If Truthout And Will Pitt Fall I Fall With Them. I Stand With Them United.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

Doubts, or no doubts. They have tremendous courage and conviction to stick their necks out like this. They both have been true patriots and warriors to our cause. I can't think of almost anyone that has given me reason to trust their word more than Will, regardless of me not knowing him from a hole in the wall. His deep trust in Jason causes me to trust Jason that much as well.

What I'm trying to say is, that regardless of how this all turns out, Will Pitt and Truthout have done everything they can to earn our trust over the years, and I'm not going to turn my backs on them now. This doesn't mean I'm declaring with 100% certainty that I know how this is going to turn out, or that others shouldn't feel free to question the accuracy. It means if they believe with all their hearts it is true, I'm not going to question their credibility. They have earned my trust, and if anyone deserves support and blind faith in times like this it is them.

Having faith in your fellow man always carries a risk. Strong faith in face of risk should be reserved for only those who have proven worthy. They have.

I want to declare I stand with them. If they fall, I fall. Because they deserve at least that much from me, for all that they've done.

[malaise]

1. I trust them n/t

[AuntiBush]

86. Me, too!

:thumbsup:

[MADem]

2. But will you stand with Tweety Bird, who broke the story first???

He's the Third Musketeer, like it or not!!! And the only Musketeer to do it on NATIONAL TV and radio!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

3. That's The Most Absurd Thing I've Ever Heard.

[MADem]

11. No it isn't. He broke it on FRIDAY MORNING, on IMUS

Ya want proof? I'll give ya proof:

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/05/12/matthews-on-rove-indictment-it-could-be-today/

Tweety beat TRUTHOUT by a day.

Not absurd--FACT.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

14. To Declare A Statement Of "Umm, Well Maybe Today, Could Happen I Guess" Is

the same as "Rove Was Indicted Today", is one of the most absurd things I've ever seen.

[rodeodance]

22. I recall Tweetys little slip. But he rather backtracked when called on it

[Media_Lies_Daily]

23. Tweety really went out on a limb with "It could be today", didn't he?....

...Not much of bold statment, was it?

[dysfunctional press]

155. "could" is WAY different than "Did"...

you have to admit that...why is it so hard to give props?

[MADem]

162. Whaddaya mean, give props?

Where's the indictment? "Could" is more accurate in this case. DID turned out to be false. Ooops!

[dysfunctional press]

165. I'm giving it until tuesday to be announced...

they did say he was given 24 hours to get his affairs in order...and the clock doesn't tick on weekends.

[MADem]

169. I'm giving it till the end of next week, myself

I think it will happen, and hopefully sooner rather than later. It would be nice if it happened sooner.

[eleny]

10. Did Matthews write a full blog on this matter?

Link please.

If not - then he isn't in TO's league, IMO.

[MADem]

17. No, he gave an interview on Don Imus' show.

Link to partial transcript above. Ya want video, find it yourself.

There's no "league" here. Quite frankly, Matthews, who actually SOCIALIZES with Rove, and who was the one who notified Wilson that Rove was trashing his WIFE, is probably in a good position to know a little sumpinsumpin about what's going on in DC.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

26. But not brave enough to make a solid definitive statement, was he?

[MADem]

48. He said Friday or next week.

He didn't say next year, or maybe, or who knows.

Hey, whatever. Everyone seems to be whining about how one must "stand by" Truthout, but no one is noting that the first media discussion of this matter happened on MSNBC and an assortment of CBS radio affiliates from sea to shining sea..not on the internet.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

60. He plainly said "It could be". How do you define the word "could"?....

...Hell, if you want to talk about the first media "discussion" about the possibility of Rove being indicted, how far do you want to go back? What kind of game are you playing here?

TO was the FIRST media outlet to state that Rove has been indicted. Period.

Find me another outlet that has gone out on that limb, and link it here.

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

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

[Media_Lies_Daily]

99. Again, what timeline are you using? The one that allows you to...

...trash Leopold and anyone else who supports him, like me, or the one that Will Pitt discussed later that day as a correction to the original article?

"Get a fucking grip"? If you had any chance of convincing me of your point of view, you lost it with that comment.

The only thing on which Tweety has ever been first is being first in line to get the paycheck he receives for the NeoCon propaganda he spews Monday through Friday.

Since we've dropped the gloves, allow me to state that anyone still supporting Tweety on any subject after all of the years has to be more than a little delusional. Good luck with getting that treated.

[MADem]

108. OK, show me where I trashed your hero--I didn't

All I asked was who will stand with Tweety, who said it on FRIDAY? And the point is not lost that he was clever enough to give himself a little wiggle room, and not have to go back and edit his copy after the fact.

Christ, take a pill. All I said was Tweety beat the guy by a day, and you went ballistic.

Here's hateful Tweety, providing corroboration for YOUR HERO, and you start smacking me around for friken MENTIONING it.

I am not the president of the Tweety fan club, but he did have it first, and he had it on national TV and radio. Like it or not, them's FACTS. Now, if the story turns out to be true, Tweety will be pleased, your guy will be pleased, and most of America will be pleased.

The more you disparage a DC-based commentator telling the exact same story, a commentator with established connections to the administration, the further away you get from YOUR point, which is that you believe YOUR guy.

How can you believe one, and not the other, when they are saying the same basic thing??

[Media_Lies_Daily]

120. You need to review your posts because you seem to have a...

...very bad anger management problem, not to mention delusions about what people are actually telling you. You obviously don't understand the meaning of the word "could", and you appear to be desperately trying to somehow discredit Leopold by challenging what he meant by "24 business hours", and the "15 hours" he spent with Luskin.

What really appears to be killing you is that so few posters are buying what you're selling about Tweety being the "first to break the story", and even fewer are buying the idea that he is a great journalist because he hangs out at parties with Karl Rove.

Hey, go ahead and flaunt your appreciation of Tweety's great skills as a television commentator for the NeoCons. That's not my problem, it's yours.

