegations come at a crucial time for the senator. Polls showed him leading Mr Bush by 52 per cent to 42 per cent, and aides will be anxious to see if the apparent scandal affects his standing among voters.

Miss Polier, a former intern who also spent some time in 1998 doing work experience at the Houses of Parliament in London, is in Kenya staying with Yaron Schwartzman, her fiance and a member of the country's fashionable young set. The couple have refused to make any comment on her alleged links with Senator Kerry, who is married to Teresa Heinz Kerry, an heiress to the food empire.

Senator Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran dubbed the new JFK, has vehemently denied any relationship with Miss Polier, and shrugged off allegations that he had a two-year affair with her from 2001. "I just deny it categorically. It's rumour. It's untrue. Period," he said.

Mr Kerry, 60, has won 12 out of the 14 Democratic primaries and has looked all but certain to seal the nomination to take on President George W. Bush in November's elections.

His aides have blamed a dirty tricks campaign for bringing the allegations about Miss Polier into the public eye; they first surfaced last week on a Right-wing internet site, the Drudge Report, which famously first broke the news of Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky.

Miss Polier's parents, Terry and Donna, from Malvern, Pennsylvania, added fuel to the fire by claiming that Mr Kerry did pursue their daughter.

"I think he's a sleazeball. I did wonder if she didn't get that feeling herself," said Mr Polier. "He's not the sort of guy I'd choose to be with my daughter.

"John Kerry called my daughter and invited her to be on his re-election committee. She talked to him and decided against it."

The Drudge website also quoted retired Gen Wesley Clark, one of Mr Kerry's rivals for the nomination, as having told journalists off the record: "Kerry will implode over an intern issue."

Mr Clark later dropped out of the race and endorsed Mr Kerry.

Miss Polier, a journalist who once worked for Associated Press, is a graduate of Columbia University, New York. She apparently met the senator as she was beginning her media career. Miss Polier and her fiance were believed to be hiding yesterday at the Nairobi home of Mr Schwartzman's parents, who moved to Kenya from Israel.

She appears to have few friends of her own in Kenya: she has never lived in the country and makes only occasional visits. "She seemed perfectly nice, although she was a little cool," said a Schwartzman family friend.

"She didn't seem to be very willing to open up but whether it was because she was aloof or just shy, I couldn't work out."


Alex Polier, 24, is alleged to have had an affair with John Kerry

Daily Telegraph Story

[Mavdog]

Clark falls prey to anti-Kerry rumor mill
By Thomas Oliphant, 2/15/2004

WASHINGTON

POLITICS ASIDE, the quick endorsement of John Kerry by presidential candidate emeritus Wesley Clark might best be understood as an act of contrition for two egregious sins that ironically serve as bookends for this month's degrading detour into campaign slime.

The sin of commission occurred during an astonishing, even for a rookie, judgment lapse with the gaggle of reporters covering his campaign on its final day last week. Bantering with them at length under supposedly off-the-record ground rules, Clark actually said he was still in the race because he thought Kerry's campaign was going to implode over what he inelegantly called an "intern" scandal.

The sin of omission occurred in January, when Clark stood mute while filmmaker Michael Moore referred to President Bush as a "deserter" during the Vietnam War era while endorsing Clark.

The first sin is part of a chain of truly weird events that has produced a classic bit of modern media manipulation that has slowly but surely in turn produced the following phenomenon -- published rumors about the possibility of a story about Kerry fooling around with a young woman appearing despite the absence of any allegation (much less purported information) to that effect.

The second sin -- compounded by Democratic National chairman Terry McAuliffe's equally irresponsible labeling, without evidence, of Bush as having been "AWOL" during his National Guard service more than 30 years ago -- has helped spawn a classic example of journalism by millimeter-length "facts" that raise sinister questions without answering them.

In the first instance, a few days of absurd public behavior after a few weeks of equally absurd undercurrents and rumor-mongering have resulted in a new journalistic low -- a frenzy about a "story" that hasn't been written concerning an "allegation" that hasn't been made.

In the second instance, the public is left with the choice of being tortured by daily developments that add and subtract minutely from an overall picture that is completely obscured. For the minority who prefer waiting for real evidence, there is only one fact: President Bush promised last weekend to release all of his service records and until Friday night had resisted doing so.

