I can speculate but my post would probably get deleted, like it has in the past. Look for to Guy James today. Hey Ben... if you get a chance to talk to Guy, let him know he STEPNW1F THINKS HE IS A RIOT when taking calls from the right. He had me in stiches with one poor soul who called in this week. Guy is a true Patriot! He's making a difference... pass it on. He deserves it.
Since I've been here in 2003 (I think that's when). I've seen probably hundreds of posts about this person going down, Bush finally being toast, something else being the tipping point, Cheney resigning, Rumsfeld resigning, the Democrats stopping some bill, Kerry challenging Ohio, this judge being filibustered, and a nearly endless series of articles on Rove finally being indicted. Quite a few of these, I might add, stem from the Original Poster on the thread that started this entire subject.
I almost wish I had saved all the threads into a folder named "Lucy/Charlie Brown."
So when a story comes along written by a thrice-disgraced reporter and filled with several dubious claims, I immediately go into skeptic mode. And yet - like Bart Simpson at Kamp Krusty - hundreds of posters become their "Bush is toast....Bush is toast" mantra.
The conspiracy nutters and the far-leftists and the trolls have done a great job steering DU from being what it ought to be: a place to debate logically about politics, and to find ways to help the Democratic Party win office.
Where does Leopold go from here if this story blows up?
He was not exactly the model of stability and credibility before this.
And that's really what intrigues me. How does a disgraced reporter for an obscure website have all these fantastic sources? If you were an associate at Luskin's firm and wanted to leak, would you be calling the guy fired from Salon or Bob Woodward?
26. I'm not giving any benefit, because there is no doubt..........
That's like giving the surgeon who amputated the wrong leg another chance to get it right.
In my business, one strike and you're out. This guy has fucked up so many times, he really has no right to be taken seriously by anyone. It speaks ill of whomever hired him to do this job. Really poor judgment.
I hate to jump into the fray here, but attornies screw up all the cotton pickin' time.
I've had one screw my life up royally, which won't be over with until I'm about 42.
They make mistakes, do sloppy or no research, get their facts/laws wrong...and they aren't 'out' like you suggest, on one strike, or 5 or even 12. They just pocket the retainer and move on to the next case.
and all I can tell you is that your attorney didn't cause whatever it was that brought you to his or her office.
If you didn't like how he or she was handling your case, you should have fired him and gotten another lawyer. People do that all the time. If you didn't, it's your own damn fault.
So, sorry that you're stuck with whatever you got yourself into, but people love to blame attorneys for their shortcomings and screwups. Taking responsibility for your actions is one way of getting yourself out of your own personal pity party.
So, Jason Leopold is a lawyer now? Or you just having your own private bitchfest?
of strangers trying to tell you how horrid their lawyers were.
It gets tiresome, and this is the last place I need to hear it. What does his legal experience have to do with this Leopold matter? It was nothing but an excuse to whine at someone who identifies herself as "OldLeftieLawyer," and it was exploitive.
He's so upset, take his lawyer to the Bar Grievance Committee. Not to me.
41. benefit of the doubt is a foreign concept here apparently.
there are several people out there who have been judge, jury, and executioner on this matter about TO instead of giving the benefit of the doubt to see how this plays out.They(TO) could have retracted the story on Monday but they didn't, in fact they ratcheted it up a few more degrees by putting themselves out further with interviews and articles since then. This sticking your neck out on line speaks volumes and until it is proven either way I think people should give TO the benefit of doubt and wait see. People are entitled to their opinions, but not when those opinions are thrust upon others in the form of an attack disguised as a concerned opinion
WilliamPitt (1000+ posts) Wed May-17-06 04:02 PM Original message
I read that he already had a book deal working, close to publication, and the material was found to be so unreliable, unprovable, defamatory, libelous, and incapable of checking out that the contract was cancelled.
I work in the publishing industry as a novelist, and do you know how fucked up something has to be for a publisher to cancel a contract rather than just expunge the offending parts and continue on with publication?
Subject's Challenge Derails Reporter's Book Project
By Howard Kurtz Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, March 9, 2005; Page C07
Jason Leopold got a journalistic black eye three years ago when Salon retracted a story the freelancer had written about a Bush administration official, saying it could not authenticate the piece.
