Jason Leopold on Ed Schultz right now ~

There was interference, so Ed had to let him go, but now he's back ~

:hi:

Seems surprised that MSM has still not come out with the same story, citing the fact that of 75 reporters at Rove's speech yesterday, only one asked Rove about the indictment story.

Even the 24 hour "business day" extension is over now. The story is just wrong.

to his indictment.

And I hope it happens soon; but there's no saving the accuracy of this story right now. Even if he's indicted sometime this week, the story said he was already indicted. It doesn't look like that's true.

were feedbacking.

The NSA must have fixed it

They had to hang up because the interference made it difficult to hear JL. JL did seem a little disconcerted by the problem ~

He, Jason Leopold, says he is not worried that he was 'set up' ~ he doesn't know why the MSM has not reported the story also ~ but says he knows he'll be vindicated ~

He checked his sources. He thought that the story was so big, the MSM would be on top of it. He is surprised that he is the only one who reported it.

He mentioned that only one reporter questioned Rove yesterday ~ at the American Enterprise meeting.

thrashed ~ Jason said he doesn't know, people seem to hate him!


He is telling about Carollo and Livingston ~

Ed: Do you think you were duped?

JL: No, I don't. I said there would be an announcement this week, the date and time are unknown.

"The maximum possible dissonance is equal to the resistance to change of the less resistant cognition; therefore, once dissonance reaches a level that overcomes the resistance of one of the cognitions involved, that cognition will be changed or eliminated, and dissonance will be reduced."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

You see alot of that "inexplicably" around environments where myth-makers are working hard.

We saw it 1) in the lead up and rational for Iraq (we assumed Rummy would try and win the war, that there was imminent danger from WMDs, etc.)

2) National Guard Story & CBS wanting to go with a story before it had been fully vetted

3) Any other examples?

Seems Leopold wanted it so much he stopped reporting and following his own rules re: timing of the announcement of Rove's indictment.

Still so much more to find out.

Still more cognitive dissonance to come.

Nice that the Pentagon allowed the 911 tin foilers to "reality test" the plane hitting the Pentagon. That was really sweet and kind of them seeing as how they are government and the welfare of people is obviously their top priority.

A dim bulb interviewing a cracked bulb.

Leopold certainly sounded steadfast and sure of his story. Time will tell.

:thumbsup:

If you think we can win back ANYTHING without the moderates and former republicans, you are mistaken. Ed may be a good ol' boy, but he draws a big, loyal, audience, FULL of people that wouldn't be caught dead listening to Randi or Al. You all think we can win without the Red States? Think again. Ed appeals to them with his folksy personality and Rush-like delivery. I don't always agree with him, but he seems like an okay fellow, and a smart one. And.. I appreciate ANYONE that gets the message out, and LISTENS the way he does.

for the same story so far. Knight Ridder and two other biggies (NBC and ABC?)

JL has been getting these last few days, if he or his editor had any doubts about the sources, they would have cut their losses and retracted the story long before now.
Slink into the woodwork.


They still holding firm. Just wait and see.

the story. 24 hours=equals 8 business days + 2 weeks vacation. Blah Blah. We'll see what happens. Obviously patience isnt a necessary requirement of being liberal.

:eyes:

of the MSM-CON, so why not doubt JL/TO?

i mean, you DO believe everything reported by NBCABCFOXCBSCNN et al right, or do they have an agenda ?

nah, can't be.
dp

I make an exception for someone on the other side just because I -want- to hear some particular thing? Answer: I don't.

its the first time ive posted to a leopold/rove thread

i truly dont understand what all the to-do is about - i get that this is a huge story and that by being the first to make such a loud declaration that it brings the left sphere into question and that if its wrong then its a big hit against our side

how many times has the corporate media NOT run a story or very implicitly let us know its not worth discussing or outright lied or covered up facts

is the problem that jason didnt initially say 24 "business" hours - i get that was a clear journalistic mistake that should have been caught before going with the story but unless there is something i am missing (and i am sincerely asking) then i just dont get why people are all over him and truthout like they are

i definitely believe the story but am unclear why some are so upset - is it because this hasnt also been aired by the corporate media? because jason said 24 hours (later amended to 24 business hours) or because they dont believe in jason as a journalist?

im truly puzzled
i see a lot of rolls eyes icons and snark but not a lot of clarity about why they think jason is "wrong"
it would really help to have specifics of why people are so adamant that the story isnt true

outside verification of Leopold's explosive claim that an indictment was handed down.

