You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
TruthOut promises a full accounting . . . on Monday
2006-06-15
The lefty website Truthout.org, which reported a month ago that "Karl Rove has been secretly indicted," finally responds to the news that Karl Rove will not be indicted:
Yesterday, most Mainstream Media organizations published reports about a letter supposedly received by Karl Rove's attorney Robert Luskin. As an example of the supposed letter's contents, TIME Magazine stated that, "Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald said or wrote, 'Absent any unexpected developments, he does not anticipate seeking any criminal charges against Rove.'"
Note the liberal (pun intended) use of weasel words.
Truthout of course published an article on May 13 which reported that Karl Rove had in fact already been indicted. Obviously there is a major contradiction between our version of the story and what was reported yesterday.
"In the category of 'Year's Boldest Understatement in an Online Publication,' the nominees are . . . "
As such, we are going to stand down on the Rove matter at this time. We defer instead to the nation's leading publications.

In that Mr. Luskin has chosen the commercial press as his oracle - and they have accepted - we call upon those publications to make known the contents of the communiqué which Luskin holds at the center of his assertions. Quoting only those snippets that Mr. Luskin chooses to characterize in his statements is not enough. If Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald has chosen to exonerate Mr. Rove, let his words - in their entirety - be made public.

Reporter Jason Leopold

Mr. Leopold did not act alone in his reporting of this matter. His work, sources and conclusions were reviewed carefully at each step of the process.
"We here at Truthout have one or two a bunch maybe a dozen or so dozens and dozens armies of editors and fact-checkers, so we're superior to some anonymous guy at Time magazine writing an internationally-published weekly newsmagazine in his pajamas. And that goes double for the New York Times!"
There is no indication that Mr. Leopold acted unethically.
Unethical? Nah. Gullible? Over-excited? Mean-spirited? Jumping the gun? Jumping the shark?
Please keep in mind that over the years we have reported on many examples of individuals being scapegoated in crisis situations by superiors seeking cover from controversy. Truthout, however, does not do scapegoats. And we stand firmly behind Jason Leopold.
". . . until Monday. Then we'll throw him under the bus."

The Confidentiality of Our Sources

As journalists, nothing is more critical to being able to report guarded facts than the guarantee of confidentiality we provide to our sources. Truthout has never compromised the identy of our imaginary friends a confidential source. We will protect our sources on this story, as we have on every other story we have ever published.

Expect a more comprehensive accounting of this matter on Monday, June 19.
Harder than it looks, huh Mr. Ash?
Marc Ash
Executive Director - Truthout
director@truthout.org
The Mayor of Rantburg, in cooperation with the Rantburg Chamber of Commerce, the Rantburg Convention & Visitor's Bureau, and the Army of Steve, hereby proclaims June 19, 2006 official 'Truthout.org Schadenfreude Day.' Come down to the pillory in the town square and watch 'em squirm."
Moved, accepted and so proclaimed. AoS.
Posted by:Mike

#6  Now Truth.out is trying wiggle out of the middle on that promise.

snicker. Would you like a scoop of ice cream with that crow pie? oooh...watchoutforthatbus!
Posted by: 2b   2006-06-15 23:35  

#5  There is no indication that Mr. Leopold acted unethically.

Thanks for the support, Marc. It's much appreciated. This is Jason Leopold reporting live from under a bus parked on my head. Back to you, Kent...
Posted by: Jason Leopold   2006-06-15 15:08  

#4  ...but it was the STRAWBERRIES! That's where I had them!
Posted by: Marc Ash   2006-06-15 15:05  

#3  The issue is, of course, that Leoppold said he would name his anonymous sources if the story they gave him turned out to be wrong.

Now Truth.out is trying wiggle out of the middle on that promise.
Posted by: lotp   2006-06-15 14:55  

#2  "Truth, out."
Posted by: Seafarious   2006-06-15 14:05  

#1  They want Luskin to prove his client is NOT being indicted?

Franz Kafka, call your office...
Posted by: mojo   2006-06-15 14:00  

00:00