I'm not trying to be a dick about this -- SERIOUSLY

However, for the first time in seemingly ages, I feel like I'm out of the loop at DU as to why it's World War 3 around here regarding Leopold/Truth Out and today's ruling concerning Rove.

I am aware that Leopold reported Rove would be indicted and that obviously today, it turns out he is wrong.

And....I understand why we're all angry and disappointed and frustrated about Fitz's ruling, however, why do some DUers want Leopold's blood because he got it wrong???

Sorry if I sound as though I've been living under a rock. I feel as though I'm the only one around here who doesn't get it.

Maybe someone can help me understand. I dunno. :)

There are many on this board that are fueling the fire way out of proportion. I urge all readers of these threads to simply put this tempest in teacup in perspective. The most vitriolic of TO's critics and the ones claiming that TO is through as a credible source of news and commentary because of ONE reporters mistake are, in my opinion, infinitely more suspect than TO.

That might qualify him for the Bush White House, but it doesn't qualify him to act as a journalist. Pretty simple, really.

If not, why jump to conclusions? Why attack the source?

Not only do they print guesses, they publish outright lies.

So much for journalism as practiced in BushAmerica.

i'd love to know how of anti-Leopoldians have actually written for a living...

or inferred erroneously.

perspectives... invites them, really.

jouranlism, which is a 'soft science" at best, allow for only one real answer.

very unscientific.

He printed that ROVE HAS BEEN INDICTED>

Not that he believed he was indicted, he printed as fact somethign it appears there was no evidence for.

I am still hoping there is somethign to this, but i just feel like he wasn't being a very good journalist, unless his sources (i HOPE it was sources and not just a SOURCE) misled him.

I just feel like they printed it like it was written in stone, when there was no information except for that he MIGHT have been at rove lawyers place.

going through the roof?!

Not a bunch of bloggers. Sure you're disappointed....

But It's like you all had wagered your life savings on the article being correct and now you've lost everything.

Is your life over now? Can you no longer pay the mortgage? Has you car been repossessed? Has your significant other left you?

I do not get it.

How easy it is to sit in judgement.

I don't think he was guessing. From the sounds of it, he thought he could trust his sources.

One of two things happened

1. Rove came within a gnat's wing of being indicted and either sold someone down the river to get out of it, or made some other sort of deal

or

2. though both JL and Truthout checked their sources, and felt pretty good about their story, they got played.

you'll notice the same cast of folks stirring the pot.

just sayin'.

almost as soon as the ingredients were placed in front of them.

As a DUer who has watched a lot happen here, I will say that it was incredible at which speed the stirring began too....And if this whole deal has been a "set up" a "Rathering" of Leopold, then I think its not coincidence that the stirring started too.

:eyes:

They watch voyeuristic style and find amusement in the games of my three year old son; when he pretends to be a dragon. They play dress up.

Some of them may even do it for a living. Sadly nearly all of them have nothing better to do.

And now reality is crashing down all around us, and they're really pissed, depressed, feel betrayed, etc. etc. and are howling for blood. It happens around here once in while. Things will be back to normal in a couple of days.

Just another reason that I don't believe in shit like the TO piece until it is verified by a couple of other sources. The net is a wonderful source of information that you can't get anywhere else. It's also a wonderful source for disinformation and plain old BS.

Washington Post, etc., etc., printed in the last few years? And their's are *intentionally* inaccurate. I don't get the double standard- I mean, Christ- people do make mistakes.

It doesn't seem appropriate. Something is very fishy here.

Of course, if one wanted to crush their opposition they would do such a thing, eh?

all those carefully cultivated folks with high post counts.

Nah, I'm sure the mods will get 'em.

Sometimes I think even the mods get fooled.

what do you mean by that statement, please explain.

