It goes well beyond the Keating Five

When considering John McCain’s history of unethical behavior, the list usually starts (and ends) with the Keating Five scandal in the 1980s, for which McCain was rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for having shown, at a minimum, poor judgment. In the aftermath, McCain helped improve his public image, and bury the scandal, by becoming an advocate of campaign-finance reform.

But the notion that McCain cleaned up his act may not be entirely true. Take, for example, Donald Diamond, a wealthy Arizona real estate developer and generous McCain contributor, who wanted some coastal land in California freed up by an Army base closing.

When Mr. Diamond wanted to buy land at the base, Fort Ord, Mr. McCain assigned an aide who set up a meeting at the Pentagon and later stepped in again to help speed up the sale, according to people involved and a deposition Mr. Diamond gave for a related lawsuit. When he appealed to a nearby city for the right to develop other property at the former base, Mr. Diamond submitted Mr. McCain’s endorsement as “a close personal friend.”

Writing to officials in the city, Seaside, Calif., the senator said, “You will find him as honorable and committed as I have.”

Courting local officials and potential partners, Mr. Diamond’s team promised that he could “help get through some of the red tape in dealing with the Department of the Army” because Mr. Diamond “has been very active with Senator McCain,” a partner said in a deposition.

For Mr. McCain, the Arizona Republican who has staked two presidential campaigns on pledges to avoid even the appearance of dispensing an official favor for a donor, Mr. Diamond is the kind of friend who can pose a test.

Ya think? The closer one looks at this, the worse it appears.

In California, the McCain aide’s assistance with the Army helped Mr. Diamond complete a purchase in 1999 that he soon turned over for a $20 million profit. And Mr. McCain’s letter of recommendation reinforced Mr. Diamond’s selling point about his McCain connections as he pursued — and won in 2005 — a potentially much more lucrative deal to develop a resort hotel and luxury housing.

In Arizona, Mr. McCain has helped Mr. Diamond with matters as small as forwarding a complaint in a regulatory skirmish over the endangered pygmy owl, and as large as introducing legislation remapping public lands. In 1991 and 1994, Mr. McCain sponsored two laws sought by Mr. Diamond that resulted in providing him millions of dollars and thousands of acres in exchange for adding some of his properties to national parks. The Arizona senator co-sponsored a third similar bill now before the Senate. […]

For the California projects, the campaign said the McCain aide arranged the introduction to an Army official for Mr. Diamond’s team as “a constituent matter.”

Oh, is that what the kids are calling it these days?

McCain helped a wealthy and generous donor buy land from the Army — complete with special water rights — for a quarter of a million dollars, which McCain’s buddy then sold two years later for $20 million. There’s a term for this — it’s called “influence peddling,” and it’s exactly the kind of thing McCain swears he never gets involved with.

If the Rezko story was considered a big deal by campaign reporters, the Donald Diamond issue should be huge. Why the New York Times ran this the day of the Pennsylvania primary, when it’s likely to get lost in the shuffle, is a mystery to me. If this same story ran on Thursday morning, it would have become the talk of the political world in a hurry.

Sorry, Steve, I have to disagree with your last paragraph. No matter when this hits the news cycle, it will only be the talk of Left Blogostan. This type of story does not echo the Corp Media’s meme of McBush being a “Maverick Straight-Talkin’ Experienced Man We Can Trust.” It will be ignored.
With any luck, we can get it in the news at some time in the future, much like the USA firings.
It’s still a great story, but we need to be realisic about the problem of the “Villagers” and what’s important to them. And this won’t be important to them, just like the Principles Torture Group including the Codpiece singing “Don’t You Want to Torture, Too?” was not important to them.

  • If the Rezko story was considered a big deal by campaign reporters, the Donald Diamond issue should be huge. Why the New York Times ran this the day of the Pennsylvania primary, when it’s likely to get lost in the shuffle, is a mystery to me. If this same story ran on Thursday morning, it would have become the talk of the political world in a hurry.

    Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. CB, you’re one of my favorite bloggers, and your analysis is usually dead-on, but don’t kid yourself– even if this story broke in late October, the press wouldn’t do a damn thing with it. Look at the Vicki Iseman story, the anecdotes about McCain’s temper, the adultery that sunk his first marriage, etc. If all of those things had happened to someone else, especially to a Democrat, the media would be all over it and run with the story no matter when it happened. But because it’s McCain– the supposedly nice, grandfatherly, reasonable guy who treats the press corps like old friends on his bus and feeds them barbecue at his country estate in Sedona– they brush it all under the rug and give him a pass. Breaking the story today just gives the press an extra bit of cover– “See? We’re being fair. We broke the story. It just didn’t have any legs, because it happened to break on the same day as a big primary.”

