Republican Claims Times Spiked ACORN/Obama Story
Dave
Contributor
Posted:
03/30/09
The Philadelphia Bulletin reports about what the New York Times didn't consider fit to print about ACORN:
But Strom would have been the right person, through the magic of Google, I could find several stories she did for the NYT about ACORN ( like here and here), but I couldn't find one that would fit the sourcing of Moncrief. Which doesn't prove that the Times did or did not spike the story.
This would not also not be the first time that someone claimed to have evidence of bad dealings at ACORN using Anita Moncrief as a source. From October 22nd of last year we have Michael Gaynor:
Keep half an eye on this one. If Moncrief does actually talk (for herself) and can back up that ACORN served as a way for Obama to double-dip the same donors, this could get embarrassing fast for both the president, ACORN and the New York Times. But I think until Ms. Moncrief is willing to go on the record about what she saw during her time at ACORN, this is going to remain just an underground story.
A lawyer involved with legal action against Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) told a House Judiciary subcommittee on March 19 The New York Times had killed a story in October that would have shown a close link between ACORN, Project Vote and the Obama campaign because it would have been a "a game changer."...I agree. If true this would be a game changer. But following the chain of sourcing, we have Ms. Heidelbaugh, a Republican recounting a hearsay story from a Ms. Moncrief who worked for ACORN. The New York Times Reporter, Stephanie Strom, wouldn't confirm anything.
During her testimony, Ms. Heidelbaugh said Ms. Moncrief had told her The New York Times articles stopped when she revealed that the Obama presidential campaign had sent its maxed-out donor list to ACORN's Washington, D.C. office....
"Upon learning this information and receiving the list of donors from the Obama campaign, Ms. Strom reported to Ms. Moncrief that her editors at The New York Times wanted her to kill the story because, and I quote, "it was a game changer."'
But Strom would have been the right person, through the magic of Google, I could find several stories she did for the NYT about ACORN ( like here and here), but I couldn't find one that would fit the sourcing of Moncrief. Which doesn't prove that the Times did or did not spike the story.
This would not also not be the first time that someone claimed to have evidence of bad dealings at ACORN using Anita Moncrief as a source. From October 22nd of last year we have Michael Gaynor:
Minutes later, I read this: "Anita MonCrief. Google me. Please do not use my name with anyone until we connect. I also emailed Michelle Malkin but she scares me."
I responded: "I googled that name and hope it's the real you. If it is, you should have plenty to prove that should be publicized. Please call me at or after 9 PM: 631-757-9452. I will be home by then and free to talk."
Anita emailed: "I am really terrified. When I say threats and intimidation, I am not kidding. We (my 2 year old) are moving and I have had union pressure to make me be quiet. I am on linked in. If you still have doubts add me and I will confirm you."
Keep half an eye on this one. If Moncrief does actually talk (for herself) and can back up that ACORN served as a way for Obama to double-dip the same donors, this could get embarrassing fast for both the president, ACORN and the New York Times. But I think until Ms. Moncrief is willing to go on the record about what she saw during her time at ACORN, this is going to remain just an underground story.