No, it just stinks, that's all. Of course, the venom spewed is poisonous, eh? No? Then eating each other is bad, right? No? Then playing right into the hands of the opposition is bad, right? And being so bitter and vengeful about something that doesn't amass to a pile of spit is stupid, right?

try the search feature as it seems you have not been on DU during that time.

and is a discredited journalist.

It's a bit old now as she's been out of commission for a while, but we were and are plenty outraged. Of course, no one here is defending her or spinning intricate and unlikely explanations for why her stories turned out to be wrong as they are with Leopold.

it's just another thing that didn't go our way. I don't understand the vitriol aimed at Truthout or Leopold or Will Pitt. Seems pretty silly to be infighting all day. It all seems like a giant distraction.

I honestly do believe that "what comes around goes around" whether that be some sortof judgement day or instant karma. I just won't be holding my breath. Can't wait to have a big party on George W. Bush's last day in the WH!

But I think some may be angry, if Leopold has any inkling that his 5/13 story was inaccurate, if he is not also feeling some remorse for the rift his story caused among lefties. If he truly believes his story is accurate still, some may be angry at him for not doing a better job of showing why trusting him is rational.

both to hone in for the small detail when it's needed and to zoom back out for the broad vista when it's time for that.

I'd say chances are pretty damn good you're doing it right now. Nothin' wrong at all with being an adept at prioritizing.

And I say bravo to that.

:hi: :thumbsup:

:dem:

I don't think it should be a big deal. It's a fairly insignificant thing to focus on.

Shit happens, sources give bad information. It happens all the time. But the level of nastiness has been unreal - it hasn't been this bad since the Brokeback vs. Crash wars.
One of the many things that makes me proud to be a liberal is our acceptance of disagreements as an essential part of democracy. But we also understand the importance of respect for those with whom we disagree. Let's never forget that.

:grouphug:

Thanks for the laugh!

That level of acrimony in this place is in the red zone.. I keep wondering why I am not so personally offended by all of it, after all I was disappointed too when Rove was not indicted.

I just can't seem to build up the amount of righteous indignation that others have, and frankly don't understand why they have it..

Full of glee, smacking down everyone with their condescending bullshit. Thrilled.

It's surreal, isn't it?

You know who I speak of.

If the Leopold report was false it was planted in order to discredit the 'rabid left wing bloggers' in other words he was rathered, and part of the endless hubbub here is the work of rightwing trolls working to keep the uproar going as long as possible.

Just about everything in the news right now appears to be DESIGNED to be part of the 06 midterm election campaign disaster recovery program.

It is not the issue that TruthOut would have gotten a story wrong. Although, I will point out that there are plenty of people here who, on a regular basis, trash the NYT, WaPo, etc *because* they have gotten stories wrong. If TruthOut wants to be held at a higher standard, they need to be more accurate - or at least have the humility to admit when they're wrong. Or, if it turns out that they're not wrong (since the only information released is from Rove's people) then there should be some kind of statement made.

For me what's at issue is the fact that people have been pinning so much hope on the TO reporting, stating that the findings in such reports will mean significant turn-around for the Democratic cause/against the Bush administration. So far the reports haven't panned out.

Just because a particular journalist is a DU member does not mean that we have to hang on to every word they say as the gospel truth. I didn't post much about it at the time, but I have been pretty skeptical all along about the claims of "Fitzmas" and Rove's indictment, and I know there were others that didn't pan out. I'd like to see a little more critical thinking when it comes to these issues.

things like this happen.

however i will say this -- journalists need to be very, very sure of their facts before going to ''print''.

and that's all i have to say.

No analyst always gets it right. The real difference is how you report the confidence you have in the veracity of your data.

Are we really expecting that "our" journalists will never make mistakes or misjudgements? I don't understand what all the brou-ha-ha is about, unless it frustrated rage striking out. If that's what it is, I can't support it, it's just counterproductive.

Best summary I can come up with is ... egos, piss and vinegar. Equal parts, mixed thoroughly.