Now the former Los Angeles Times and Dow Jones reporter has written a book, "Off the Record," that criticizes journalists as lazy. Oh, and by the way, Leopold says he engaged in "lying, cheating and backstabbing," is a former cocaine addict, served time for grand larceny, repeatedly tried to kill himself and has battled mental illness his whole life.
But the book's publisher, Rowman & Littlefield, has canceled "Off the Record" days before it was to go to press, despite having sent out news releases and listed the book on Amazon.com. The publisher acted after receiving a warning letter from one subject's lawyer.
114. He has a book out now. He is doing the publicity thing for it now.
The book you're talking about was called "Off the Record," which got canned just days before publication because one of the guys he wrote about in the book threatened legal action. That was about a year ago. He found a new publisher, updated the book (don't know if that addressed the questionable material or not), and renamed it "News Junkie."
It's all about his past transgressions being a cocaine addict, arrested and convicted for grand larceny, and about going into rehab, cleaning up his act and becoming a reporter. He goes into much detail about how he gets stories and the questionable tactics he has used (still uses?)
He has a sample chapter online - it's an enjoyable read - I think he does well writing humor and that's probably what he should be doing in life.
21. I would like to see more discussion on what happens if/when
he's indicted. I think he should be stripped of all security clearance and fired. If he has already been indicted and this has not been done, the press should hammer the administration on this. I think this would be a big part of the story, rather than when it was announced or by whom.
24. Well, here's Jeff Gannon/Guckert/Gosch take on Leopold....
May 16, 2006 Internet "Journalists" Also Fabricate News Jason Leopold got caught in an enormous fabrication last week when he wrote that White House advisor Karl Rove had been indicted. It is clear that the Hard Left and the Old Media want it to be true, even Hillary Clinton stood up and applauded the announcement, but wishing doesn't make it so. Nor does just making it up.
What's worse, Leopold claimed he had been set up as part of a White House "disinformation campaign." That's pathetic.
He'd have more credibility if he said he was following the examples set by The New York Times and CBS. They make stuff up too and call it news.
28. On Healthy Skeptcisim Vs. Obsessively Vitriolic Behavior
Edited on Thu May-18-06 01:54 PM by Beetwasher
As someone who has taken no side in this issue and who has not really partaken in the flamefests, I must say, witnessing the obsessive vitriol of a small minority of posters is really something. To be fair, there are people who are skeptical about this and have been perfectly gracious and polite about it. There's healthy skepticism and then there's, well, some of the others.
Bushbots deserve scathing, nonstop mockery. Bigots, racists, gay bashers, Nazi's, freepers etc. deserve nothing but scorning mockery from now until eternity. But people here who are holding out hope for the accuracy of this story do not deserve the type of mockery and scorn that is being heaped upon them by a small, but obsessively vocal few, IMO. And I say that as someone who has done his share of heaping on posters in the past and has no qualms about being an asshole.
If you have any insight or input other than vitriol and ad hominems, I haven't seen it. If you have inside legal information then enlighten those who may be misinformed. If you have information or knowledge regarding indictment procedure, sealed or otherwise that would prove that in fact there can not have been an idictment of Rove yet please provide it, because I have yet to see this info and yet I have seen the claim made that there is absolutely no way Rove could have been indicted (sealed or otherwise). What makes that statement true? It may be, I'm no lawyer, but I've not seen the coherent explanations as to how or why this is so, I've only seen it asserted w/ nothing to back it up. I have seen it said that "no one knows anything". I suggest that advice be heeded unless it can be shown otherwise by both skeptics and those holding out hope.
Awaiting something other than vitriol from certain posters on this subject, but not expecting it.
I'm not asking you to even be polite, just saying that IMO the scorn, derision and vitriol is not necessary or warranted. But keep it up if it floats your boat.
Provide evidence of me telling anyone to shut up, and it doesn't even have to be those exact words. How about evidence of any indication whatsoever in that post that I want people to shut up. I'm merely stating my observation on that matter and asking for something MORE than JUST mere vitriol. By all means, continue the vitriol.
I think it's quite disingenous of you to imply that I'm telling people to shut up.
My ENTIRE reaction to this is the blind following of groupies that, literally in some cases, are saying that they will follow JL and TO 100% regardless of anything that happens. That is silly and foolish.