[MADem]

122. Enough. n/t

[eleny]

33. Here's how I feel about this

Matthews goes on a dawn radio show and offers a sentence or two. TO puts out a written exposition and has to defend it over and over again. I don't recall anyone nailing Matthews' nuts to any wall since he was on Imus. TO laid it out as a major announcement and has been defending it ever since. Matthews mumbling a few words on Imus in the early A.M. just doesn't stand shoulder to shoulder with TO's exposition. That's how I see it.

Take the last word if you wish. I'm done.

[MADem]

46. I'd hardly call Imus, like him or not, a "dawn radio show"

He has more listeners, and now viewers, than TRUTHOUT gets hits.

His guests range from the usual talking heads, to David Gregory, Harold Ford, John Kerry, the despised Santorum and Allen, and a vast number of authors. If he shills the book, it goes to the top of the NYT list, without a daggar.

He has influence. To ignore that is to ignore reality.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

63. Imus is a venomous hateful individual. I tend to not put any...

...stock in anything that guy says.

[MADem]

83. Fine. You have that right. But ignore him at your peril, because he

DOES, like it or not, INFLUENCE opinion.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

100. "Ignore him at my peril"??? How incredibly melodramatic of you.

[MADem]

109. OK, go ahead and ignore him, that will make you happy! n/t

[robbedvoter]

24. Tweety, like Timeeeh is in it to his eyeballs. He is a subject, not a

"journalist" in it. You stand with him, you don an orange suit. Or a dunce cap if you prefer.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

36. Bingo. Well said.

[MADem]

51. Who gives a rat's ass what he is? He put out some information.

Will you be happier if his information (and he DOES know Rove) turns out to be FALSE? Will that validate what an evil weasel the Twitchy Tweety is?

I sure wouldn't. I want Tweety to be RIGHT on this.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

76. Tweety put out nothing that he couldn't back away from.

[MADem]

80. What is the angst here? Why is everyone so upset about an article

that someone wrote on the internet, that didn't come to pass in the timeline specified? And why trash a MSM person who CORROBERATES, in essence, the story, and who actually revealed it BEFORE the article?

What's up with that shit? It isn't a boxing match between Tweety and Truthout. They both put out the same basic story.

Spare us all the pedastals, let's see if the bones of the story as put out by BOTH sources pans out.

The GJ will be meeting twice more this week.

Patience. And decorum.

Sheesh.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

89. What timeline are you using? And why do you insist on....

...stating that Tweety broke this story when all he did was make a "could", "would", "maybe" "if" kind of statement?

"They both put out the same basic story"?? What?? Do you not see the difference between the kind of wishy-washy comment made by Tweety that he backed away from, and the definitive statement from Leopold that Rove has been indicted??

The only thing you got right in your post was the fact that Tweety is a member of the MSM. That tells me all I need to know, and after all of these years, it should be telling you the exact same thing.

[MADem]

98. I actually WATCHED the FULL Interview

Tweety was LOADED for bear. He was ready to work all night, and thought he might have to reschedule his weekend show if the story broke that day.

You really need a reality check. Does Leopold go for cocktails with Rove? Is his wife a DC reporter? Does he have the sources that Tweety has? Who called Wilson and TOLD him that Rove outed his wife? Why, Tweety did! Come ON...Matthews, like it or not, knows as much about this story as anyone who has hung around the Hill, and way more than most. He's IN it--and that makes him as valid a source as anyone. And he has a shitload more to lose if he gets it wrong than some guy that most people have never heard of. So why trash the guy? If he's wrong, then YOUR GUY is wrong.

Just because you don't like Tweety, you're making an idiotic point and cutting the throat of your own advocacy--that Tweety says it, it's wrong. If some guy on the internet posting on a liberal site says it, it's right. How about this for a concept?? THEY are BOTH right. They both said the same damn thing.

Is that too tough for you to wrap your head around? I can manage it...

Say, if Patrick Fitzgerald eventually retires, and becomes a talking head for the MSM, does he become evil too??? Your argument is childish, frankly.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

105. Oooohh! The WHOLE interview! Wow...break out the gold stars for you!....

If Tweety knows something let's hear or see it in a definitive statement. Where is it? Do you have a link?

Where has Tweety stated, anywhere, and unequivocally, that Rove has been indicted?

What has all of Tweety's "rubbing elbows" with the NeoCon Junta gotten him? Where are all of the scoops this guy should have by now?

Come on, MAdem, let's hear it. Tell us all about what a great journalist Tweety really is.

[MADem]

114. You're starting to get a bit abusive. It's not appreciated.

I did not say shit about Tweety's credentials. I did not aver that I was a fan. All I said is that he broke the story first. On FRIDAY. The only difference is that he said indictment was IMMINENT, not that it had occurred, but of course, he was reporting this A DAY EARLIER. The story that is the same story that your hero broke on Saturday. The story that CORROBORATES the story that you are shrieking about now, like a bear in a trap.

I gave you a link to the Thinkprogress site. Find the fucking video yourself. I watched it live.

You're trying to change the subject by postulating things I don't feel, and you are behaving like a complete and total jerk. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[robbedvoter]

118. CRIMINALS don't get to report on their own crimes! Period!

All he knows is because he did it. No kudos from me!

[Media_Lies_Daily]

127. Read your own post very slowly, and note the irony....

...concerning your use of the words "abusive" and "shrieking".

Also, I note with interest your earlier posts where you practically fell all over yourself lauding Tweety's abilities as a television journalist, and his ability to attend cocktail parties with the NeoCon elite.

Tweety NEVER stated on Thursday evening or Friday morning that ROVE had been indicted. Period. Repeat that slowly a couple of times, and you may actually start to comprehend what that means.

Perhaps you need to back away from the keyboard for a day or two...you seem to be growing increasingly more unbalanced.

