And then…
Issa told me that he did not set the fire at the Quantum factory in 1982, and he is furious that the story has dogged him. He lashed out at Eric Lichtblau, the New York Times reporter who, in 1998, while working for the Los Angeles Times, first aired allegations from Issa’s former business partner Joey Adkins. Lichtblau, Issa charged, “is a notorious hatchet man.” (“Everything in that story was accurate,” Lichtblau told me in response. “The picture that emerged of his early start in Cleveland was very different from the Horatio Alger story he had adopted.”)
Adkins, both Issa brothers said, is not credible. William told me that Adkins was “a lowlife.” The morning after the fire, Darrell said, Adkins took most of the Steal Stopper merchandise that wasn’t damaged, hauled it away, and set up a rival business across town. (Adkins told me it was his understanding that the inventory would be scrapped, so he took it.)…
…Issa seemed unfamiliar with the insurance company’s fire-analysis report concluding that the fire was arson, and said that, as far as he knew, it was officially declared accidental. He blamed the local fire department for letting the fire get out of hand. “If the fire department had done a competent job and turned off the natural-gas line, there would’ve been de-minimis damage,” he said. “They fought the fire for a couple of hours before they realized that the fire is being fed by a gas line from an overhead heater that had ruptured early on in the fire. And if there’s a story, the story is ‘Fire department screws up, small fire becomes devastating fire.’ ” If Issa is right, the natural gas could explain the blue flames that insurance investigators cited as evidence of arson, although it wouldn’t explain the suspected presence of an accelerant.
Overall, the piece is a fascinating read and a must-see primer on Issa as he looks to define himself in his new role. Though much of Lizza’s reporting isn’t necessarily new—part of the reason Issa faces the music and deals with the accusations so directly is that he’s been doing so for years—but it is comprehensively researched and cogently put together. And ultimately, it’s pretty damning whether you believe Issa’s accusers or his most oft-used response: it was my brother.
As mentioned, though, the most interesting element of this profile might be the controversy it stirred over at The Daily Beast. First, the almost otherworldliness of Kurtz’s mistake, then the near-two months it took to correct it, followed by the speculation as to why it had taken so long. Finally, last week, there was the relentless Twitter campaign by The Daily’s Hunter Walker to get Kurtz to Tweet a correction. Walker hounded @HowardKurtz for a Twitter correction with over 150 messages. (Disclosure: Walker is a former classmate and a friend and thus any suggestion that Walker was riding Kurtz for a bit of attention will be implied and not stated). Walker’s logic: it would not have been hard to Tweet a correction before it slipped your mind, and in an age of personalized Twitter streams and Facebook pages, you are obliged to—especially if your story was promoted through both media.
Issa is a perfect example of the fact that corruption, sexual indiscretions and shenanigans, past criminality, none of that kind of stuff is an impediment to achieving success in the Republican Party.
For a Democrat, one poorly-worded phrase can forever destroy one's viability as a political candidate. ( Or not even poorly worded. Example: Wesley Clark "I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president" in answer to Bob Schieffer's "I have to say, Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down." Remember that media frenzy?)
Bardella is correct, of course, about lazy, Drudge-baiting journos taking pre-packaged Republican-generated material and running with it. And it works to my advantage most of the time, because I think most reporters have liked me packaging things for them. Yep, those Politico "reporters" just luvs them some prepackaged GOP materials to run with. But also people like Matt Bai, Howard Kurtz, Time Magazine with their slavering "profiles," and virtually every political reporter at Washington Post. Too bad the Dems don't get on the stick and package their own stuff. But they don't have a Drudge.
As for Issa, we Californians have known about Issa's shady history for years. But those San Diego people, they just luvs them some corrupt Republican politicians. They don't care. After all, the Dukestir, convicted felon Duke Cunningham was from San Diego, and there is a long history of corruption in the Republican-controlled local government. But that's no impediment for power! San Diego's politics is every bit as wacky as South Carolina's. They did, however, finally run their Mayor out of town.
Well, Issa seems to be trying to act like a responsible Committee Chairman. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Because, yes, the American people want Congressional oversight of the federal government. Let's hope he's not another Dan Burton. Or another Tom Davis. We'll know soon enough.
#1 Posted by James, CJR on Mon 17 Jan 2011 at 04:35 PM
Reporters are measured by how often their stuff gets on drudge? *cue surprised expression* BUT I thought the media was liberal!
Editors and reporters who gear their stories as drudge bait do damage to the journalism profession. Their goal should be to educate their audience, not to please some bald headed hack who's work cultured journalism luminaries like Andrew Breitbart. And by cultured, I mean in a petrie dish filled with daiquiris and rage.
Idiots are in charge of our discourse.
#2 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Mon 17 Jan 2011 at 05:49 PM
It says something about a magazine called The New Yorker that it expends resources on an unflattering story on Rep. Issa of California, but cannot be expected to devote any resources into an investigation of Rep. Rangel, just 50 blocks to the north of the magazine's offices.
The New Yorker once used to cover, you know, New York; now it is edited for old ladies (retired schoolteachers) in Dubuque.
