Beauchamp alert: The New Republic comes out from under its desk
Finally, TNR’s editors get around to addressing the latest Beauchamp mess. They’re doubling down. And publicly sticking to their story.
Which is more than you can say for Scott Thomas Beauchamp.
***
Foer and company persist in blaming “the Army” for the magazine’s failure to keep its readers apprised of the scandal in a timely, forthcoming manner:
The New Republic is deeply frustrated by the Army’s behavior. TNR has endeavored with good faith to discover whether Beauchamp’s article contained inaccuracies and has repeatedly requested that the Army provide us with documentary evidence that it was fabricated or embellished. Instead of doing this, the Army leaked selective parts of the record—including a conversation that Beauchamp had with his lawyer—continuing a months-long pattern by which the Army has leaked information and misinformation to conservative bloggers while failing to help us with simple requests for documents.
We have worked hard to re-report this piece and will continue to do so. But this process has involved maddening delays compounded by bad faith on the part of at least some officials in the Army. Our investigation has taken far longer than we would like, but it is our obligation and promise to deliver a full account of our findings.
So, TNR has “endeavored with good faith?” Go re-read the transcripts. You be the judge.
***
Update: The bottom line from Bryan Preston…
Foer can spin and twist his conversations with Beauchamp and various Army officers all he wants. He can suggest that the Army is being devious with him, that it’s strong arming Beauchamp, whatever. But if he can’t verify, after all this time, the existence of that mass grave, and since he now has official records documenting that his reporter has lied to somebody, Foer has no choice but to consider Beauchamp’s credibility as beyond repair and his stories as fatally flawed.
And from Allah:
We learned yesterday, as this was crumbling around TNR, that the left considers this story a terribly silly distraction from the “real issues” that they’re, um, no longer covering. Will TNR’s pushback create Strange New Respect for the saga of Scott Beauchamp among our liberal colleagues? Stay tuned!
And Ace makes a good point about Foer’s wildly exaggerated picture of Beauchamp being “threatened” and who’s doing the threatening:
The privileges and freedoms he speaks of are free use of his cell phone and laptop. Certainly Beauchamp would want access to these things, but it’s hardly the case he was being threatened with three years in Leavenworth…
… Foer says that Beauchamp was not free to talk in the Sept 6th call because he was “under duress” from the Army. He doesn’t mention another sort of duress — the fact that Foer himself repeatedly told Beauchamp his wife’s career would be “harmed” unless he re-affirmed the story. He says in the later conversation, where he claims Beauchamp stood by the story, there was no duress from the Army, as the call was unmonitored.
But the duress from Foer — the “harm” that would befall Ellie Reeves — still was there, no? Foer does not provide a transcript of this call — it would be interesting to see if Foer continues making these vague threats — though he almost certainly recorded the conversation himself and could provide it.
But he chooses not to.
***
Related:
Foer, as noted in the transcript, has been badgering Beauchamp to release his personal statements made during the course of the investigation. It is obvious in reading the transcript that Beauchamp has no intention of making that a priority. The Army cannot release those documents to TNR without Beauchamp’s authorization.
But there are other documents.
After getting off the phone with CENTCOM’s FOIA office just moments ago, I now know that there are a total of 58 pages of sworn statements that have been collected from Beauchamp’s fellow soldiers and are now on their way to legal review.
I must stress that just because there are 58 pages of statements, much of the information contained in these documents is likely to be heavily redacted. The (leaked) letter of concern, and the (leaked) transcript of the call between Foer, Scoblic, and Beauchamp were also part of that request, but at this point, are somewhat unnecessary other than as housekeeping items.
That leaves us with one other known document remaining, the transcript of the interview of investigating officer Major John Cross by The New Republic, which occurred after my interview with Major Cross, published September 10.
I’ve just submitted a new FOIA request for that information, wondering if those speaking on the The New Republic side of the call will still be employed by the magazine by the time the request is processed.
At this moment, I’d say that both the odds, and the truth as we know it, are against them.
Journalistically, I was lucky enough to work at CBS News when it was still shaped by the influence of the Murrow boys. They knew and taught that “everyone is entitled to his own opinions”–and they had them–”but not his own facts.” And I miss the rough old boys and girls of the front page, who’d greet FDR with “Snappy suit, Mr. President,” who’d bribe the guard to tell them what the prisoner said on the way to the chair, and who were not rich and important but performed an extremely important social function.