[MADem]

129. Fell over? Lauding? You're delusional, and RUDE.

If anyone needs to back away, it's you. You are behaving disgracefully, and making an ass of yourself.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

133. LOL. I take it that you haven't read any of your responses to me.....

...Just curious, but just how do you define the word "rude"? Is it anything like how you define the word "could"?

[robbedvoter]

116. Leopold didn't go to Rove fundraisers eiter. Score for Leopold

Sorry if I don't give points for the incestuous relationships between the criminals and their accomplices in the press. Especially in a case where the crime was...leaking to the press. No go from me. Tweety, Timee& Judith Miller belong with KKKarl in the orange jumpsuit - they don't get to "report" their own crimes.

[MADem]

196. Ah, so John Dean couldn't possibly have told the truth about Nixon

Given his incestuous relationship as WH counsel, then.

[hwmnbn]

4. I'm with you on this one .........

They've done too much good, and I trust them.

[KittyWampus]

5. I support them too. Apparently a lot of DU'er prefer journalists who

do nothing but take dictation from the WH.

Anyone else who dares to find the truth be damned.

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. Cue melodramatic drumming

It's touching, really.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

12. You Have The Right To Not Condone Them. But I Don't Mind Taking The Risk.

I don't want to always be safe. I don't want to always set myself up for the chance to be smug. Sometimes I want to take a risk to show those that fight the true fight, stick their necks out, and work their asses off in the battle more than I ever could, that I stand with them united. I don't care about the risks. I care about them and supporting them when they need it. It helps me stay human instead of a machine.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

39. Yes! Well said!

[alcibiades_mystery]

47. Very nice performance: A+

You've really got the framing thing down. Of course, the difference between reckless and unprofessional journalism and brave risk taking is one of perspective, a rhetorical distinction. The benefit you gain by portraying the current situation as the latter is clear: you get to slyly accuse those who are questioning the story of being "safe" (as opposed to bold), being meek, by implication, in the face of a fight. And who doesn't value risk-taking and boldness? Nobody, I say! Harumph! In the final coup de grace, you go a step further, and associate this position with humanity itself - those who venture forth, who take the risks, those who face down the storm, who retain their humanity, dare I say those intrepid few who strive for glory. And, of course, their opposite number would be those safe ones, those go-along-to-get-alongers, those "men in England, now abed," meekly submissive to the routines of the iron system, machines, not humans, these, no, they'll "count their manhoods cheap," these. Huzzah! Huzzah! Huzzah!

With all this high-flown rhetoric, one scarcely remembers that what is at issue is a supposed news story, a piece of journalism. And there are surely some endeavors in which the bravado you so aptly elicit is called for, even advantageous. But I suspect I'm one of those cautious ones, barely human, who still expects journalism to move slowly and carefully, who doesn't see a news story as a space for the thrilling run across the field of battle, but still as the place wherer that run is documented, if and only if it has been thoroughly, utterly, slowly, and carefully confirmed.

[MADem]

90. Gee, and no one will give ole Tweety any props for his scoop!

He's EVIL when he says it, and weaselly, and insufficiently specific.

As I said above, I want Tweety to be right as rain on this story. I hope he had a good, valid, reliable source. I hope both accounts are true.

But I'm gonna wait and see. And I won't get excited until I see Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald on the tee vee.

[Wrinkle_In_Time]

96. Wow, that was a beautifully written riposte!

Minor point: I believe the quote from Henry V is "hold their manhoods cheap", but the spirit of the speach was right there in what you wrote. Brilliant. I was almost standing up by the end of the first paragraph ;-)

Edited for the comment above.

[Inland]

101. You wouldn't know it was an article scooping an announcement by 2 days.

Not from OMC's presentation.

I don't see the bravery, glory, or even liberal bona fides in that particular article, which, even if true, would have let us in on the indictment a whole weekend before it happened. It's a scoop. It's no more brave or liberal than being the first to report the name of Britney's child. Just because liberals wish the news is true doesn't make the newsbreaker a liberal cause du jour.

IF someone wants to argue that Leopold and Pitt are such fine human beings that they shouldn't be smacked around if wrong, fine. But this pretending that something besides Leopold's personal journalistic future, is at stake here is bizarre, and that the factual accuracy is somehow not the real issue is distasteful.

[alcibiades_mystery]

121. I agree

I was commenting on OPERATIONS ludicrous presentation of the issue, yeah?

[Inland]

124. I picked up on that.

I meant, you wouldn't know from OMC's presentation. Edited.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

135. Know Why I Don't Mind Your Empty Posts?

Cause the majority of DU doesn't care about them anyway.

[Inland]

146. delete

[alcibiades_mystery]

152. Oooooooo

You and all your friends think so too, huh?

Oh my! I'll keep that in mind next time we're in the cafeteria.

:eyes:

[MADem]

125. Very well said, and right to the point.

Factual accuracy is ALWAYS the real issue. We've had too much BS for too long, we should be on the side of the truth.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

136. Hey, Speaking Of Factual Accuracy,

Maybe you want to edit your posts proclaiming that Tweety scooped it first?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Inland]

144. Well, if "it" didn't happen, maybe that bodes well for Tweety.

Seems to me that tweety's waffling may have served him well. But because your attitude is that being explicitly and expressly wrong is somehow an act of bravery, I'm sure you disagree.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

134. No One Said You Couldn't, If They Were Wrong.

But you don't know they're wrong yet do ya. No. You don't. So don't pretend you do, you ain't foolin anybody.

And calling this OP distasteful is the height of hypocrisy in my book, but have at it. And no one said the factual accuracy is not the issue. I'm saying we do not yet know the level of accuracy within the realm of fact, and until that time I am choosing to stand with them rather than already actively trying to destroy their reputation while there has been no valid reason to consider the issue over with, as some here are doing.

[Inland]

143. The article is less a problem than your posturing.

Really, it's embarrassing, this "I'm going to stand with the men who strive for the stars".

It was a two day scoop on a public announcement. That's all it was, even if it was true. Whether it's true, or not true, has got something to do with their reps as reporters able to scoop a pubic announcement by two days, which is shit that doesn't matter much, and nothing else.