Clark's rumor-mongering with his press corps about Kerry was the visible tip of an iceberg of rumor-mongering that had gone on for weeks, stirred not only by some of his fund-raisers but also among the press by aides and consultants that "something" was coming. This is how spin doctors feed gossip mills without actually providing gossip.

His comments -- instantly passed on to home offices and then to others, proving why nothing is off-the-record with more than one person in a presidential campaign, and probably shouldn't be. They had the effect of drawing unwarranted attention to a supermarket tabloid clip job on Kerry's private life last week that rehashed the astonishing fact that the senator appears to have been single when he wasn't married.

So where was the rumored "story"? Into the breach stepped the right wing -- Matt Drudge's website and associated radio shows, and right-wing and Rupert Murdoch-owned British outlets, and their tried and true methods all for getting trash into the standards-challenged mainstream press. The absence of a story or even an allegation is no obstacle here; the technique is simply to start a rumor that a story is about to appear.

It worked. By Friday morning, Kerry decided to answer a clear, direct question from Don Imus on his radio program. Asked if there was anything coming or anything to all this, anything at all, Kerry chose to be direct, unequivocal, and on the record: "There is nothing to report, nothing to say." The answer was No.

The chain of events from Moore in Clark's magnifying presence, through McAuliffe, to the past week's water torture sequence of partial disclosures is more complicated. The big difference is that both the irresponsible statements and the minute, new developments have all been taking place in public, based on what people have said and documents have shown.

In addition, Moore and McAullife notwithstanding, the president's decision to make blanket statements last weekend and the White House's impolitic decision to release selected records piecemeal have been much more important engines pulling the frustrating story along.

However, the impression fostered more in the press than in politics that the inevitable existence of questions and gaps permits inferences about the answers and about what might be in the gaps is just as pernicious. The fact remains that while Bush is on the record promising a full disclosure he has yet to make, no one has the right to assume the answers to questions for political purposes.

I suspect this campaign is too potentially close not to get ugly, which is regrettable. What is more regrettable, however, is that my business is more likely than not to be a willing participant in the ugliness -- again.

Thomas Oliphant column

[FishForLunch]

John Kerry girl tells all
Affair ... Alex Polier


From BRIAN FLYNN
in New York

THE beauty said to have had a fling with presidential hopeful John Kerry has recorded a bombshell tell-all interview.

Journalist Alex Polier taped a talk with a US TV network at Christmas.

The former Washington intern, 27, told all about an alleged fling with the 60-year-old super-rich senator in spring 2001.


Hopeful ... John Kerry

The channel is sitting on the tape until it has enough evidence to back her story.

If the sex claims are true, they would shatter his White House hopes.

Kerry, a married dad of two, has denied the fling. But Alex told pals she fled to Kenya on his suggestion.

One TV source said: “She wants to tell her story. She has talked at length about her relationship with Kerry. But no one is believing her.”

Kerry was front-runner for the Democratic nomination to take on George Bush in November.

His hopes were hit as hints of a scandal emerged.

[FishForLunch]

FLASHBACK: MEDIA GRILLED BUSH OVER 'ADULTERY' CLAIMS

As main press players blast the DRUDGE REPORT and foreign outlets for revealing details of a behind-the-scenes campaign drama surrounding candidate Kerry and the nature of his relationship with a mystery woman, just 12 years ago pre-Internet mainstream media assaulted President George W. Bush's father with questions surrounding an infidelity rumor.

In 1992 top reporters swiftly reacted to a footnote in a book by Susan Trento, wife of CNN reporter James Trento who was the source of the original rumor -- apparently from an interview with a long dead ambassador.

CNN rushed to get the rumor into the media stream as White House correspondent Mary Tillotson confronted President Bush as he hosted Israel Prime Minister Rabin in the Oval Office.

"There is an extensive series of reports in today's New York Post alleging that a former U.S. ambassador, a man now deceased, had told several persons that he arranged for a sexual tryst involving you and one of your female staffers in Geneva in 1984."

Asked NBC's Stone 'Stone' Phillips to the president's face at the height of the rumor mongering:

"Have you ever had an affair?"