Also, people are upset that Leopold said Rove was given 24 hours to get his affairs in order. That was amended to '24 business hours' after people asked if he meant the next day, or after the weekend.

Other questions arose regarding JL's claim that a 15 hour session took place between Fitzgerald and Rove's attorneys. Some claims have been made since (by Luskin) that Fitz was in Chicago (was he?) and that he, Luskin, did not take part in such a meeting.

He reported on what his sources told him, so it is not JL saying '24 hours' or 'a sealed indictment was handed down'. Or, the extended session, which according to him, ended with no agreement for a plea. He is insistent that this information came from very credible sources.

On Ed Shultz, I did get the impression that JL did not think he was the only one who got the story from sources. He said he was certain the story would be all over the news by the next day. But as it turned out, only he actually reported on the information he (and maybe others) was given.

What I remember is that several others did believe something was going to happen this past weekend, or at least over the next week.

Chris Matthews
Bill Israel
Larry Johnson

The problem JL has, which they don't, is that he gave details ~ and he claimed that the indictment was already handed down. He will be vindicated if Rove is indicted and there is proof of a sealed indictment dated May 12th.

I hope he and his sources were not used ~ but I don't think it's the end of the world or the end of independent journalism if that happens. Maybe this time, unlike in the Rather case, he and others can trace the fake info back to its source. I don't think he made this up. But I do see the possibility that he and his sources were set up.

so i am understanding you to say that there were a few specifics (important to be sure if youre going to include them in such a story) that are being disputed by those involved (no surprise there but important to have right of course)
and the underlying story is huge and as weve said - leopold was the first to run it

i guess im still confused why people are upset

why arent we all just waiting until the 24 business hours are up before shouting about this being correct or not?
as i said it was important that he had to amend the story to business hours but i think the correction did come the same day did it not?
so im just confused why this was assualted from the get go and why arent we all just waiting to see if by wednesday this is verified?

this is not directed at you catrina
again thank you for your thoughtful response

i am one for details and proof (also an idealist) but i do believe that rove has been indicted
and regardless of where we stand on this why arent we just waiting to hear from someone else before we attack or even before we declare it absolute truth?
i certainly dont know one way or the other but its just truly confusing why people are so all over the place on this

the people in question (rove and the wh) are so vile that i dont believe one word out of their mouth so why are people here so quick to try to shoot holes into jasons story based on what these criminals are responding with?

sadly - people are so distraught with all the crimes and devastation that its hard to know fact from fiction any longer

thanks again friend for the response

so upset.

This is what I think and it's just my opinion after listening to Jason Leopold today, and considering the number of other reporters who also seemed to be expecting 'something big' to happen very soon.

I think that Jason Leopold is not the only reporter who was given the information he reported in his article. As he said, he expected this to be all over the news this past weekend.

Those who mentioned, last week, the possibility of big news re a Rove indictment, include:

David Schuster
Chris Matthews
Bill Israel (Rove's friend and a reporter)
Joe Wilson, according to at least two people, heard similar info to that which JL published from various sources.
Larry Johnson, who came to DU to back up JL also heard similar news from various sources. (this was verified by Jeralyn Merritt who emailed him to verify his ID on DU).

I think there are others in the media who were also told what Jason Leopold was told.

I also think that no matter what happens, Jason Leopold, Truthout and all those others who got the info, believe the sources.

The question is, why didn't the others publish the story? I think it's possible that they could not get confirmation of the meeting with lawyers from Luskin ~ Leopold did say Luskin met with Fitzgerald, but Luskin denies that.

It's possible that someone other than Fitz met with Luskin, or someone in the lawfirm other than Luskin met with Fitz. Luskin has played with words before.