Stop putting it...and by association, yourself....on stilts.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

145. LMAO! Wow, Did You Not Have Accurate Reading Comprehension Of The OP LOL

Nothing is on stilts and no one said anything about reaching for stars. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


It's just a simple thread in reference to all the complete trashing going on against T.O., even though it is soooooooo premature to even be at that point since Wednesday night would be the EARLIEST someone could have a leg to stand on declaring in a factual manner that the story is false. See, many are already acting as if this issue is dead in the water, and T.O. got it wrong. Yet that is 100% ignorant to portray at this point since the articles have made it clear we wouldn't know for certain yet. So this is merely a thread in the spirit of acknowledging that until we know one way or another, they have my faith in their reporting.

To twist it like you did, well wow, talk about who's really being melodramatic! :spray:

[Inland]

148. I suppose you wish your posts weren't melodramatic posturing.

Try the edit function, rather than misdescription. Switching the focus of your impassioned defense of truthiness from Leopold to yourself is making it quite obvious that it's all about you and your posturing.

If you would like them to be more about things that matter and less about yourself and your embarrassing paeans, feel free to copy my posts. Any sensible person could repeat anything I said, excepting the part where I tell of warning against putting too much time and reliance on "reports" from the grand jury and being sarcastically smacked down by one WilliamPitt. That's personal to me.

Or you could just stop.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

150. LMAO!!!!!!

Dude, you crack me up. Thanks for the hearty laugh before bed LOL

Yeah, it's such a crime to stand up and say they've earned our trust and don't deserve this pathetic abuse.

Methinks you're taking this thread wayyyyyyyyy too personally. Let it go bro.

I'm off. Goodnight.

[Inland]

153. Sweet dreams, Brave Warrior! Deserved Rest After Fighting the Good Fight

Really, isn't that what you were fishing for from the OP on?

It wasn't me that took any part of this thread personally. The thread was about how others were taking a stand and being brave and fighting the good fight.....and you by reflected glory, as opposed to the pedestrians who nipped at the heels of giants. You were posting about you. And taking it personally if anyone looked sideways at the entire exercise.

If it had been about boring things like truth vs. falsity, or the importance of the material, why, then, you'd have made my posts. Too late now, I guess.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

204. Again, That Is Twisting The Context Of The OP To Alllllll Sorts Of Warped

dramatic extents. But it seems to mean a lot to you to portray it in such a melodramatic fashion, so do what ya do. Makes no real difference to me if you want to twist the truth.

[Inland]

213. I don't believe you are thinking much about the truth of the matter.

Hence, your emphasis on standing, soaring, reaching, all the action words, to make this a matter of team spirit and grandiose self-congratulation.

Me, and my poor little posts, actually considering the value and the accuracy of a scoop piece, are taken personally by you because they don't flatter you and your clarion call to STAND FAST, MY TRUTHOUT RIGHT OR WRONG, DAMN THE TORPEDOES or whatever melodramatic drama.

But that's just my opinion.

Say, has anyone noticed if there were any indictments handed down today, or unsealed today? Again, it's not really about truth, is it? Too fucking bad.

[Jazz2006]

170. Indeed...

Well said, well written.

Truth be told, I might even settle occasionally for some journalistic pieces being merely thorough, precise and carefully confirmed if the piece was at least internally and externally consistent. The story at issue doesn't even get past thorough, precise or internally consistent.

But, frankly, since the "Rove is about to be indicted" story has been reported in various forms since at least last July, yeah, I actually DO expect better with each new incarnation of the old story that never materialized. I actually DO expect someone reporting on it for the nth time after so many false starts to actually get it right.

I don't think that's too much to ask.

[Iowa]

171. Wow...

This is a brilliant piece. Not many have the ability to cut through the bull with the surgical precision you just displayed. Absolutely deadly.

[progmom]

182. well said

:hi:

[Maven]

209. Yes A_M!

YOU SPEAK FOR ME! Beats chest

(Cue music from Titanic: My heart will go onnnnnnnnn and onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn)

LOL.

[Inland]

67. Wow, aren't you putting a two day "scoop" on stilts!!

Even if it ends up being true, all Leopold's article could have done is give us a day or two advance warning of a Rove indictment. I mean, that's good for him, but in what sense is us knowing before the fact of an indictment two days before it's handed down, in ANY sense, "the true fight"?

Sure, getting a scoop sells paper, or hits, or whatever. But what good is it TO US if the news is a day or two away from public announcement anyway? Well, entertainment value for the weekend and a good emotional high. If that's good enough for you....if that's the true fight....well, count me out. I've never been a fan of "truthiness", even before Colbert invented the word.

When Leopold comes up with something that isn't going to go public in a day or two anyway, I'll give him props, but chrissakes, stop putting this scoop on stilts. Your paean is embarrassing.

[Gabi Hayes]

7. It's one story. what about Whitewater?

the entire M$M got it wrong on PURPOSE for six years

sure hurt them alot

I know the ramifications, but the blogosphere is still the only medium we really have to get the truth, uh, out. others will continue

[Cooley Hurd]

8. K&R to drown out the other bullshit thread...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1198283

:kick:

[MrSlayer]

9. I've been talking a lot of shit.

I hope for all of us that this is true, not just to say "How you like me now?" to the pukes but also because it's important for the country to get this guy in prison or flipped.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

18. Agreed Completely Mr. Slayer.

[Inland]

13. All I ever said is, reports about the secret proceedings of this G.J.

should be approached cautiously and that I would rather wait until results were announced..... a position which, when stated in another thread about a month ago, earned me a sarcastic number of replies from one WilliamPitt. Ironic, huh?

I don't know how much someone wants to make out of it, but the fact of the matter is, I think it shows poor judgment to put too much stock into scoops about the operations of this grand jury. Leopold may end up being right, but that merely means somebody made a good guess, and our lives aren't going to be one whit better because he scooped the world. If Leopold ends up wrong, well.....