Then when those same people don't have their bullshit dectectors go off when the "24 business hours" explanation comes out, it seems too much for me to take. TO said that the indictment was made on Friday. TO said that Rove was given 24 hours to get everything in order. And now it is Thursday with nothing at all in sight. And for some reason, those of use that call bullshit on Leopold are the just spreading vitriol.
And you said this:
"I must say, witnessing the obsessive vitriol of a small minority of posters is really something...people here who are holding out hope for the accuracy of this story do not deserve the type of mockery and scorn that is being heaped upon them by a small, but obsessively vocal few...I have seen it said that "no one knows anything". I suggest that advice be heeded unless it can be shown otherwise by both skeptics and those holding out hope.
For this past week, I've delivered all the legal information you might want in order to adjust your thinking and understand that this Leopold story is bogus. Other attorneys who frequent DU - specifically "Seabiscuit" - have also been spending time trying to explain to non-lawyers that how these things work is NOT how they are portrayed by Leopold in this obviously bogus piece on nonsense.
Before you condemn - which is what you're doing - understand that there are not two sides to this matter.
This is a set of lies without any kind of triangulation or verification of a sort that a responsible journalist would employ.
And there are seasoned and experienced lawyers - I've been in DC for 30 years now - trying to explain how none of this could ever have happened the way Leopold claims it did.
I've seen vitriol, all right, and it's all come from the folks who, for whatever reasons, can't bring themselves to face the fact that Leopold (and Pitt) have conned them.
People are consumed with seeing Rove charged with something. It's not guaranteed that he'll be indicted, though, and so what if he is? It's about as significant to the American public as Libby's case.
In the meantime, how many American soldiers died in Iraq today?
How many Marines were killed there this week?
How much is gas in your area?
How many people in your community can't get medical or dental care because they have no health insurance or money?
Remember that city called "New Orleans"?
How much money did the Cheneys earn from Halliburton this week?
There are other matters that are more important, but, for now, imaginary indictments and deadlines and the bloodlust about Rove are what matter to a lot of people here.
They'll get it out of their system, one way or the other, and then maybe we can all pull together and get about the business of helping to find a Democrat who can be a leader with a strong and powerful and hopeful message, someone with a spine and truth on his or her side.
Those are the things that I believe matter. Not Karl Rove. This is just a geek show, purely for entertainment purposes. Like a French tickler.
I got trashed by someone who identified herself as a DU Moderator after calling me some really vile things, and, on the urging of a more experienced DUer, contacted Skinner, who immediately and most graciously informed me that that person was no longer a Mod.
See? We be ruffling feathers of the people who can't bring themselves to admit that they've been had.
66. I actually think a Rove indictment now would help Republicans in Nov
The Republican Party has risen to power in large part to the paranoid fear that the established powers in government and the culture at large are out to get them. Right now, thanks to immigration and spending and the stalemate in Iraq, the Republican base is disillusioned, depressed, and despondent. (I sound like Don King today).
But if we give them the bloody shirt of Karl Rove to wave with the bloody shirt of Tom Delay, they might get that old spring in their step back.
54. All I can add to this disscusion is to remind everyone ...
that the constant bickering throughout this thead and all it's predecessors is utterly pointless. If Rove is indicted it won't matter to me if the announcement comes today, tommorow, or a Tuesday a month from now as long as it actually happens. It won't matter who broke the story, when, or what the estimated time tables were versus how long things really took.
Unless one of us works in Fitzgerald's office, none of us knows anything for sure. Whatever, or whoever we know, think we know, or believe deep down in our guts is irrelevant. Until an announcement or some other independant corroboration is made this is all just speculation.
None of this fighting really matters. The only thing it accomplishes is the alienation of our fellow DUers.
If Rove is indicted it won't matter which side of this little skirmish you were on. I'm sure we'll all be celebrating, but I can't help but feel that the victory will be hollow if the resentment from this divide is allowed to continue.
The guy said he was sure of his sources. It's not like he said anything that many of us haven't said. So maybe the timing thing was a bit off... he has explained that, too. Someone else posted that they feel secure about his source. Why all the attacking? He's on our side, right? Leave Pat Robertson alone.
About media "scoops", in cases when the information would become public anyway a few days later with all the details? Especially in cases such as this one, where we still don't know for sure (so, we still have to wait for the public news to know for sure)...
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.