The story was posted on 5/12. A lot of people said "No Way!" Pitt showed up and viciously attacked everyone who said that, basically calling them traitors to the cause.

So, vindication is at hand.

His behaviour was totally unprofessionable and down right rude. At least Jason wasn't here calling all us 'doubters' crass names and throwing fits.

Wonder where Willie is now? Babysitting his great aunt's hamster somewhere in the Ozarks without access to net, prolly...

A Will Pitt post from last month that was so vicious it requires 4 weeks of nonstop trashing of Leopold and TO by a select group of 5 or 6 DU'ers?

I call bullshit and it has nothing to do with Pitt or TO.

His attack on Skinner:
When this story pans out, and all the little fish try to swim home, I am going to say "Sorry, you had the chance to stand with an ally, and instead, decided to say 'I find it very hard not to be skeptical.'"

You could have asked. I would have gladly explained the inside sourcing that I cannot reveal publicly. I would have told you. Happily. I would have explained how Joseph Wilson independently verified a half dozen other sources, none of whom are connected. We had a guy **deleted**.

I'd have told you, had you asked, because you are owed that much. But sadly, no. You threw me and Jason and truthout under the bus. Publicly, because you do not have the COURAGE to stand with someone who has stood with you. You couldn't even do it silently.

This was a wheat-from-the-chaff moment, and you failed. You spend a good deal of time talking about standing strong, but you publicly fucked one man who has stood stronger for you more than any other. Name for me please the New York Times and international best-selling book, translated into twelve languages, that thanks you and your site above anything else. First and foremost.

There is one. Only one. Mine. Before my own mother, I thanked you.

Yeah, yeah, we're 'ballsy' if we're right. But you made it 100% clear that you don't think we are. You could have asked. I'd have let you in. But no, you decided to cover your own ass.

You're in the wrong business.

I am disgusted.

You are no better than the cretins who have taken control of your site.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There's another attack on everyone but I can't find it.

Ann Coulter's comments about the Jersey Girls were vicious. That post is just a guy defending his employer and his friend.

And BTW, the story is far from over.

Put a fork in it.

I'll put a crow on ice for ya.

I'd love to be wrong about this. I'd love it if we were back here in a month or two enjoying an indictment on Cheney based on Rove's testimony. I'd be thrilled if Rove got frog-marched, after all.

Freeze that bird good for me because I'll cook it up with a bernaise so nice you'll want to share it with me. But I can't continue to believe in a story that has no corroboration except "we have sources, we stand by the story" when there's other evidence to the contrary.

Lordy, lordy.

Did that actually appear in a thread somewhere?

Dude knows how to burn a bridge doesn't he.

It also appears that, like Bush, he doesn't like to have his judgement questioned. Sucks to be him, then.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1342857

That's better.

N/T

you will need it here....

and ye shall find.

I was one of the early doubters and I thought Leopold's article and Pitt's arrogance about it merely pathetic at first.

I wasn't really disgusted until I read several of Pitt's outrageous attacks on the doubters - including several posted during a late, late night drunken meltdown. He not only attacked many of us, including Symbolman as "cretins" and "fuckwits", he similarly attacked Skinner himself for saying he had his doubts. Not only that, about a week or two ago he comes back for the first time since he sulked off and issued the most disgustingly masturbatory self-eulogy and phony non-apology anyone on DU had ever witnessed.

But even worse than Pitt's disgraceful behavior was the behavior of his DU groupies, who have to this day continued to spew bile at anyone and everyone saying anything critical or negative about the whole fiasco, and who to this day hit the "recommend for greatest thread" button (like lab rats who receive a dose of morphine each time they do) every time Mr. Pitt slinks back into DU to take a dump and get his "strokes" fix from his groupies with a new thread.

Leopold and Truthout owe readers of Leopold and Truthout a genuine and comprehensive apology, explanation, admission, and a retraction of the story. That's what real journalists do when they fuck up. Their credibility is in shambles and I suspect so is their integrity, so don't hold your breath in anticipation.

