"Am I to discount everything TruthOut has ever written because of one incident?"
So they made just one tiny mistake (that they never apologized for). DUmmie trumad now wants to know in this THREAD, "Am I to discount everything TruthOut has ever written because of one incident?" He is referring, of course, to the Non-indictment that Dares Not Speak It's Name, namely the Non-indictment of Karl Rove last May 12 despite TruthOut staking its reputation on that "fact." Also putting themselves on the line were the Truthout publisher and fashion photographer, Marc Ash, star reporter Jason Leopold (pictured above) who appears in this thread to face the music, and Truthout editor, William Rivers Pitt, who is conspicuous, as ever, by his absence whenever the subject of the Rove non-indictment comes up. So let us now watch the DUmmies question the credibility of TruthOut in Bolshevik Red while the commentary of your humble correspondent, noting that Jason Leopold and Pied Piper Pitt both share the same fishbelly white pallid skin tone, is in the [brackets]:
Am I to discount everything TruthOut has ever written because of one incident?
[Just ONE incident?]
I don't know.... I've read TruthOut almost since it's inception. I've always found it a great source of political information and it seems to me that they've had a flawless reputation as a go-to accurate source.
[As flawless and go-to accurate as Dan Rather.]
BUT then came the Rove indictment story. I honestly can't tell you what was told to the Editors of TruthOut or to Jason Leopold and I can betcha a majority of those who offer up negative posts about TruthOut have no idea as well. Did they flat out make it up? I doubt it. Does Will Pitt come across as a liar? I don't think so and why would he lie?
[Will Pitt doesn't come across as anything lately because he is always hiding under a Bukowski's table whenever the subject of the Karl Rove non-indictment comes up.]
Did they handle the aftermath of the botched story as well as they should have? Me-thinks not really. If they would have come out with one explanation and said they stick by their sources, I think things would have blown over much quicker. Instead, they made it bigger with some comments that I'm sure they regret. Hey--- they're an on-line pub with not much experience with a major-size backlash like this.
[Hey! They were just "ahead of the news cycle." When the news cycle finally catches up to them, Karl Rove WILL have been indicted last May 12.]
So here's the thing--- If I were to write a pro and con list about TruthOut, it looks like the Pros out- number the cons 10 to 1. Or am I missing something?
[Reality. And now on to the other DUmmie comments...]
That sounds right, to me. And I still doubt that we know the full story on the Rove indictment and/or Leopold's reporting of it.
[The full story of what really happened will be revealed in just 24 business hours.]
I agree with that.... methinks there is more to it then we know. However, I do think Leopold should out that source......
[Come on Jason. Lay off the Lithium treatment just long enough to out Sonny Crockett as your source.]
Leopold and TruthOut are not the first to ever be burned by a source.
[And TruthOut wasn't the first rag to be burned by Jason Leopold, a self-confessed liar, drug addict, and crook.]
True, they may have gotten a bit ahead of themselves.
[The correct term is they "got ahead of the news cycle."]
Leopold said that if his source was wrong he would out that source. The source was wrong. Leopold did not out him. As far as I'm concerned Leopold is just a showboater who likes attention and until he outs the source I can never take him seriously as a journalist.
[Will Pitt still has unquestioning faith in Leopold.]
I just don't understand why TO didn't give a solid, sincere "We f*cked up, we were conned by a guy who is a serial liar" mea culpa. Instead, they stuck by a guy with a history of 'horseshittery' and never adequately explained or atoned for their cock-up. Indeed, last I remember, they were in a hole and they kept digging. That suggests an absence of judgment, IMHO...so I've no choice, really, but to look askance at anything they say that isn't also reported, independently, by another source. They lost my trust with that fiasco, and not because they got conned--that happens to good people every day--but because they treated their readers like idiots, never explained, and seemed to blame the readers for not 'believing'....like seven year olds and Santa, really. I might think about that stance for, I dunno, 24 'business hours' and come up with a more charitable approach, but right now I think they treated their readers disrespectfully and relied on more good will than they in fact possessed.
[It will take a lot more than 24 business hours for Google News to ever use TruthOut again as a source. Thanks to the wonderful reporting team of Leopold & Lib (Pitt), Google REMOVED TruthOut from Google News.]
They did their due diligence. AND if you think they didn't then I am to surmise that you think Pitt and Ash are liars. I ain't going there because I trust that they are not.
[That's okay. You have permission to go there.]