CBS' Harry Smith then confronted Bush spokesperson Mary Matalin with the rumor over morning coffee:

"Let me ask you about something else. There's a book out, or a book that's just about out that in a footnote names that then-Vice President Bush had an affair with an assistant when he was on a mission in Geneva. Well, that footnote has turned into frontpage news (holding up N.Y.POST), at least in New York, in the N.Y. POST. Albeit a tabloid, it is usually a conservative newspaper. Are you ready to say that accusation is a flat out lie?"

Jonathan Alter, who never came to embrace the Lewinsky rumor -- even when it was proved to be true -- defended the aggressive adultery rumor line-of-questioning of the first President Bush:

"In this situation, the Oval Office isn't a temple. The President is a candidate and he has to be asked tough, often distasteful, but nonetheless important kinds of questions."

Alter's freedom of the press to sniff out sex rumors was seconded by UPI's Helen Thomas (another Lewinsky-era convert to bold privacy lines between press and president):

"Some people might have felt that it wasn't appropriate. But when you have the President there, I think it's very legitimate to ask him any question."

CUT TO 2004:

NEWSWEEK'S Alter blasted reportage of the Kerry infidelity probe last week on a New York City talkradio outlet -- calling the investigation 'sleazy'.

The media outrage over an erupting story of possible infidelity of a presidential candidate peaked with top Lewinsky rumor quasher Joe Conason's "thought piece" in SALON [There he goes again! Matt Drudge and the GOP smear machine are back in the Democrats' pants] in which he lamented aloud:

"But the kind of proof usually required by national news organizations isn't what Drudge needs in order to put innuendo into circulation. "

Yes, this is the same Joe Conason who in the Summer of 1992 wrote a Spy magazine cover story entitled "1,000 REASONS NOT TO VOTE FOR GEORGE BUSH".

Consaon's reason #1?

"He cheats on his wife."

The rumor of President Bush having an affair was never proved by the media that raised the question aloud in the first place, and now claims with a straight face that affair rumors are strictly forbidden.

At least against their candidates.

Developing...


This was on drudge

[Drbio]

It's easy....if you are a democrat, the liberal media will protect you, suppress the story until they can perform "due diligence", etc. If you are a republican, then a national inquirer rag of a rumor will be reported zealously by the national liberal media with no research under the banner of "finding the truth".

[Dooby]

In the media's defense, the adultery thing was a big issue in 1992, as the Bush camp was desperately attempting to get reports of Clinton's then-current philandering in the press with no success. Also, it was post- Gennifer Flowers.

[Mavdog]

So now there is supposedly "a bombshell tell-all interview" where the very person who has been (without evidence it seems) labeled as "The former Washington intern, 27, [who] told all about an alleged fling with the 60-year-old super-rich senator in spring 2001" ("super-rich"?? so now Drudge is into class warfare eh?) and the interview is in the possession of a "US TV network" who has had this EVIDENCE for weeks now as it was alleged to have been done "at Christmas", but in spite of such supposed FIRST PERSON relevation that will truly be bona fide validation of this sleasy campaign...they don't show it? Yeah, that makes all the sense in the world...at least to those who actually believe that Drudge is a true "reporter" rather than the trash story sleaseball he clearly is.

Yuck Yuck Yuck. This can't be a serious story, it's just too funny. Let's see, a "US News network" sits on THE story of the campaign season but doesn't use it...they not only have the story, they have an interview where the liason partner supposedly admits to the daliance, providing the proof that sleaseballs like Drudge are tripping over themselves to find. Oh wait, Drudge isn't trying to find the evidence because he doesn't care if there is any, Drudge's motto seems to be "Damn the facts, don't let them get in the way of juicy character assasination and the Drudge brand of yellow journalism!".

Too funny. Matt Drudge, when did you stop beating your wife? yuck yuck yuck.

Maybe Drudge can get a job with the Enquirer running down stories about cows who have been abducted by aliens who taught them how to moo in their planet's language...Stop Matt, I'm laughing too hard!

[Drbio]

democrat feeling the sting of truth or just a frustrated democrat?