Ditto for Pitt and his groupies here on DU.

Leopold, Pitt, and Ash (from TO) brought this all on themselves with their incompetence, mental laziness, dishonesty, arrogance and in Pitt's case downright mean-spiritness and have no one but themselves to blame for the reactions here on DU. On second thought, I'd say 99% of the responsibility for all the commotion on DU falls on Pitt's shoulders because he was the one who tried to involve himself in Leopold's "scoop" by posting part of Leopold's article on DU along with a link to TO, and then continuing to update the story and saga, using the word "we" to include himself where sourcing the story was concerned. He was trying to personally take credit for the story along with Leopold. And he was the one lashing out viciously at all the doubters here on DU, not Leopold. All Leopold did was write it and put it up on Truthout. Leopold never engaged DU directly - I'd say he is 1% responsible for this mess, however, for authorizing Pitt to do so.

Us libruls/perguessives deserve better than that from those who would hold themselves out as representing our interests as so-called journalists. It's a disgrace to the cause.

:shrug:

know what "word" means in that context........but "word" is slang for: "I agree" or "yes," etc.

My apologies if you already know that and were just trying to be sarcastic. ;)

So thanks for clueing in this very unhip old fart. :)

;)

:shrug:

Besides, we Californians need to stick together!! ;)

would be indicted based on the story, challenged it, and therefore Pitt reacted viciously?

Now I'm even more baffled.

How in the hell could A LOT of people know either way whether Rove would be indicted and be confident enough to challenge the story?

I though maybe there was a 50-50 chance Rove would be indicted, but I certainly had no proof either way.

So, you're saying the reason people are lashing out about this is because they got their feelings hurt disputing the story???

In my opinion, that's seems very juvenile. You would think DUers are above that??? Apparently not.

The story was ludicrous from the beginning. From the sealed office building on a beautiful Friday in May to telling Rove to get his "affairs in order." The 24 "Business Hours" sealed it.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

...the hole story stinks, stank, stunk from the get-go. Fer instance, how is it that Leopold is THE ONLY REPORTER IN THE WORLD WITH ACCESS TO THESE 5 OR 6 INDEPENDENT SOURCES? Wouldn't you think that maybe, after TO 'broke' the story, that every Capitol Hill reporter with a phone and a little black book began searching for an avenue to horn-in on this huge story? I can guarantee that there are a least a few reporters remaining with the credentials to ferret-out a story this big - but for some reason, after 1 month, Leopold is STILL the only reporter in the world with this story? I'm sorry, but that just doesn't wash with reality...

gate and decided to be rude and condescending to anyone they couldn't convince to doubt the story immediately. the nasty tone in some threads was very similar to what happened to Andy Stephenson just a year ago. will pitt lashed out at the doubters, then apologized, excepting 5 or 6 muckrakers. this same 5-6 people kept vigil on what ended up to be about 20 threads on this (even though there was nothing new to say). many posts were deleted because people took attacked too personally. then those same people would say "show me the post where anyone got nasty". LOL. much ado about ego. quite a few people can't say "i told you so" often enough. :shrug:

but I don't think that's exactly what happened.

The best part is that the FEW (I don't think it was exactly "a LOT") of the posters, were quoting from a post W.P. had DELETED quickly after posting it. Now, I'd say a LOT of us get a bit hot-headed at times, and post things we maybe shouldn't, but I guess Will isn't allowed to do that. That deleted, obviously regretted post, was posted by people here, over and over and over. It was also, amazingly enough, posted on other websites. That's right - a DELETED-by-the-author post. Kinda strange, I'd say, and extremely juvenile.

There's more going on than people challenging the story - what it is I'm not exactly sure, but I finally started using the "ignore" feature because these FEW people were relentless...

I'm going to start using the "ignore" feature myself. The posts that are meant to incite aren't productive -- they're only destructive & they're getting in the way when seeking out the more valuable information.

