Rallying to TNR’s Defense
by Sean Hackbarth
Maybe “this Army conduct stinks really, really badly.” It doesn’t get us any closer to answering these questions:
- Did Scott Beauchamp make up his stories about military misconduct in Iraq?
- Did Beauchamp recant?
- What did The New Republic know and when did they know it?
- Why did TNR not tell us about their conversation with Beauchamp?
On that last question Bryan Preston writes,
What the leak actually did was torpedo the raft of lies that Franklin Foer et al have been floating on for months now. The leak confirmed that TNR had spoken to Beauchamp despite their claims that the Army is not allowing him to speak, confirmed that TNR asked Beauchamp not to speak with other media outlets so that TNR could control the story (a story that they have a vested interest in, obviously, and therefore ought not be allowed to control), and confirmed that Foer was even willing to drag Beauchamp’s wife into the discussion as a weapon against him.
Who cares?
I literally don’t see the significance of this issue at all, aside from how it highlights how conservatives bloggers shoot off accusations of “liar” any time a source presents an insufficiently rose-tinted picture of conditions in Iraq.
But Beauchamp’s reporting has played absolutely zero role in the national dialog about Iraq. And the Army “investigation” – as in “we investigated ourselves and found ourselves absolutely innocent of any misconduct” – even less so.
Where’s the legs on this story? Is it just that conservatives see yet another chance to attack the troops?