[catnhatnh]

15. Remember the movie "Spartacus"???

"I am Truthout!"

[Vinnie From Indy]

16. Will Pitt and Truthout are great.

eom

[pitohui]

19. whatever

i prefer to reward people for using good judgment and not playing with our emotions with such posts as karl rove indicted, when karl rove has not been proved to be indicted

to mr. leopold this is apparently a game and a way to promote himself, the whole sad story of the drug addict who changed his life, well, too often the drug addict doesn't change his life and the addiction to deception remains

to some of us, such as those of us in the gulf coast corner of the world -- and prob. to those in the iraq corner of the world -- getting these criminals out of office is no game, it is a matter of life and death

i do NOT appreciate having my emotions jerked around and being fed a false fantasy

leopold apparently is what he is, but will pitt has a responsibility to his readers to do the due diligence

i should not have had to find out "elsewhere" that mr. leopold was a former drug addict trying to call attention to his autobiography, you have no idea how much that peeves me off

leopold has nothing to lose, assuming he made the whole thing up, which seems likely at this point, he has already gathered far more attention than he could have done as a honest straightforward reporter, and he does have all those copies of his book to sell that no one would have ever heard of!

so he wins whether he lies or tells the truth

therefore he is not credible and i am not interested in leopold saying however many sources he claims to have, when there is no proof but his say so

trust is broken here

emotions were toyed with for cheap publicity really

i expected better of truth-out, frankly

but i won't stand by and make excuses, it appears that pitt screwed up and his credibility will have to be regained


what is really sorry and sad is will pitt going back, and altering a published article, to change the timing on the article -- as if we wouldn't have noticed that the 24 hours have passed without rove being indicted, as if we haven't noticed that now 2 days have passed since supposedly rove was indicted and he just slipped in a new word "business" hours, whatever "business" hours means, apparently in the district there are no police or law enforcement officers on the weekend available to arrest evil-doers, oh yeah, right! that's sooooo believable

all i can say is that after all this, karl rove DAMN WELL better be indicted tomorrow

the original truth-out was already proved false and had to be fiddled with

i won't appreciate another fiddle

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

27. Saddest Post Of Seen Since This All Started.

I can't even begin to express my disappointed and awe at your assessment, but understand your right to feel whatever way you want.

But just know, all those things you are saying about Jason must also then be applied to Larry Johnson and Joe Wilson, since they verify the story.

But the levels to which you smear him, my god. Out of respect for the DU community I won't continue with how I really feel about your post above.

[pitohui]

30. you need to visit daily kos

it is v. much open to doubt whether those people back up jason or even know that he's taking their name in vain

[Media_Lies_Daily]

44. Hmmm. Sounds like more personal attacks to me. Why go there...

...when we're subjected to the same line of "reasoning" here?

[Maddy McCall]

35. Oh get over it.

:eyes:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

38. Yeah, I'm So So So Damaged By It. How Can I Go On. I'm Going To Be Up

all night now in emotional duress. :eyes:


Talk about your melodramatic posts. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[DisgustedTX]

70. Bravo!

You see the light. SH H2OWBP SH!

[karlrschneider]

74. You have struck the spike upon its cranium...and for which you will

be roundly chastised by the drinkers of whatever the hell flavor of kool-aid TRVE BELIEVING "liberals" appear to have found tasteful as of late. Some of which have probably used with great glee (and properly) the term "dittohead" in a pejorative manner whilst completely missing the true irony in doing so.

[npincus]

183. sorry, it's not all about you and your emotions

5 sources thisclose to the investigation is "due diligence"... because the WH is being cagey and secretive (deny, deny, deny), and the MSM complicit in ignoring JL's investigation (what have they DONE to verify this MAJOR story, other than speak with Rove's PR guy? HAR HAR HAR) so many at DU are projecting anger which deserves to be aimed at the treasonous bastards, at a reporter who has been working like hell for 2+ years to uncover the actual events in this case, not the ones staged by the WH operatives (Rove) and transcribed by an obedient MSM. Stephen Colbert had it right. The MSM are glorified typewrites for B*shco.

If Rove reads the liberal blogs and DU, he would be very happy that his denials are given such credibility, and the Dem/Liberal community is turning against one of their own. I am sure this is exactly what Rove wants, while hie is biding time until he meets his destiny. Of course Rove is behaving like he hasn't a care in the world- he has the same smile Delay had in his mug shot.

I think the fair weather friends in the Dem/Lib community should rely on dependable sources like FUX, MSNBC and CNN and ignore the reporting in Truthout and Rawstory. The former will never let you down- they are 100% tainted.

We need to support our own. As events play out this week and the weeks to come, our patience will be rewarded. Fitz always gets the bad guys, and we will have read it first, as always, in the alternative media.

Thanks, Jason, if you read this.

[eleny]

20. Leopold told LeftTalk that he'd out his sources if they lied to him

Leopold has guts.

I'm with you, btw. People who put their reputation on the line like this while fighting the good fight have my admiration and support. These guys are like the partisans in the woods.

[Igel]

68. And if he does, I hope

that he proves that they lied to him.

Not claim. Not assert. Not believe.

Prove. Claiming, asserting, and believing is easy and requires no effort or ethics, and no actual facts.

Not show that that they were wrong. Or mistaken. Or overreached given limited information. Or even falsely, but sincerely, claimed direct knowledge they couldn't possibly have. If the story's false, and he has evidence they said it was true, showing them to be in some sort of error is also easy and requires little effort or ethics, just two facts: They said X, X was false.

But I want him to prove that his sources said things they knew at the time to be false in order to cause Leopold and others to believe those things to be true. That is, lied.

That should be a kick to see.

[eleny]

85. I think that the fireworks that would ensue might get your attention

No doubt, a flurry of denials, teeth gnashing and discussions will follow any divulging of names. At that time we can all make up our minds who we believe.