I'd rather resort to the "ignore" feature than to stay away from DU because of the immaturity & self-loathing.

Sorry, but please spare me with this shit.

The "vicious" posts you refer to were not aimed at those who doubted the veracity of the story, but at those who made the whole thing ugly and personal.

You know what inspired the "vicious" posts? The single thing above all, but enflamed by the other ugliness?

It was a post from a well-known DUer that claimed, flat-out, that I demanded and insisted that I be the one to give the eulogy at Andy Stephenson's funeral.

Two things:

1. I was asked to give the eulogy by Andy himself, right after he was diagnosed. I wanted to vomit, I told him to fuck off, swear to god, because I wanted no part of that kind of talk, but he insisted because he was arranging his affairs, and I finally agreed. To be asked was perhaps the singular honor of my life, and one of the hardest things I've ever had to do. After I pulled my freak-out here during the worst of the attacks against him, he still insisted I give the thing. I tried to beg off because of how I had acted, but he again insisted.

2. The fact that a) the topic of Andy would be thrown into the midst of the Rove thing, and b) the fact that it was a bald-faced fucking lie of truly disgusting proportions, demonstrates the level of personal animosity I absorbed when this whole thing popped. There was a lot of crap being thrown, but that combined with the rest was simply too much.

I stated here as this thing unfolded, several times, that doubt was good, that if I were reading the story like everyone else, I'd reserve judgment as well. So take your sad-assed martyrdom and go pound some sand with it.

Point me at the person who said it and I'll go kick their ass. Seriously. I remember Andy asking me to make sure you gave his eulogy and the vomit-inducing feeling you're talking about. I didn't want to even think about it. I remember how much it meant to him and how hard it was for you. Some people around here suck. :hug:

it made me sick. I couldn't believe the person (who I had respected prior to that) had actually posted it. He earned the honor of being the first person I had ever put on ignore since I'd found DU late 2004.

Although it has started a cascade of ignores, I might add. I must have ten or twelve now.

or we turn each other into dogmeat, like the nice, tolerant liberals we are.

at least Leopold didn't sell anyone a bullshit story about Weapons of Mass Destruction or fucking yellow cake from Nigeria.

details do matter!

wrong African country that starts with an "N"... my bad. :blush:

We properly criticize this adminsitration and its supporters of distorting, twisting and simply ignoring the truth...of lying. But if you're going to convince people that the other side is not truthful, our side had damn well better be careful that it can back up its claims. And like it or not, TO is viewed as part of "our side". So when JL goes out on a limb with the assertion that Rove was indicted on a specific date, he can and should be held accountable if he can't back up his assertion. From the outset there were any number of reasons to question his claim. He has offered nothing to rebut those questions other than statements that raise more questions (like the sealed v. sealed claim which is no more substantiated than his original claim). And now that a story has come out claiming that Rove's counsel has been told by Fitz that charges won't be sought against Rove (not that charges already brought against Rove will be dropped), many folks are pissed because our credibility is our most important weapon. Some people are still questioning the statements made by Rove's counsel, but no one has put forward an explanation of how creating a lie about hearing from Fitz would help Rove's legal case. Is it possible that Rove has "cut a deal" with Fitz? I suppose its "possible" but if that was the case do you really think Rove would still be working at the White House?

Just as people doubt (sometimes to extremes) anything that this adminsitration says because of their record of lying, we risk having people take our claims less seriously when someone on "our side" is caught spreading false stories, which is what appears to have happened.

BTW, invariably, someone will respond to this by demanding that I prove that Rove hasn't been indicted. My reaction: prove that he has. I put the burden on those making the claim because until its proven that he has been indicted, the public at large -- the folks whose support we need in order to recapture control of the government -- are going to assume that he hasn't been indicted, not the other way around.

would be a nice gesture out of respect for TO's readership.

for a handful of DU'ers. In the scheme of things, this should be a minor blip on the radar, but instead this thing is huge and won't die. And I am bored to death of the subject and the incredible nastiness of it.