They found out who, what, where, when, why. And they would have looked at the half-baked, overcooked junior Hemingway of Scott Thomas Beauchamp and said, “That sounds like a buncha hooey.”
Beauchamp is young; under pressure he made a dumb mistake. In fact, he has not always been an ideal soldier. But to his credit, the young soldier decided to stay, and he is serving tonight in a dangerous part of Baghdad. He might well be seriously injured or killed here, and he knows it. He could have quit, but he did not. He faced his peers. I can only imagine the cold shoulders, and worse, he must have gotten. He could have left the unit, but LTC Glaze told me that Beauchamp wanted to stay and make it right. Whatever price he has to pay, he is paying it…
The commander said I was welcome to talk with Beauchamp, but clearly he did not want anyone else coming at his soldier. LTC Glaze told me that at least one blog had even called for Beauchamp to be killed, which seems rather extreme even on a very bad day. LTC Glaze wants to keep Beauchamp, and hopes folks will let it rest. I’m with LTC Glaze on this: it’s time to let Beauchamp get back to the war.
Good for Beauchamp for not walking away. But the only people preventing him from getting back to the war are TNR and, possibly, Beauchamp himself. This goes back to my post yesterday and the two possibilities identified by Ace: either Beauchamp hasn’t released his sworn statements, in which case he’s left TNR in a type of limbo, or else he has released them and TNR’s sitting on them in hopes everyone will forget about this and it’ll go away. Yon’s appeal reads like a plea to bloggers but I’m not sure which bloggers he means. Bob Owens? Michael Goldfarb? TNR can put the whole thing to bed by simply walking away from the story, which it should have done after that first phone call with Beauchamp, or Beauchamp can force them to put it to bed by telling them flat out that he’s no longer standing by the story and they should therefore commence eating shinola. Instead he no-commented them to death and promised to get them those statements, and after six weeks — nothing. Radio silence from all parties.
To be clear, Yon isn’t making excuses for TNR. They’re the guilty parties in his retelling of the story, and no one would disagree, but even so this evil editor/good-but-wayward soldier dynamic he’s trying to create here doesn’t sit right with me. Beauchamp deserves credit for fulfilling his obligation to the military, but what about his obligation to Foer and Scoblic (and to his wife, most of all) not to hang them out to dry with half-baked calumnies against his unit? He made a mistake, says Yon, which is true — but so did Foer. TNR’s lied, true — but not as much as Beauchamp, apparently. They gave Beauchamp a huge break by not only publishing a young writer but putting their trust in him, post-Glass, seemingly sight unseen, and he dumped all over it. Their fact-checking failures and especially their stonewalling after this came out are their fault entirely but let’s not minimize the extent to which they were wronged just because Beauchamp’s still willing to man his post.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
TNR: Better at exposing others’ hoaxes than their own
December 29, 2008 12:04 PM by Michelle Malkin
28 Comments
What the hell is the matter with The New Republic?
September 11, 2008 03:48 PM by Michelle Malkin
118 Comments
What’s more snort-worthy than Franklin Foer’s Beauchamp bloviation?
December 6, 2007 02:14 PM by Michelle Malkin
18 Comments
And now for some shoddy war reporting…from an NRO milblogger
December 2, 2007 10:10 AM by Michelle Malkin
47 CommentsBombshell…TNR ‘fesses up: The Beauchamp stories are bullcrap
December 1, 2007 03:48 PM by Michelle Malkin
78 Comments
Punked! Faking the hate, manufacturing the news
November 7, 2007 11:00 AM by Michelle Malkin
63 Comments
Manufacturing the news: ABC News hires actors to engage in homosexual PDA, provoke reaction
November 5, 2007 03:45 PM by Michelle Malkin
112 Comments
Categories: Scott Thomas Beauchamp
*rolls his eyes*
Learned through his wife?
Yeah, I believe them. Honest.
Oh, so it’s the Army’s fault.
But you know…
Maybe they should hire Calvan to “handle” things for them. He has the petulance that get’s things done.
They want proof that something didn’t happen…. shouldn’t that be the other way around???
they want documentary evidence from the Army? you mean like the documentary evidence they received from Beauchamp? you mean like the documentary evidence they have shown to prove their side?
my goodness, these people can make a rational person think irrationally! i am so tired of the lack of ethics in the media, whether mainstream or not, this has got to stop.