If that is true, they should out the lying source. Something stinks, there. It doesn't make sense to cover for a liar. It just doesn't. And that moving 24 business hour goalpost just sounded like pure, made-up, horseshit to me. "The dog ate my homework" would have been more believable. Now that is just my opinion, I realize that others may not feel that way. It doesn't pass my smell test, to me it looked like they got caught in a mess and yeah, if they didn't try to lie their way out of it, they suspended judgment and passed on a cockamamie story, or they made stuff up as they went along, and I don't believe that they were being honest with their readers. Again, just my opinion, and just my impression. Others' mileage will likely vary.
[The dog ate my homework 24 business hours ago.]
IMO this was a set-up like Dan Rather. The fascisti have found the Achilles heel of citizen journalism and they are working it for all its worth.
[The fascisti worked diligently for 24 business hours to take down that amazing reportorial team of Leopold & Lib.]
TruthOut had no incident in my eyes. I believe and trust Will Pitt ... and find Jason to of reported his Rove story with a sincere heart.....no malice intent. What happened after the story broke, as in no Rove indictment does not mean his story and data was false.
Dan Rather. Judith Miller and the NYT. More seasoned jouralists than Leopold have been screwed over by Bushco.
[So making out Jason Leopold to be a liar, drug addict, and a crook was a piece of cake.]
Point out one instance where I "demanded" you believe anything. You call yourself a liberal. You are no better than the liars on the right you claims to abhor. I certainly never demanded anyone believe anything. No one did.
[That was Jason Leopold himself posting from the asylum. You're right, Jason. No one believed anything you wrote except for the DUmmies.]
You were not posting here at the time your article came out. Instead, another Truthout employee demanded that we take the article on faith.
[That was William Rivers Pitt posting his famous articles of faith tracts on the DUmmie Door.]
I, and many others, were roundly criticized for being skeptical of your article from a number of people here on DU. Anyone who was skeptical of your article was called a "cretin" and a "f*ckshit of low mental weight."
[That was Pied Piper Pitt posting under the influence of too many Bukowski's refreshments.]
If your article was true, why is Rove free today?
[Because intrepid boy reporter, Jason Leopold, got too far ahead of the news cycle?]
Prove one instance where the NYT outs their sources. I dare you
[Leopold issues a Truth or Dare.]
I don't regret helping Pitt get his publishing contract, but I wasn't prepared for the disinformation campaign he waged here to protect Bev Harris. So yes, he's perfectly capable of lying.
[Pied Piper Pitt is just $10 away from getting his publishing contract.]
Everybody makes a mistake now and then. Nobody should think of it as a big deal.
[Said the captain of the Titanic.]
Jason has some serious incidents in his recent journalism past (regardless if they're right, wrong, or even if those publications were actively trashing Jason), and it was Ash's duty to be extra careful with Leopold. Truthout's lost reputation can be put squarely on Mark Ash's shoulders. Period.
[Incidents like flat out lying in his stories. No big deal.]
Sure, everyone makes mistakes, but that's what retractions are for, and Truthout never fully retracted the Rove stories. Can they be trusted as a news source? Google doesn't think so. Google had included Truthout as a news source in their news site until the Rove indictment stories. Then they abruptly pulled Truthout, and they've never added them back.
[Perhaps they will in 24 business hours.]
Getting the story wrong AND insulting people for not believing said story? Not the way to build trust in your organization.
[Pitt's excuse was that he was not only an incompetent press secretary but an incompetent editor as well.]
Leopold made the story up, hoping it would turn out to be true and then he'd look like they'd have scooped the MSM.
[And this DUmmie WINS a Kewpie Doll for having a brief moment of mental clarity!]
Don't forget that Leopold had a book to sell...
If it had turned out Rove was indicted (which a lot of people believed would happen) then Leopold would have really benefitted financially.
[Notes From The Asylum: The Jason Leopold Story.]
Did YOU speak to Leopold's source? Don't forget when this whole thing was coming down, first there were a dozen sources, then eight or six, down to three or two, then one? I can't exactly remember, but the number of sources was all over the map and changed several times from Will Pitt's first posting of Leopold's article on the DU. Exactly which of the non-existent sources did Ash talk to? All of em? Or was it just one? Or NONE? Who can tell?
[Check the Bukowski's barroom floor and pose those questions to Will Pitt when he finally awakes from the nightly coma.]
Sure, they could have sources. Then again, they might not have sources. Or their source might be a pink elephant in a tutu. Prove to me that's not true.
[That pink elephant in a tutu is just Will Pitt's version of his personal Harvey.]