Doesn't anybody have any better ideas that we could be discussing? I mean, "Democrats don't have any ideas" is what the Repubs are always saying. I can tell you on DU, that's become true.

I responded once already that it was really getting difficult for regular members to avoid all these nasty one-note threads rehashing the same crap for the 2500th time. I want to learn about OTHER TOPICS RELATED TO THE UPCOMING ELECTIONS AND THE ADVANCEMENT OF LIBERAL IDEALS -- but these certain DU'ers are in cahoots, and they vote up every Leopold thread so that the Greatest Page is FULL of this crap and the forums are FULL of this one subject (over and over) -- and it's making it hard to navigate (since I have to take the time to hide practically every thread).

As I've said before, I don't give a shit about Leopold or Pitt one way or the other and don't want to have to (this story is so five-seconds-ago as my teens would say) -- can't we just push these stupid, repetitive threads to their own forum or something for the sake of the NON-INTERESTED DU'ERS????

I WANT TO BE ABLE TO READ ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE!!!!! I've been spending more time on DKos.

Unless something is done, I'm using the "ignore" button. Enough is enough!

We're always on the losing end. Why should anyone be surprised?

That's what we do. We Lose. We Underachieve. If we're up 10-0 in the bottom of the ninth, we'll figure out a way to lose the game.

I'm not at all surprised. Now, if rove had been indicted, THEN I would be surprised. If Leopold had been proven correct, THEN I would be surprised.

This? No surprise at all. When the Dems fail to take control of either house in November, I won't be surprised then either. Those here who get their hopes up will be, but I know what's coming, and it ain't victory, because we're Democrats, and we don't believe in that stuff anymore.

Democrats statements to yourself.. I have seen many of the same message from you....

He said he HAD been indicted.

Now, if your local newspaper printed a story that Edmonton had won the game last night, and it turned out that, in fact, Carolina had won, wouldn't you be a bit miffed at your newspaper?

Why is this the most grievious offense against the truth in your book?
We're in the middle of a

WAR BASED ON LIES

in case you forgot.

If anything, it is remarkably minor, even inconsequential. Besides, anyone who wasn't practicing wish fulfillment knew it to be bullshit from the git. Yes, we are in a war based on lies. I don't need any reminders.

still alive, when in fact they were dead... I don't remember the indignant acrimony for that?

People weren't roaming the streets with torches and pitchforks because a reporter(s) got it wrong.

It was gut-wrenching to learn the miners were dead, but yet I didn't see the same outrage I'm observing now over a stupid political story that means nothing.

As I've already said, it's like people wagered their homes on Leopold's story.

The reaction is utterly out of proportion and disturbedly venomous.
I was especially unsettled by the gloating today and the posts declaring Rove innocent (not even his lawyer said that).
I also remember another pictorial thread that had Rove giving DU the finger.
Makes one wonder who these people are.

Miller, Woodward, and Faux don't hang around DU holding themselves up as messiahs of our cause, only to become so full of their own hubris that they play us like dumb fiddles, turning themselves into pariahs by betraying the trust that hundreds if not thousands of DUers placed in them.

How fucking hard is it to issue a simple and clear statement? Something like:

"I reported earlier that Rove was to be indicted, I was apparently mistaken in this and apologoze to my readers. In my defense it is possible I was right and the indictment was/is sealed. However the time frame I announced for them to announce it was in obvious error....

Update to my readers - it appears that for whatever reasons my sources passed along wrong information. I realize my reporting this based solely on their tips caused a lot issues for fellow liberals in various venues. I have learned from this and will not make such a mistake again - I have worked hard for the cause in the past, and this set back will not deter my digging for more information you can use. Thank you all."