    I’m actually starting to wish Obama would withdraw and give the nomination to Clinton; at this rate, with the press powering the McCain Train, there’s no stopping it, and I’d hate for Obama to be the sacrificial lamb. Let Hillary lose to McCain, so that Obama can still have a chance to be president down the road!

  • TCC wrote: “I’m actually starting to wish Obama would withdraw and give the nomination to Clinton; at this rate, with the press powering the McCain Train, there’s no stopping it, and I’d hate for Obama to be the sacrificial lamb. Let Hillary lose to McCain, so that Obama can still have a chance to be president down the road!”

    Now that is unique.

    But back to the original point. McCan’t believes that if HE does something, is simply can’t be unethical. He’s just too pure a person for that to be true.

    Gah!

    I have to agree with TCC and BuzzMon here Steve. Your suggestion that the MSM will jump on this is either naive or satirical.

  • Give me a break…

    The fact that an insincere man who’s entire public perception is based on lies was the run-away nomination for the repugs is proof that the MSM will only “catapult the propaganda” and will not offer any meaningful insight into who mclame is and what he stands for.

    The lying liars that fraudulently hoisted an alcoholic/cocaine addict into the POTUS via 2 stolen elections (dutifully covering up the corruption and fraud) is proof that we will not see any real analysis or issues surrounding the dispicable career of this fool.

  • “Why the New York Times ran this the day of the Pennsylvania primary, when it’s likely to get lost in the shuffle, is a mystery to me”

    Not to me.

  • McCain wants to have it both ways — to put his line and hook in restricted waters, catch the big one, and then to pull his line out and, standing with pole and fish in hand, tell the game warden he isn’t fishing. This is the typical response that we have seen from Bush and Cheney defenders the past 7 years — why are you concentrating on the past? … we are concentrating on the future!

    The crony capitalism of the Bush family and followers was well documented before the 2000 election. The press did not make much fuss over it while dwelling on Gore’s “character”. Many in the press are impressed by those who make great wealth even if that wealth comes from questionable tactics that rely on skimming the public with the aid of elected officials.

    Anyway, I do appreciate this reporting and other recent excellent articles in Times and WaPo that represent the kind of knowledge that we need to elect our leaders. It is up to us and the campaigns to keep these alive as campaign issues.

  • If we refer to McCain as a straight talker and champion of campaign finance reform, then how could he possibly be procuring land deals for wealthy contributors? Those two are in conflict, are they not?

  • The other McCain story today http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-pension22apr22,1,2872446.story is interesting, and not only as it pertains to McCain’s health. How is he 100% disabled and drawing a disability pension, yet he was previously rehabilitated, and now employed as a U.S. Senator? How do those laws work that entitle this wealthy man (who could walk across the Grand Canyon) to a $58,358 disability pension on the taxpayers’ dime?

  • Alan Keyes may not know it, but the same Constitution Party he wants to be the Presidential candidate of has been identified as a “patriot group” by the Southern Poverty Law Centre, thereby raising equally serious questions about the sincerity of the Keyes Presidential bid.

    Questions which need to be raised by would-be followers as are unlikely to ask such questions, what with their being hard-wired Zealots and True Believers in the Constitution Party’s “Traditional Values” agenda.

    More than likely from the Religiopolitical Right’s ranks.

  • For the California projects, the campaign said the McCain aide arranged the introduction to an Army official for Mr. Diamond’s team as “a constituent matter.”

    I’m sorry, when did McCain become a Californian Senator Realtor ?

  • Is McCain’s behavior in keeping with the finest traditions of the Rethuglican Party? Yes. That said, if anyone actually managed to buy the abandoned ordnance dump that is Fort Ord, rehabilitate it, and develop it for something other than condemned WWII housing, gods bless ’em. That place has been an eyesore and source of water contaminants since the Army owned it. It’s blighted. Monterey County HUD didn’t want to touch it due to the dangers involved. I guarantee none of the rich Berkeley hippies inhabiting the surrounding area would have invested in it. The only people willing to deal with it were private developers. In real estate, as with anything involving multi million dollar deals, having a Senator in your pocket isn’t a bad thing.

  • Comments are closed.