Looks like they’re trying to get their credibility ratings to go even lower. It seems that being aliberal, means never admitting being wrong or apologizing.
The Dan Rather defense…this all could be true, yes….in an alternate universe. What’s the frequency kenneth?
The transcripts are clear that at least some of the docs were Beauchamp’s to give. Were he in a hurry or, for that matter, able to clear his name, it is within his discretion to do so. It seems He has neither the desire nor the power.
However, he is also in the army. So, in a technical sense it is “the army” that they should be frustrated with for withholding information.
I hope Michael Yon is right about Beauchamp’s effort to make the situation right. If this is, in fact, the case, he (Beauchamp) will do inestimably greater damage to TNR than his original writings have done. Without his cover, their facade will crumble. And good riddance.
“Faced with the fact that Beauchamp stood by his story and the fact that the Army investigation had serious gaps—as well as the fact that our earlier reporting had uncovered significant evidence corroborating Beauchamp’s accounts”
Their link goes to their claim that the maker of the Bradley vehicle backed Beauchamp’s story, even though the maker denies saying that. They are still trotting out the same lies.
The people above Foer and his ilk need to step and remove him if they want any hope of salvaging TNR.
Trying to get the conspiracy nuts and truthers on their side it seems.
They’re
Not
Real
I’ve had both the pleasure and discomfit of working with young sailors who, after shooting their mouths off at the wrong time and the wrong people, promise to rehabilitate themselves. Most of the time, especially after one or two ‘counseling’ sessions, they did in fact become outstanding sailors. Some of the time, the reverse was the outcome. There were a few that, despite the numerous Captain’s Masts, refused to change. They were unceremoniously kicked out.
Having said that, in Pvt. Beauchamp’s situation, I advise to take President Reagan’s advice ‘Trust but verify’. Talk with Pvt. Beauchamp’s platoon sergeant after a year and see what comes out. Then we’ll know for certain.
As regards the ignoble TNR, their credibility is in the sewer. Let ‘em stay there. They don’t mean anything anyway.
Good for Beauchamp. It shows character that although he didn’t “start well” he wants to “end well” and come home proud of having been able to serve his country.
Yup – and trust he has no interest in pulling an anti-troops Kerry routine once he’s mustered out.
I read the transcripts and I came away with the belief that STB lied in the TNR tales but now is refusing to confirm or deny the lies – which leaves them out there as unproven lies. To neither confirm or deny is a tactic often used by the military, as in “we can neither confirm nor deny that there are nukes in such-and-such location.” So STB learned something from his military experience.
What most causes me concern is the “I need to take care of the person to the right and left of me” (paraphrasing). Given the earlier transgressions it sounds way too much like “I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. Now I need to get back to the business the people elected me for, running this country” (also paraphrasing). Who was it who said that patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel? I still think STB is a scoundrel, and will until he confirms that his tales are lies, something that is abundantly clear from the transcripts, and removes that last shred of cover that TNR is hiding behind. Only then would I take a chance to be the pperson on the right or left of him.
By the way, does anybody know his MOS (job title)?
If the latest from TNR is accurate, then Beauchamp doesn’t sound like he is doing anything to “make the situation right.” He is telling them the stories are solid and he still stands by them and that pressure from the Army is keeping him from speaking the truth.
Then he’s gonna HATE what happens once he thinks he’s left the military, and he gets nailed for lying during an investigation.
Maybe “comes out from under it’s rock” would be more appropriate in this case!
– Lorie Byrd
That’s not the case. In fact, he Beauchamp has told TNR he wants no further part of this whole ordeal. He also states in one of the leaked transcripts that he intended to go to other media sources, to dispell the TNR statement that he was being sequestered from the media. Foer and his TNR cronies attempted to dissuade him, by saying that his wife (TNR employee) didn’t want him to do that.
Yep.
This should of Happened on day one of this mess.
Just one question. If Beauchamp grievously slandered the U.S. military, why hasn’t he been consigned to a stockade, or at least been given a bad conduct discharge?
If Foer cared about the truth, he wouldn’t have said, geez, y’know it puts me in an awkward position, but we’re all so fond of Ellie, yadda, but it’s the most important thing in the world to her that you not recant. He would have said, “Just tell the truth, man.” And you’ve got to be some kind of moronic dipsh*t to believe otherwise.