Hell I was on a thread one day arguing with someone about a religious matter and figured out I was wrong later in a definition of forum/group. I apologized, simple as that. My question was still legite to me, but I was wrong on some basic facts. Having to apologize sucks, but when you are wrong - you are wrong.

I think Leopold was duped or things changed...Rove flipped under pressure or Fitz was shut down from above. Leopold seemed, and still seems, very confident about his sources. Maybe Leopold is a damn nut, but I really don't think so. Listening to him today on Ed Schultz, I think there are things he can't say. He can't out his sources, they are still talking to him.

Plenty of other reporters out there, many with hard-earned credibility, and I can guarantee that they've got their sources too.

So how is it that JL is the *only* reporter with sources claiming a Rove indictment? How is it that no other reporter was able to 'crack' the story that JL broke? How is it that the mysterious 'multiple sources' for the TO story are the exclusive confidants of a small-time reporter like JL? It just can't happen that way...

There is no story, never was, never will be. If JL hasn't figured that out by now, then he's incompetent at best. At worst, he's a liar who, in an attempt to get the scoop, guessed wrong at the timing of a long-rumored indictment. Either way, it's not simply a case of someone 'simply getting it wrong'.

Why anyone would celebrate today, is beyond me.

head up their collective whatever. To paraphrase a great American, there are more plants on this board right now than there are in the last arboretum I visited. They're obvious. They're also embarrassing themselves.

They are here, in my opinion.

What is "today's ruling" that people keep referring to?

Fitz allegedly sent a letter to Rove's lawyer saying that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Rove:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2335471&mesg_id=2335471

:shrug:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

better understand, my friends!! ;)

However, it's too bad it doesn't seem I heard from most of the people (if any) who've been composing post after post about this, and are seemingly one step away from needing anger management.

Anyway, It's good to know I'm not the only person who didn't and still doesn't understand the fierce outrage concerning a reporting error.

The bottom line is Rove will not be indicted.

THAT SUCKS

But Jesus, lets move on....shall we?

...So it seems that a banquet was scheduled, and some 90,000 famished diners were seated around the table (big table). The waiters (Messrs. Leopold, Ash, and Pitt) told the diners that Chef Pat had prepared a nice, fat, juicy, tasty Roast Rove.

This, of course, sent the diners into a feeding frenzy, since Roast Rove was a rare delicacy -- so much so that some diners doubted that Chef Pat really had a Roast Rove in the kitchen. These people ordered Roast Rove, but also ordered a double-order of Steak-on-a-Stick or Tofu Surprise appetizers, just so they'd have something to eat regardless. The rest ordered double orders of Roast Rove, of course. While sipping cocktails, some of the people who ordered Roast Rove made fun of the Steak-on-a-Stick and Tofu Surprise orderers, and vice-versa.

Well, an hour or so later, the natives were getting restless, and started asking the waiters where their Roast Rove was. The waiters said, "It's coming, be patient."

Another hour passes, and word comes to the Big Table that Chef Pat has decided not to serve the Roast Rove. The diners are apoplectic about this, of course. Knives and forks clatter as many of the diners bang them on the table and chant, "We want Roast Rove! We want Roast Rove!" over and over (which isn't easy to say even once, and harder if you've been sipping cocktails for two hours).

Then some of the diners look over at the waiters, who are somewhat at a loss about the development. "You tell them," one says. "No, YOU tell them," says another. Finally, one approaches the table. "I've got some bad news..." he begins.

"Yeah, we know. No Roast Rove." The anger of the diners weighs like a big ol' schlurping turtle upon the room. Then a few of them start muttering in their most menacing manner to the waiters...

"But YOU'LL do nicely in a pinch. Go fetch some fava beans and a nice Chianti..."