[Dooby]

Originally posted by: Mavdog
So now there is supposedly "a bombshell tell-all interview" where the very person who has been (without evidence it seems) labeled as "The former Washington intern, 27, [who] told all about an alleged fling with the 60-year-old super-rich senator in spring 2001" ("super-rich"?? so now Drudge is into class warfare eh?) and the interview is in the possession of a "US TV network" who has had this EVIDENCE for weeks now as it was alleged to have been done "at Christmas", but in spite of such supposed FIRST PERSON relevation that will truly be bona fide validation of this sleasy campaign...they don't show it? Yeah, that makes all the sense in the world...at least to those who actually believe that Drudge is a true "reporter" rather than the trash story sleaseball he clearly is.

Yuck Yuck Yuck. This can't be a serious story, it's just too funny. Let's see, a "US News network" sits on THE story of the campaign season but doesn't use it...they not only have the story, they have an interview where the liason partner supposedly admits to the daliance, providing the proof that sleaseballs like Drudge are tripping over themselves to find. Oh wait, Drudge isn't trying to find the evidence because he doesn't care if there is any, Drudge's motto seems to be "Damn the facts, don't let them get in the way of juicy character assasination and the Drudge brand of yellow journalism!".

Too funny. Matt Drudge, when did you stop beating your wife? yuck yuck yuck.

Maybe Drudge can get a job with the Enquirer running down stories about cows who have been abducted by aliens who taught them how to moo in their planet's language...Stop Matt, I'm laughing too hard!

Ya know, it is kind of funny. The people that bash the Drudge Report have never read it. I know this because every critical statement about the drudge report reveals that the author has never read it because 99% of what's on the Drudge Report is not original content. For example, the story you are making fun of is actually a story from a brittish newspaper which the Drudge Report only provides a link to. If you go there now (10:30 AM on 2/16/04) you find a single story that is original content and that story is largely a compilation of 12 year old news stories; on most days, there is zero percent-i.e. no - original content. Further, when there is original content, it almost always ends up being true. I say "almost" because I can only think of one instance where he was actually wrong- Drudge said that Arnold was going to go on Leno and announce he was not going to run for governor (and even then he corrected the story before the episode was even taped). This is the only instance I recall where he was wrong.

Everything Drudge wrote about Monica Lewinsky, BTW, was 100% true. That is why in this thread, I went to great pains to explain what Drudge actually does. It is the same thing that Drudge has done in this case. Drudge has reported that the story is out there and it is going to break. Invariably, we will discover that the people giving Drudge most of his information are the reporters covering the story themselves-just like last time.

[Mavdog]

Ya know, it is kind of funny. The people that bash the Drudge Report have never read it. I know this because every critical statement about the drudge report reveals that the author has never read it because 99% of what's on the Drudge Report is not original content.

Perhaps you should read the Drudge "Yellow Journalism 101" Report yourself. The following is from the first posting of the unsubstantiated, innuendo filled rumor, Clearly it does not validate the assertion that "the Drudge"Yellow Journalism 101" Report is not original content" relative to this campaign of personal attack on John Kerry. Drudge copywrites the story AND demands credit for it:

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU FEB 12, 2004 11:45:28 ET XXXXX

CAMPAIGN DRAMA ROCKS DEMOCRATS: KERRY FIGHTS OFF MEDIA PROBE OF RECENT ALLEGED INFIDELITY, RIVALS PREDICT RUIN

**World Exclusive**
**Must Credit the DRUDGE REPORT**

The fact that other "newspapers" (that term is not truly applicable to the Murdock owned rags BTW) pick up the Drudge story and put in their rags does not condone Drudge's actions.

If all Drudge does is be a compiler of other sources, he'd be a news service. He's not, he's a sleaseball, as true journalist are those who don't throw out unsubstantiated rumors as facts and twist statements by others to suit their self promoting interests. In Drudge's world, corrobaration is unnecessary, expending actual effort to dig up what may be the truth is burdensome to the realization of his own goals, so why bother?
Yes, Yellow Journalism 101 is the class Matt Drudge is the qualified teacher for. Perhaps he can also lecture on "Amoral use of a public platform; Using rumor and innuendo to further your own goals". Few, if any, are as experienced...

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: Drbio
democrat feeling the sting of truth or just a frustrated democrat?

apparently both. [img]i/expressions/rolleye.gif[/img]