[Robbie Michaels]

21. I'm with them

They had the stones to stand for the truth when no one else would. Give them credit for the work they've done. :thumbsup:

[Jersey Devil]

25. What's with all the Sara Bernhardt melodramatics?

Look, either Leopold was right or he was wrong and got suckered. Either way it's no big deal. This isn't Atlanta burning. He wouldn't be the first reporter who got fooled and he wouldn't be the last.

[Mr_Spock]

40. I agree.

It ain't the end of the world. All the second guessing and navel staring are not only not productive, they are making this into a bigger deal than it is.

[johnaries]

58. Yep. How did this get turned around to be about Jason,

when it is really about Rove?

Classic Rovian tactic. Makes you wonder....

[Mr_Spock]

77. Well, I don't think it's Rovian myself.

It only buys him a few days of infighting on a few blogs - not worth it IMHO.

This really isn't a big deal. If for some reason this isn't true, then I say "we'll get him next time" and keep up the good fight.

You can only pull off this sort of "misdirection" thing once, maybe twice. This would not be an advantageous time to play one of your possibly two "wild" cards.

[johnaries]

149. Well, let me explain my definition of "Rovian" -

I don't mean that Rove himself did it. But the tactic is typical of the thetypes of tactics that Rove has used repeatedly in the past.

In particular, rather than address a particular story, attack the credibility of the person reporting the story.

[robbedvoter]

28. No one is falling here - regardless of the outcome.

And I shall ALWAYS trust these people over Rove&comp + the ones who cheer for them out of petty personal vendetta.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

29. Falling Was Rhetorical. You Know What I Mean. Sheesh.

[Orsino]

180. A reporter's getting a story wrong is not falling...

...nor is being deliberately misled. The only way Leopold falls on this one is if he turns out to be waaaaaay wrong because of mistakes he made.

If Rove is indicted on Wednesday, or next Monday, Leopold isn't far wrong. If Rove has actually cut a deal in which he does not get indicted, or if Fitz never asks for the indictment, Leopold is pretty doggone wrong.

[pitohui]

37. but that's how you create a bev harris

i hope i am not crossing a line by mentioning the name but we had all the same posts abt how "i stand with bev" and "i believe bev" and "bev is fighting for us" and it turned out bev was fighting for no one except to get attention for bev

if you just believe mindlessly in anyone who says the right thing, without digging deeper, without putting them to the test and being more caution when it is proven that they have deceived in the past, then you are hopelessly easy prey for any scammer that comes along

i don't think will pitt is a scammer

i do think he is too easily taken advantage of

a bit of research elsewhere on the internet such as daily kos does not convince me that leopold is anything but a user

[Maddy McCall]

45. Yes, that's true...

I was attacked relentlessly for asking questions about Bev. I'm still here, though.

[robbedvoter]

102. Nope. I smelt the self serving there from day one. Not here.

I do have a nose for these things. This is an investigative journalist trying to do his job - not someone offering for sale opinions of DU-ers.
I see no opportunism here.

[Maddy McCall]

42. That's where you screwed up. You and others attacked those of us...

who did nothing more than ask questions about the article. It is the fault of people who attacked those of us (who didn't gobble up the story hook, line, and sinker) for the division that is currently infesting this forum.

Questions about facts in an article are NOT vendettas. No matter how you want to spin it.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

73. Quite a few of those "questions" were framed around personal....

...attacks on Leopold and Pitt.

You can deny it all you want, but those kinds of attacks will never go unchallenged.

[Maddy McCall]

95. If asking the following questions are personal attacks...

"What exactly does '24 hours to tend to his affairs' mean?"
"Was it 15 hours, a half a day, a whole day, what?"

Yeah, that makes me a personal attacker. :eyes:

You're just pissed and lashing out at me because I was hesitant to put blind trust in THE ARTICLE, and now, especially after Will's "clarifications, it appears I might have been asking good questions.

I accept that, and I understand how you must feel right now, so I won't say anything else that you might misconstrue as a "personal attack."

[Media_Lies_Daily]

107. "Pissed at you"?? Don't flatter yourself....

...you make my side of the argument very easy.

Keep posting about how much you like Tweety and what a great journalist he is because he goes to cocktail parties with Karl Rove. Killer stuff, MADem....just killer.

[Maddy McCall]

132. Are you on drugs?

Show me one post that I've made about Tweety--just one.

You need to stop and take a breath. You're losing it.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

138. Nope...but you're correct. You haven't posted about Tweety...

...and I apologize for that.

"Losing it"?? Not hardly. I made a mistake just like Leopold did in his article, and I've corrected it, just like Will Pitt did later that day.

Does that mean I'm going to be pilloried, too?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

139. LOL! Touche!

:applause:

[MADem]

198. I didn't say a word about them, personally, but I got the treatment, too

It doesn't do much to advance their cause when surrogates behave in such a fashion.

[robbedvoter]

104. Not ALL questions are vendettas. Some reveal themselves to be.

It's easy to spot the personal attacks. Never had a problem with your questions.
Stuff I saw on Kos and is backwashing here - another story.

[salinen]

31. Well yeah

but goddammit, sometimes being the first to have the poop isn't the most important aspect of a story. Reminds me of those 30's movies where reporters are crawling all over eachother.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

32. I'm with you 100%.

[DisgustedTX]

34. CLICK.CLICK.S.H!

SH!

[Lochloosa]

41. I'll take my chances with them. FUCK THE MSM

[tlsmith1963]

43. I Don't Know if Leopold Was Right, But...

Do you *really* want to believe Rove's people? They lie all the time! Who says that they aren't lying this time, too? Oh, well--we'll see how this plays out. I did tell someone at work about the story today, but I said it hadn't been confirmed yet. This was before I came home & saw all the new posts here claiming that the story is a hoax.

Tammy

[Media_Lies_Daily]

50. What does any of this have to do with "Rove's people"?

[tlsmith1963]

53. They Are Going to the Press...

& denying the rumor.