The End.

to justice

What's the big deal?

jason lied, there is no way that he can claim he had all these folks telling him rove was indicted when, as we know, rove was not indicted -- clearly this "reporter" fabricates rather than reports

pitt screwed up in publishing the story by a person of jason leopold's credibility (on a par w. ann coulter or less) but, okay, anybody can screw up

my issue is that pitt instead of acknowledging the screw-up and his editorial issues in publishing such a story continued to push a story as true that was obvious to one and all as a patent attention seeking lie

why wouldn't people be angry? many people feel cheated and deceived

another source that we can't trust

no one wants leopold's blood, we simply don't see the need to give this person any further attention or any further publicity outlet

he is a disgrace and he has also managed to disgrace formerly trusted posters here

yes, people are going to be somewhat bitter about it

my suggestion is simple -- DON'T buy leopold's book, DON'T read his articles, DON'T apologize for not believing every bit of unsubstantiated crap that is put out there no matter who the editor is

don't reward cheats w. drama and attention

let's move on, anybody paying attention already knew a month ago that rove was not under indictment

on edit -- now having read the entire thread, i'm disturbed that the only response by will pitt is to claim this is somehow about reading an eulogy for a dead man, when in fact none of this has anything to do w. andy and i have not seen anyone other than pitt himself try to pull andy's name into it, perhaps there are other threads i haven't seen, but i saw the "eff-wits" thread and the "i don't really apologize thread" and i think i see all i need to see, the will pitt we knew from getting the scoop on scott ritter interview etcetera seems to have completely vanished from view

i just hope we get him back sooner rather than later

so it's very disappointing all around, i must say, i can't object to anyone being disappointed and angry, i'm too tired to be angry, just v. v. v. disappointed

accused him of forcing himself into doing the eulogy. It was after that point that a) Pitt really cut loose, b) tons of people told the 5-6 (10-20, really) Pitt haters to shut their juvenile pieholes, and c) the haters decided everyone who was calling bullshit on them was a "groupie". This no longer has anything to do with Rove. It's all about a small group of haters driving away an ally, and calling reasonable DUers groupies.

"making up news, especially to hawk a new book" guy:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18624-2005Mar8.html

on an important subject to them (getting that s.o.b. KKK).

They also want to hold sources on our side to high journalistic standards, and thus would like to see an explanation/apology from truthout for having been conned by Liepold.

Now, while truthout OWES no one anything, it is smart not to stonewall/cover up when you have messed up, because doing so ALWAYS makes the situation worse, and loses you supporters the longer the denial/stonewalling/cover up/refusal to explain goes on. It just makes YOU (in this case truthout) the story, instead of the news source. It also tends to make you look arrogant and clueless; whether that is fair or not (it really is just human nature - circling the wagons when things go wrong, and hoping they will turn out o.k.).

To sum up: Truthout was taken by Liepold. At this point, their reputation and integrity are getting tied to this story by many (fair or not), so they need to come clean to placate those who feel betrayed (not me, BTW).Things will not blow over till truthout offers an explanation/apology, OR till they lose enough people who care about the issue, OR till they are exonerated on this issue (looks increasingly unlikely, imho).

Hope that helped.

.... assessment of them...

truthout claimed, without any publically verifiable evidence that rove WAS indicted on May 12th.

Aspects of the claim quickly turned out to be fishy at the least, or simply false at the worst.

truthout tried to "fix" those "burps" by changing their story. You'll hear snark from me and others here regarding "24 hours" in this regard.

Some here chose to believe truthout's basic claim, regardless of the lack of publically verifiable evidence.

Other here chose to withold their belief (which is not the same as believing the opposite), pending publically verifiable evidence.

End result: a minor brouhaha between those who insist on evidence, and those who are happy to believe without it.

Now that it seems a lock that rove was NOT in fact indicted on May 12th, as truthout claimed.

And afaik, there have been no consequences for anyone in the chain of the story. No sources who burned the author outed, no consequences for the author of the (apparently) false story, no consequences for the editor.

And of course the don't-need-no-stinkin-evidence believers keep right on believin'.


EDIT: I gave up trying to keep my assessment-bias out of it - LOL


Have I got anything *factually* wrong in this?