Leopold said he tried to get Luskin on the phone, but Luskin did not return his call. Maybe that's there JL made a different decision than the others. They were reluctan to go ahead without a confirmation from Luskin, JL went ahead anyway, confident that his sources were enough.

Luskin however, made a statement that wasn't true. He said that as far as he knew, Fitz was in Chicago on Friday. But we know that Fitz was in Court in DC regarding the Plame investigation. He was mistaken.

I will not be one of those who loses faith in TO or Jason Leopold if there is no indictment dated May 12th. If a reporter gets a story like this from various sources who he trusts what should he do? Imo, he should not hold it back from the public. I think Jason Leopold did the right thing. I have a feeling that this is how journalism used to be. A reporter gets a story, his editors check it out, and they publish it.

The problem is the MSM now doesn't do this anymore, out of fear that they may get in trouble with this WH. Things have changed as Colbert said, 'make, announce, type.'

The only criticism I have of JL is with regard to not getting one of the lawyers to verify the story. Especially since it involved Rove who is notorious for his deviousness.

I'm glad a few people, like Larry Johnson, have backed JL up. As you said though, I really don't see why so many people are upset ~ unless they think he made the whole thing up, which I do not. I think he published what he was told. He believed it was true. If it turns out it is not, it's no big deal. But he will have to find out why his sources were wrong. What I hope if that happens is that other reporters who had the same info will have the courage to say so.

What is strange is how silent everyone else is, even on the right. No one is saying anything. I think everyone is waiting for the indictment they apparently believe is coming. If it doesn't, then it means Rove made a deal, imo.

Thanks for your posts ~ I think we are in agreement ~

The story has by this point in time been amply demonstrated as false. Fitz would absolutely not have proffered an indictment without publicising it. And if you think the entire SCLM (MSM if you prefer) would agree to quash the story, well...

I want Rove to go to prison. And I want facts and truth from journalists whichever 'side' they are on. Not that I expect it from Faux but I damn sure do from those who claim to be liberal or progressive.

Is that too much to ask?

jason and truthout amended the story to say 24 "business" hours
in my understanding (limited to be sure) that would mean tomorrow so i truly dont understand how anything has been proven or not proven

i can only wait to see what comes down tomorrow
then we will have more definitive "proof" - wont we? or am i missing something about 24 business hours to get his affairs in order?
again i ask because i do not know the ins and outs of law protocol

thanks
i know we all want this to be true and given all the lies thrown around i understand that its not easy to believe what anyone says about anything
and i also certainly understand how important it is to get all the facts and state them correctly and clearly
with lots of hyperbole its easy to be - and important to be - skeptical

practically, it is a made-up term with no meaning and would never be used by either any lawyer or competent journalist. His story unequivocally claimed that an indictment had been (was) presented. No prosecutor would have done that without at the very least a press conference and certainly no way would the SCLM/MSM collude to hide a story like that and risk being scooped.

I have no dog in this fight, I never even heard of this Leopold character until last Friday but the first time I read the story it was clear to me it wouldn't pass even the most rudimentary sniff test. Nobody wants Rove to get nailed any more than I do but dammit, our side ought to hold reporters on "our" side to at LEAST as high a standard as we would demand from CNN, etc. What's the point of being a liberal, a Democrat or a Progressive if we're willing to accept questionable "news" without question? That's the very sort of thing we condemn when the rightwing does it.

edit: minor typo

theres no legal precedent for getting affairs in order within 24 business hours?

i definitely didnt know that

as to the corporate media i absolutely believe they would put off the story as they have thousands of other times and from what ive learned most every one truly lives in their own privileged bubble where lots of facts dont seem to matter and lots of stories dont seem to warrant reporting
certainly this warrants reporting

and yes i certainly want any side to be held to the same standards
in fact i want all politicians out who cant abide by the law i dont care what their political affiliation to be

thanks for explaining the 24 hours thing - again i didnt know that
i guess we will just have to see come tomorrow

:D

Just to make sure they are not in trouble. Jeebus my head is fucking exploding.

for him, for me, and for the nation. Heck, for the world also.