Vicki Iseman

Statement From Iseman?s Lawyers - New York Times

Statement From Iseman?s LawyersNew York Times, United StatesToday our client Ms. Vicki Iseman settled the defamation action that we filed on her behalf against The New York Times, and a number of its editors and reporters, resulting from an article published by the Times on February 21, 2008 (see ?Note to ...Lobbyist drops suit against New York Times over John McCain story Los Angeles TimesNew York Times, lobbyist settle libel suit ReutersLobbyist linked to McCain settles lawsuit with the New York Times San Jose Mercury NewsCBS News - The Associated Pressall 276 news articles

---

Vicki Iseman drops $27 million defamation suit against the NYT - Hot Air

Vicki Iseman drops $27 million defamation suit against the NYTHot Air, MDVicki Iseman has dropped her lawsuit against The Times, just weeks after it was filed. We paid no money. We did not apologize. We did not retract one word of the story, which was a compelling chapter in the tale of Senator John McCain and his political ...

---

Iseman Suit Settled; Times Pays Nothing, Prints Statement - Village Voice

Iseman Suit Settled; Times Pays Nothing, Prints StatementVillage Voice, NYLast February the Times said John McCain and Vicki Iseman had a "the appearance of a close bond" and "some of the senator's advisers had grown so concerned that the relationship had become romantic that they took steps to intervene"; some of these ...

---

A Note to Readers - New York Times

A Note to ReadersNew York Times, United StatesAn article published on February 21, 2008, about Senator John McCain and his record as an ethics reformer who was at times blind to potential conflicts of interest included references to Vicki Iseman, a Washington lobbyist. The article did not state, ...

---

Rutenberg: Times 'not backing off' - Politico

Rutenberg: Times 'not backing off'Politico, DCThere's some debate over whether the Times's statement on Vicki Iseman represents a concession, as she claims, or not. As our statements have made clear, this newspaper is not backing off of the story in any way, shape, or form -- we are not backing ...

---