#3 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Wed 19 Jan 2011 at 12:29 PM
The New Yorker has an extensive archive of Rangel coverage, including his recent censure in the House of Representatives. You obviously don't read the New Yorker. Search : The New Yorker: Rangel
It says something about rightwingers that they expend resources posting a long lists of bitter grievances about publications that they don't even read.
#4 Posted by James, CJR on Wed 19 Jan 2011 at 12:48 PM
Blog posts, James. I was writing about the magazine. I read it until early 2009 when I got tired of the boring, predicable-left slant and the embarrassingly worshipful Obama covers. And your record itself shows that the lazy editors only got around to taking an interest in Harlem politics after charges had been brought against Rangel (whom I like, on a human level.) Issa, whom I don't like on a human level, hasn't been charged with anything in a good many years, by contrast with Rangel.
Does it say something large about left-wingers that they are only capable of writing as if everyone reading already agrees with them in advance?
#5 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Thu 20 Jan 2011 at 12:40 PM
Obviously, Mr. Richard, the New Yorker did a profile of Issa because he is a relatively unknown politician (at least outside of California) and he is coming into prominence as the Committee Chairman of the Government Oversight Committee. He has engendered quite a bit of news coverage recently with controversial statements about his plans for pursuing what he believes as corruption in the Obama Administration.
In contrast, New Yorkers know just about all there is to know about Rep. Charles Rangel. I doubt they can sell many magazines if they just keep rehashing the overly-covered antics of a known local politician. I think their hope is that their coverage and profile of a controversial new face will sell a couple of magazines.
I'm sure they are very sorry that their magazine sales strategy doesn't comport with your political agenda. We all are.
#6 Posted by James, CJR on Thu 20 Jan 2011 at 12:50 PM
Obviously, Mr. Richard, the New Yorker did a profile of Issa because he is a relatively unknown conservative republican politician (at least outside of California) and he is coming into prominence as the Committee Chairman of the Government Oversight Committee.
There James, I fixed it for you. Also, could you please point me to the New Yorker’s profile on Henry Waxman who, in 2006, was a relatively unknown politician (at least outside of California) who came into prominence as the Committee Chairman of the Government Oversight Committee and the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
I am sure a similar comparison would be an obvious topic for a NYker profile but damned if I cant find it.
#7 Posted by Mike H, CJR on Thu 20 Jan 2011 at 02:28 PM
As I said above, we are all so terribly sorry that the New Yorker's magazine sales strategy doesn't comport with you poor, oh-so-victimized rightwingers' personal political agenda. Other than that, who really gives a crap? You people are harboring seething rage and bitterness because The New Yorker Magazine didn't do a profile on Henry Waxman in 2006? :::HUGE eyeroll::
#8 Posted by James, CJR on Thu 20 Jan 2011 at 02:43 PM
You people are harboring seething rage and bitterness because The New Yorker Magazine didn't do a profile on Henry Waxman in 2006?
Rage … that’s cute. You know what happens when you point a finger James, you have three pointing back at you.
This is not some in depth profile of a newly prominent member of congress its is a hatchet job, red meat for lefties, grist for the coastal elites, which is exactly what partisan magazines like the New Yorker (or the Nation, National Review, American Spectator, Mother Jones, etcetera) do. At least Lizza did sit down and talk with Issa, which is more than I can say for most of these style of articles, but lets not pretend this was anything other than a liberals attempt to throw some shit around.
#9 Posted by Mike H, CJR on Thu 20 Jan 2011 at 02:58 PM
Well, y'all go on there and air out your long list of bitter resentments. I've heard the song before. So with that, I'll bid you a good day. Cheerio, now.
#10 Posted by James, CJR on Thu 20 Jan 2011 at 03:14 PM
You know, conservative or not, I think its relevant to remind everyone, as Issa takes his subpoena wielding position, what a huge prick he is. I remember Issa back in the early 00s recalling California's governor as he got screwed by the deregulation done under republicans, the criminal energy company run by republicans, and the federal government who looked the other way because they were bought republicans. There would not have been an Arnold Schwartzenger governorship if it wasn't for Issa's desire to see the position for himself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_gubernatorial_recall_election,_2003
The guy is a hack's hack. Expect him to have a very active office over very minor issues that he will demand democrats attend to testify about.
And, unlike life under Waxman, expect the Fox-led media to report on every detail.
And expect that, unlike life under Waxman, the media won't have that "boys will be boys" attitude that they had when republicans, like Karl Rove, ignored their subpoenas and used their "discretion of the president" to ignore inquiries of the house.
It's going to be a fun couple of years.
#11 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Thu 20 Jan 2011 at 06:00 PM
At the risk of stating the painfully obvious to James, readers of the New Yorker apparently did not know 'just about all there is to know' about Rep. Rangel, such as the reasons for his fall from grace.
As for the rest, I'll leave it to amused readers to decide who is seething with 'rage and bitterness'. Hasn't this narrative been eclipsed a bit since November?
#12 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Fri 21 Jan 2011 at 04:51 PM
Wah, wah, wah, conservatives are a bunch of crybabies ! The NYT picking on a senior Republican politician, and a relatively unknown pol at that, so what is wrong with getting to know Rep. Issa's background...good or bad?
#13 Posted by Tommy Thunderball, CJR on Mon 7 Feb 2011 at 03:44 PM