Tammy

[Media_Lies_Daily]

79. Who specifically?

[Jacobin]

49. the True Believer Kamikazee train has left the station

See ya'll later.

I stand with honest reporting and truth and not ideological suicide.

[alcibiades_mystery]

55. You'll count your manhood cheap

While any speaks that fought with them upon St. Leopold's Day!

:rofl:

[Inland]

71. Or the Truthiness Believer train.

Where's Colbert when you need him?

I'm not nearly as worried about Leopold or Pitt being wrong as I am about the defenses implying that right or wrong, factwise, doesn't matter.

[stop the bleeding]

52. Well said

I think that TO, RS and many others are vital to those of us who need something more than CNN, Drudge, ect..

Until this is all over - keep on rockin in the free world

[diamondsndust]

54. I stand with them also...

I speak only for myself, no one else here, but I think that what they are doing is fantastic. We can't trust the MSM anymore, and can't trust anything coming out of the Bush Crime Regime either.

Besides, whether Jason got fed disinformation or if he just flat out lied (which I highly doubt), NO ONE DIED BECAUSE OF IT!

[Clarkie1]

56. I stand with good reporting, not Leopold. n/t

[flvegan]

57. You and I often disagree, and we fight. Safe to say, it

oft looks ugly. However, this is a topic upon which we agree. I'm with you. I'm with Will, and I'm with truthout.

If Jason got played, then I got played. That's okay. I've been played before.

Good f'ing post.

Recommended, btw.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

69. Thanks flvegan.

Just know I never carry any argument outside of the individual thread itself, and each thread or post is a new opportunity to agree, or disagree, whichever the case may be. In the end of it all, I have respect for all DU'ers who are true democrats even if I more often disagree with their sentiments than agree. But I know in the end we are all in this together, and I hope you know that no matter how much we ever disagree, I'm still proud to fight the overall fight right beside you.

Thanks for your honesty, and a toast to commonality! (ok, not sure if it's really a word but it'll do)

:toast:

[flvegan]

75. Bingo.

Lines in the sand are just that. Sometimes, the sand just doesn't matter, or at least, it's not permanent. It's shaped by wind, water...the environment.

Commonality...a word, or sentiment that should be spread around here, there, everywhere.

Yes, cheers.

[Gman]

59. The Pittbots are out

and in force.

[Catherine Vincent]

65. Now that was not necessary.

[karlrschneider]

61. Blind loyalty like blind faith is a remarkable thing.

...

[Media_Lies_Daily]

81. Blind hatred is equally remarkable...

...you exhibit it well.

[karlrschneider]

88. You obviously don't know me.

And you have a really strange concept of the meaning of 'hate.'

[Media_Lies_Daily]

110. Oh, I think I've seen enough of....

...your posts over the years to know how you operate.

[karlrschneider]

117. How I "operate"? Nice try and welcome to my ignore filter.

bu-bye.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

128. Thank you! See ya.

[mirandapriestly]

62. It's really important to support independent media

and most of the time they are right. At least they don't lie and cover up for the Bush administration, now that's something to complain about.
Plus, they are right i'm sure , it's inevitable.

[DearAbby]

64. Count me in...I'll stand with Pitt and Truthout.

:hi:

[Bluebear]

66. Is this not about the future of our country? Not Will Pitt & truthout?

Truth is truth. I hope they are right about this, but if they are not, why would you just bellow 'loyalty' above accuracy? Just asking.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

72. If It Turns Out To Be False Then I Will Stand Up And Declare My Wrong.

But until that time comes (which it HAS NOT YET), they have my support and faith.

[Maddy McCall]

156. I think all of DU will be holding its breath to see your reaction.

You important guy, you. :eyes:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

206. And Are Your Posts Any More Important?

Because I fail to see any substance in them whatsoever, as pertaining to the context of the OP. In fact, most often they seem to be only there to bait and poke without any real desire for rational conversation or thoughtful dialogue whatsoever. Sarcasm is good in certain doses, but when abused or habitual it just becomes unproductive and distasteful.

[fudge stripe cookays]

249. It's actually very entertaining.

For the rest of us. You're just annoyed that the sarcasm is directed at you.

[arwalden]

191. That's One Of Bush's Weaknesses...

... steadfast loyalty and "belief" despite all contrary evidence. An unwillingness to consider or accept any other realities. That stubborn "if-we-just-hold-on-and-believe-everything-will-be-all-right" mentality.

You're ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, Bluebear... why should we embrace that weakness for ourselves? I prefer truth and accuracy instead of misplaced "loyalty".

[Bluebear]

222. Zactly.

And your comment downstream cracked me up :)

[AuntiBush]

78. For Whatever It's Worth...

... If it were not for Truthout I'd never have learned the truth as of November 3, in the year 2004. It led me to here, and all the other wonderful news-worthy sites.

Thanks Truthout, DU and all the rest.

Now please, everyone back to biz'niz, and allow us regular truth-seeking readers get back to learning from you're "way better then any tee-vee media, ever" information, and news. Ok :)

:popcorn:

[Inland]

82. I think that's fair enough.

Truthout an information source, not my team colors.

[AuntiBush]

93. Thanks, Inland.

I think it's no more then fair. Many of us average citizens depend on DU to link us "out" to sites that at least "try" to lend us help, info and bits & pieces of real news while tee-vee starves us with tiny, confusing spoon-fed half-truths.

At least Truthout, and other sites out here give way, way more then then that.

Edited: Dog-gone typo errors!!!

[sendero]

87. As much as I wanted to stay out of this.....

...I can't.

My simple belief is this - Jason and Truthout believed their sources or they would not have gone with this story. I trust them that far, and who wouldn't? What would be gained by playing around with this kind of story? Rolling the dice that they were going to strike gold on the timing? Bullshit.

Now, they could have been duped. It happens. There are a lot of forces at work here, the stakes are high.

Whether they were right or wrong, I believe their story was issued in good faith. And that's all we can ask for.

