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 screen capture posted on mediabistro.com’s FishbowlDC seems to indicate that TNR fact-checker and Beauchamp’s wife Elspeth Reeve is also no longer with the beleaguered magazine.

Update: Patrick Gavin, who posted the Facebook entry noting that Reeve was no longer at The New Republic, has followed up on his original post, noting that Reeve has indeed left the magazine, but:

…not for any sinister reasons. Her year-long internship had expired and she is currently working as a research assistant for Mike Grunwald.

 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.

 Elspeth Reeve
Author Search
Elspeth Reeve’s Recent Articles
Elspeth Reeve is a reporter-researcher at The New Republic.

RECENT ARTICLES: Boo-Ya
Post date 06.20.07
Progressives pile on Hillary Clinton

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.

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.

the first time the Army had granted TNR permission to speak with Beauchamp since it cut off outside contact with him on July 26.

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:

On August 10, we had filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the Department of the Army for all documents pertaining to its investigation of Beauchamp, particularly any statements Beauchamp had signed. But it was not until October 10 that Central Command informed us that the FOIA request was finally under review by the appropriate office.

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?

We also tried to get the statements from Beauchamp himself. However, when Beauchamp requested a copy of his own statements from an Army legal adviser, he was told that he first had to coordinate any dissemination of them with Army public affairs.

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.

Did TNR have an internal leak again, which was how this story broke in the first place?

Foer has no choice but to consider Beauchamp’s credibility as beyond repair and his stories as fatally flawed.BP

Yep.

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.”PN

This should of Happened on day one of this mess.

Quick hits:…

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.

– 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.

Beauchamp alert: The New Republic comes out from under its desk

Maybe “comes out from under it’s rock” would be more appropriate in this case!