Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
The wheels come of the TNR/Beauchamp affair (updates)
Posted by: mcq on Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Apparently Drudge has managed to get ahold of a transcript of a conversation that Scott Beauchamp had with The New Republic editor Frank Foer & TNR executive editor Peter Scoblic on September 7th.

It is an amazing conversation. In it Beauchamp adamantly refuses to talk about the stories in question. Foer and Scoblic are understandably upset about that decision. There are some interesting comments by Scoblic in the beginning where he states that when the Beauchamp story was published he was on leave from TNR and didn't see any of this until he returned, but states that he can understand why there were questions. More than a little bit of a shot a Foer.

Beauchamp comes off as an almost sympathetic figure in this. You can tell he knows he's screwed up, he's had an epiphany somewhere in the process and he has made a decision that he is done with anything to do with writing or the media. He claims to be totally dedicated to his job now (to be fair in all of this, his squad leader and a specialist from the PAO are on the call with him, but he tells Foer and Scoblic they're there - however it would be hard to argue his squad leader's presence wouldn't have some effect).

Foer comes off as the heavy in this. He uses Beauchamp's wife (who works, or worked, for TNR) as a lever claiming to have gotten an email from Beauchamp's wife asking him not to recant his story. Pretty cheesy in my estimation.

Both Foer and Scoblic get Beauchamp to cancel interviews with Newsweek and the Washington Post saying that Beauchamp owes them the right to control this story and its outcome. Beauchamp agrees. They also get a lawyer on the conference call in order to work out how they'll get the sworn statements released through military channels to Beauchamp so he can release them to TNR. He agrees to that as well.

This was all on September 7th. Since then not a peep.

Read the 3rd document as well. It's the summary of the official investigation. In essence is says the disfigured story is a total fabrication with no truth to it at all. The second story about the skull cap is also a fabrication, with Beauchamp admitting the only bones he found on site were animal bones. And lastly, as you might expect, the third story is also fabricated, i.e. the running over of wild dogs with a Bradley.

Reading through the final document, it appears absolutely genuine (as does the memo from the battalion commander to Beauchamp appended to the second part of the transcript).

As Drudge notes:
Further the report stated "that Private Beauchamp desired to use his experiences to enhance his writing and provide legitimacy to his work possibly becoming the next Hemingway."

The report concludes that "Private Beauchamp takes small bits of truth and twists and exaggerates them into fictional accounts that he puts forth as the whole truth for public consumption."
And as we noted, to derision from some who wouldn't know a MRE from a COP, those with experience in both the technical aspects of the stories as well as the culture of the Army knew from the get-go that these narratives weren't right.

We now await the promised word from TNR on their "findings" in this case.

UPDATE: The docs are gone from Drudge's cite, but they can be found here.

UPDATE II: Franklin Foer to the NY Observer:
Mr. Foer said he called TNR's contact there, Major Kirk Luedeke, as soon as the documents appeared on Drudge's site. According to Mr. Foer, Major Luedeke told him that the Army was "investigating the source of the leak," though they did not explicitly take responsibility for it.

"It's maddening to see the Army selectively leak to the Drudge Report things that we've been trying to obtain from them through Freedom of Information Act requests," Mr. Foer said. "This fits a pattern in this case where the army has leaked a lot of stuff to right wing blogs."
Ummm ... leaks are only good when they show up in the NY Times and give away secret programs, huh? Maddening.

In the meantime note that Foer doesn't dispute the contents or validity of the documents.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
That story has now disappeared from Drudge’s front page. The PDF documents were backed up by Mike McCullough here.
 
Written By: Billy Beck
URL: http://www.two—four.net/weblog.php
Thanks Billy - updated.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://qando.net
Happy to help.

I’m damned curious to know why it dropped off Drudge’s page.
 
Written By: Billy Beck
URL: http://www.two—four.net/weblog.php
You can tell he knows he’s screwed up, he’s had an epiphany somewhere in the process and he has made a decision that he is done with anything to do with writing or the media.
I believe that is what is commonly known as a "Come to Jesus" moment.

His future experiances in the army? Well, once this hitch is up, I would think that would be "zero".

Am I wrong in suspecting they have already stamped "Not Recommended for Re-Enlistment" in big red letters all over his file?

Drudge likely dropped it because it likely violated privacy laws. It was released to TNR, not Drudge, and I would suspect it wasn’t released for publication.

I’m more curious who leaked it from inside TNR. It appears "Gracie" wasn’t the only one with concerns. I suspect his wife, personally...
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
Ah, but the military hasn’t come completely clean on its report, has it? Until then, how can we possibly trust the military’s word over that of The New Republic?

And I don’t like that Beauchamp’s wife has been "outed" now as a covert operative of TNR. Shades of Valerie Plame!
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://
I was replying to Steveino, and then my sarcasm-detector finally went off.

I should have it checked...
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
Since Erb is not around to give us the Lefty spin on this new development will anyone else venture a guess? I’m thinking that STB will stay mum until he is out of the military, and then he’ll make the rounds of the talk shows claiming the story was true all along, but he was silenced by the Army.

The public schools will teach our grandchildren that he was a great American hero like Joe Wilson.
 
Written By: Aldo
URL: http://
Since Erb is not around to give us the Lefty spin on this new development will anyone else venture a guess?
The lefty spin? Here’s the lefty spin, I suppose:

TNR supported the insanely stupid decision to invade Iraq. Anything that can be done to eliminate TNR from the planet is obviously welcome. Thanks for your help, wingnuts.

Now, if you would train your sights on the other publications that supported the invasion and social re-engineeering project in Iraq, it would be greatly appreciated.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
"It’s maddening to see the Army selectively leak to the Drudge Report things that we’ve been trying to obtain from them through Freedom of Information Act requests," Mr. Foer said. "This fits a pattern in this case where the army has leaked a lot of stuff to right wing blogs
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.......................


The hypocracy is so thick you can cut it with a knife
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
The lefty spin? Here’s the lefty spin, I suppose:

TNR supported the insanely stupid decision to invade Iraq. Anything that can be done to eliminate TNR from the planet is obviously welcome. Thanks for your help, wingnuts.

Now, if you would train your sights on the other publications that supported the invasion and social re-engineeering project in Iraq, it would be greatly appreciated.
It’s like he’s here solely for our amusement...
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
It’s like he’s here solely for our amusement...
No - the amusement is the circular firing squad of war supporters going after other war supporters.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Yeah... Cause people who post the sort of stories, who more or less recuit someone to write those stories, are huge supporters of anything having to do with the military...

The scary thing is, you believe what you’re saying...
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
Yeah... Cause people who post the sort of stories, who more or less recuit someone to write those stories, are huge supporters of anything having to do with the military...
TNR supported the invasion of Iraq. So of course TNR’s judgment is unsound.

But then I assume the same could be said about you.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
TNR supported the invasion of Iraq. So of course TNR’s judgment is unsound.
If you’re going to use that logic, then there’s no way you’ll vote for Hillary, right? Or John Edwards?

I don’t read the magazine, so I don’t know whether its take on the Iraq war has changed. If it now is against the war, does that mean TNR gets a pass on presenting a false story as true?

(And don’t claim other publications have done it. Tu quoque is not a defense.)

 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://steverino.journalspace.com/
MK is still smarting from the failure of his intel network on Iraq, Turkey and the US addressing the PKK problems.

And yes, he is here for the amusement, but he thinks it’s his amusement he’s here for.

 
Written By: looker
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider