Tuesday’s edition of The View once again zombie-walked through the outrage that the White House has yet to issue a public apology to John McCain for White House aide Kelly Sadler suggesting his political stances don’t matter because “he’s dying anyway.”
No one in the middle of this circle of supportive sisters asks Meghan McCain why Sadler’s private apology isn’t enough, especially when the public has been aware of the private apology for days now. Clearly they know this routine is getting tired. They only spent a few minutes on it.
WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Still no apology from the White House for that disgusting comment about Meghan's dad, but You-Know-Who did tweet about it, saying, “So-called leaks are a massive overexaggeration put out by the Fake Media.” But then he added, “with that being said, leakers are traitors and cowards and we'll find out who they are.”
So which is it? Are the leakers, the leaks are fake? Or the traitors are leaking and cowards? I'm confused!...
MEGHAN McCAIN: I read this like, four or five times last night. I was like, okay, I don't understand. Like, the leaking is fake, leakers are cowards but the leaking didn't happen. Whatever. Let me tell you, as a person involved with this and got the phone call, she said it, she admitted to it, so that part is 100 percent right, and I know because she called me and told me. So let's start with that.
They should read Trump tweets in code. If you leak to the destroy-Trump media, you are helping the "fake media." You are "traitors" because you're leaking to the president's enemies, and you're "cowards" if you leak anonymously and nobody knows it's you. It's not that complicated. If someone inside The View leaked embarassing material about nasty insults from stars in the makeup chair, the stars would surely be angry at the disloyalty.
The outrage machine continued:
JOY BEHAR: But she can't apologize in public because if she apologizes in public, then Trump has to apologize to your father in public, and he can't do that either. That's why there's no apology coming down the pike!...
McCAIN: But I will say one thing that I'm so proud of. My family -- my dad's office, they never had a leaking problem and you have leaking problems when you don't have loyalty to the principal, when you're not inspiring loyalty.
BEHAR: Why do they continue to work there? Why don't they find some balls and quit?
McCAIN: I don't know. That's between them and their conscience. [Applause] I don't know, but it's fascinating to me because it's always a sign of a bad campaign or a bad candidate or a bad politician when you have rampant leaking problems because it shows that you don't have loyalty to the principal or the message and clearly, you have to look in your own house on that one.
As to McCain never having a leaking/loyalty problem, let’s revisit The New York Times on July 8, 2008:
WASHINGTON — Senator John McCain’s campaigns have long been defined by internal squabbling and power plays, zigzagging lines of command and a penchant by the candidate for consulting with former advisers without alerting current ones, always a recipe for disquiet.
After a period of relative calm on that score, it is becoming clear that his campaign is once again a swirl of competing spheres of influence, clusters of friends, consultants and media advisers who represent a matrix of clashing ambitions and festering feuds....
All of this intrigue breeds discouragement among even those former McCain associates who do not dispute the notion that voters now might be getting an early glimpse of the messy, unstructured way in which a McCain White House might be managed. They are hard-pressed to explain why Mr. McCain tolerates this — or encourages this — or why he has trouble cutting ties with people who have not served him well over the years.
Meghan McCain may not remember this well, but it's clear that if her father had defeated Obama, there would have been great encouragement from these liberal media organs to leak. The fact that her father's top advisers, like Steve Schmidt and Nicolle Wallace, now bash the Republicans daily on MSNBC suggest loyalty might have been a very serious problem if only he had actually won the White House. If McCain was not a "bad candidate" with a "bad campaign," why didn't he win?