What has NOT been reported. There were 3 documents, 2 of the TNR call and 1 with an Army document and while TNR is blaming the 3rd document leak on the Army they do not talk about or address the first 2. I am wondering if the Army document was actually from TNR and what information they received from the Army.
Did TNR have an internal leak again, which was how this story broke in the first place?
Okay will hit up a few points from the article TNR posted.
Well according to the documents and phone call it was Beauchamp himself, NOT the Army that cut himself off from TNR. They kind of ignore that fact.
Then they go on and state there were many other calls that stated the opposite of what Beauchamp stated in the Sept 6th call, but for some reason TNR did feel it needed to record these conversations to back up the claims they keep making.
If you remember Scott told the TNR he was giving their lawyer permission to all documents on Sept 6th, but TNR states:
Sorry, why don’t they talk about their request for the documents from TNR lawyer after he gave TNR permission to everything? How can you blame a Aug 10th request and not state what request you did after Scott gave your lawyer power of attorney to all documents?
Back up again, because in that Sept 6th call he stated he would not have time and TNR got it’s lawyer on the phone that was suppose to be how the documents were handled.
What is sad is they don’t admit the Sept 6th call is false, but seem to complete ignore everything that was talked about in it.
Is the TNR owned by Dan Rather?
This has to be one of the few times the Treason Media is complaining about leaked government docs, eh? Is anyone else noticing that Foer/TNR is whining about the leaked documents going to outlets of the wrong ideological slant but aren’t disputing the contents? Are we supposed to believe that the exculpatory stuff is in the other unreleased pages? Yeah, right.
I have seen nothing new to dissuade my core beliefs on this issue:
1. Beauchamp joined the military with an agenda in mind, specifically, to be the “Hemingway” of his time. TNR, using his wife, either helped him formulate this plan or simply exploited the opportunity.
2. Beauchamp wrote stories that were sensationalized, out-right fabrications in order to gain attention, conform to the anti-military agenda of TNR, or both.
3. He got caught. When the overwhelming evidence of his fabrications mounted too high to climb over, and his chain of command demanded an explaination, he came clean to the military.
4. TNR, Froer in particular, is trying to salvage their reputation (career in Froer’s case) and is using obfuscation, half-truths and, most egregiously, intimidation through his wife to hide their inappropriate and unresponsible reporting. They will most likely, in the end, throw Beauchamp under the bus.
(I give the Beauchamp marriage less than a year)
5. Beauchamp’s fellow Soldiers, having been slimed by his stories and being (in a large majority) supportive of this war, consider him the poster-boy for the 10% of any organization that are malcontents, cry-babies, sea-lawyers or just plain asshats. (In Marine Corps terms, the “sick, lame and lazy or Sh*tbirds)
6. Because of the last, he is trying to put all this behind him and “fit in.” I like many here, applaud this attempt to grow up and hope it sticks.
7. In the end, nothing will change. The military will fight and win wars, protect the interests of the citizens of the US while the young men and women serving find their adult voice and morale compasses. The congress will fight for the right to fleece the taxpayer. The left will push Socialism while the right defends Capitalism. And the majority of the press will follow their own agenda (usually in lock-step with the Socialists) until they are replaced by interactive media like the internet and Bloggers.
Unofficial reports of friends on Beauchamps personal website claimed his wife was no longer employed by TNR shortly after the time of the transcribed conversation.
Her name no longer appears on the masthead of the TNR website.
So Mr Foer, please clarify the current status of Ms Beauchamp. I believe you can probably actually determine that without a FOIA request, having to fight a lot of DOD red tape and I doubt it should take you very long or have to call in outside experts to complete a reinvestigation of the status.
To expand a little. Ms Beauchamp is referred to as a participant of sorts in their latest update report. The transcript refers to her involvement in the issue. Therefore her employment status is germaine to the context of the current situation.
Confederate Yankee (Bob Owens) reported about the Facebook entries noting that she was a intern who was reported to no longer be at TNR.
A google search resulted in having to access a cached page when searching for Elspeth Reeves and indicates her last article was published on 6/20/07.
classic piece of anti-American propaganda in the L.A. Slimes by Timothy Rotten