I really think Leopold could get his career back if he were to out his source and really tell us what happened.
[Unfortunately, his source is sealed on the fourth floor of Paxton Boggs.]
Truthout was far from the only news source that believed Rove was about to be indicted. David Shuster reported much the same thing on MSNBC. Many other people were confident that Mr. Fitzgerald was moving towards indictment in early May. I count myself as being among them.
[Thanx for reminding us that David Shuster was an idiot too.]
Don't forget, the Rove indictment came on the heels of Truthout being questioned about a Leopold article where he said Rove or Rove's lawyer had received a target letter, also of which was never substantiated. THEN after the Rove indictment fiasco occurred, they held fast to the story, even when it got to unbelievable ends...I kept waiting for Truthout to do the obvious thing they should have done: issued a statement that they were retracting the story until they had information that could substantiate it.
[On the up side it did cause Pied Piper Pitt to post his Endless "Penitence" At DUmmie Canossa whose very length qualifed for the Guiness Book of Records.]
Before the Rove has been indicted story was printed, Leopold wrote a story that Rove and/or his attorney received a target letter. When Leopold was facing severe questioning about the truthfulness/facts of that story, he suddenly came out with the indictment story. It appeared he published that one to divert the bad attention from the target letter story being bogus, figuring Rove would be indicted any day (which appeared was going to be the case), then when he wasn't, then even worse spin began...
[TruthOut's fashion photographer thought it passed the smell test plus the most Incompetent Press Secretary in the History of All the Known Universes thought the Leopold story was entirely credible as well.]
I have no personal beef with you, Jason. I have an aversion to bad journalism and media spin. It has nothing to do with you, and I had no intention of bringing any of your prior history up until you made it a big issue. I even complimented you on your book and writing ability. You gotta stop being paranoid. Columbia Journalism Review points out how you seem to think everyone is always out to get you - that everyone is after you.
[To request that Jason Leopold stop being paranoid is like asking a normal person to stop breathing.]
It isn't the event. It was the coverup. The obvious lies by Leopold were masked by total, utter bullshit by Marc Ash. I lost all faith, but not when they were caught with believing bad sources - that happens. It was the aftermath that bothered me. The slow, painful way in which they tried to linger on the original story despite the obvious (to everyone else?) nonsense that it was based on. They didn't own up to their mistakes for a painfully long time.
[Thus toppling the reputation of that giant of journalism---TruthOutTheDoor.]
Will Pitt's drunken rant on here really lowered TruthOut in my eyes, too.
[Which drunken rant? Will Pitt rants drunkenly almost every time he crawls home from Bukowski's which means its hard to keep track of them all.]
Patrick Fitzgerald's office has yet to confirm or deny
all we have is the word of Karl Rove's attorney who has been known to lie to protect his clients.
[That's right, Jason. Why should we believe Rove's attorney or the small detail that Karl Rove is still walking around free? Instead we should place our faith in your credibility that Rove was indicted last May 12.]
So again, all you have is the word of Rove's attorney. nothing else. no documents. Nothing. Just the word of his attorney. So we are sticking to our story and we have said so many times already, but some people just can't seem to accept that.
[Proclaimed Jason Leopold between electro-shocks.]
I am sticking to the story. that is my point. Debate the shit out of it here. But I am sticking to it.
[The sun rises in the west. that is my point. Debate the shit out of it here. But I am sticking to it.]
Did I ever once say or claim or opine that people were out to get me? You put that in quotes. No. I never did. So your interpretation is way off base. At what point do you accept that this is the way it is.
[Stated Jason Leopold from the Rubber Room.]
Christmas is coming soon I have the PERFECT Christmas gift item for my DUmmie FUnnies fans. It is a product I have been using myself and fully endorse: the amazing HELICOPTER KITE. This helicopter kite flies like a helicopter. You can make it go hundreds of feet into the air or hover it just a couple of feet off the ground. The propellor rotation is done entirely by windpower. Please check out the VIDEO of the INCREDIBLE helicopter kite. Not only was the helicopter kite aerodynamically designed but it is also MADE IN THE USA! So feel good about purchasing an AMERICAN MADE toy which makes the perfect Christmas or birthday gift. The helicopter kites have a LIFETIME warranty so all defective or broken parts will be replaced. Your purchase of the helicopter kite will not only provide you with lots of FUn but it will also help keep the DUmmie FUnnies going. So take a look at the VIDEO and be AMAZED!
p.s. Check out what one of our happy customers had to SAY about the amazing helicopter kite.