[MADem]

92. I think the fact that the "evil" Tweety had the same story a day earlier

actually lends them credence. But some here prefer to trash Tweety, even when he is lending premature corroboration to the Truthout report. Strange bedfellows!

[alcibiades_mystery]

154. No, it's not

Good faith is fine and dandy, and I have no doubt that at least WilliamPitt went with the story in good faith.

But good practices are as important as good faith, and if the story is false, then there has been some massive breakdown in good practices, and that's good and goddamn well relevant.

[sendero]

177. Everyone here..

.... who has not been convincingly lied to, never been legitimately fooled, please raise your hand.

If people are honest, I see no hands.

[Chomskyite]

91. Better to stand and fall on issues and on proposals

. . . rather than personalities or parties. That's the fallacy of the Bushies. And you see what's happening to them.

[0007]

103. Thank you for true wisdom.

[SPKrazy]

94. Why Does Anyone Stand Or Not Stand?????

In reality the only ones who will fall and are standing are Jason Leopold and Truthout

Their asses are on the line

Anyone can say "I stand with ......"

It reminds me of the freepers saying "I stand with our troops", when they are nowhere near the troops.

(I'm not calling anyone a freeper)

Just saying everyone can have an opinion. We all will know the truth sooner or later.

No one but Truthout took the risk here, really.

If you say "I support Truthout" and they are wrong, who is really going to remember?

If you say "I support Truthout" and they are right, who is really going to remember? (except you on both counts)

I hope the bastard Rove is indicted. I hope they are right at Truthout. But if they aren't, then what is that really to me?

The blogosphere isn't going to go away. The CMSM can't stop it. Rove can't stop it. * can't stop it.

The age of instant information is long since arrived and you can't put the genie back in the bottle so to speak.

So, let's all just wait this out, be patient, and realize that we don't have to "take a stand" take a pledge, pass a litmus test, etc. to be good progressives.

Amen

[Inland]

97. That's what I've been saying.

Leopold, if right, scoops a public announcement by two days. That's good for him, but aside from that, what difference does it make? If he's wrong, so what? His ass is grass, I suppose, but if peopel put the article in it's proper place, no harm done to the republic.

[Rex]

106. Oh BFD! Man, ya know

I thought 911 was crazy on this board, but come one people! Truth Out is right 95% of the time! How often is FOX or CNN or MSNBC wrong on a story? How often do they not cover news that matters to America? They pay people to whore for Karl Rove and George Bush! I can't believe it is even here on DU. We shall see where this leads, because something tells me this story is far from over. People who give up on Truth Out may do so, their loss.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

123. Why The Hell Are You Addressing This To Me?

Your post makes no sense in the context of my OP.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

130. I think the poster was just making a general response to those...

...who seem intent on discrediting Truthout.

[BrklynLiberal]

220. kicked and recommended!

[Joe Fields]

111. You should never trust a journalist. Or a politician.

It is skepticism and a willingness to question the veracity of their words and deeds that can keep this country healthy. You would do well to remember that.

Respect is one thing. You can respect where their heart is. You can appreciate and respect what they have brought to the table, but once they have our complete trust, they are less apt to actually earn it.

Perfect examples are within the White House press corps.

[arwalden]

112. WWASD?

:shrug:

[Iniquitous Bunny]

113. I don't question the integrity of Truthout or it's writers.

They have done amazing work.

I think it may be fair for the writers (and it's readers) to begin to question the motivations of their sources if nothing happens soon.

[LaPera]

115. Wow, what a brave stance-Now is this a life or death ordeal-Exactly what

are these "risk" involved, that you mention?

Having to say what, I was wrong, OR Ha Ha... I was right...this isn't exactly like being thrown in a dark dungeon, forced to watch Rumsfeld speeches, over & over with no hope of a trial...

I mean come on, were all hoping the fucking story is true, we despise Rove, if not, then what, fuck...that it's exposed they are human...They aren't going to be crucified...

Why all this melodrama?

At the very worst, is someones rather large ego may take a bit of a minor trampling...Don't get your panties all tied up, dude...

There are far more pressing and important issues & things that need to be addressed...far more important than ones dying devotion to speculation...

[arwalden]

119. There Is A Direct Correlation Between The Humility One Has Displayed, And

... and the amount of goodwill and benefit-of-the-doubt they are likely to receive.

[Bluebear]

172. .

:spray:

[iconoclastic cat]

126. Who's Will Pitt?

[LaPera]

131. LOL! Best question I've heard in days...TruthOut.org writer & fine

liberal and free lance author of interesting books, essays, and DU contributor, but way too weird stuff going on around here and out of distortion at the moment. People are(to use an appropriate British term)far too "sticky" about this, it's actually hilarious!!

[iconoclastic cat]

176. (Psst...that was a joke...talked to him many times...) nt

[LaPera]

201. Your quite the clown, as I said I LOL! All the bullshit is so hilarious!!!

iconoclastic cat, you idiot...you kill me!!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Bluebear]

244. I've never seen a show like this before! :)

[treestar]

137. Me too. I don't hold with the idea that those who screw others

"win." If these sources prove to be liars, then I condemn them as such, don't admire them for "putting one over" on TO.

[Ksec]

140. I said I trusted them

And I do. You naysayers be damned to Hell for all eternity and junk.

Just you wait and see.

[lpbk2713]

141. You have spunk and moxie.

And Harris would like them returned ASAP. She's lost without them.













(Just trying to lighten things up a tad)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

142. Thanks.

Always maintaining a lighthearded easygoing sense of humor is mandatory these days. :)

[lpbk2713]

147. Good to know you took it in the way it was offered.

Hang in there.

[bleever]

157. That was darn funny.

And the delivery was just right.

:thumbsup:

[Gregorian]

151. And all they have done. And all they stand for.

And not just Truthout. Take Back The Media. As well as others on this forum.

Look what they have done to expose the lies. And what they've done to uncover the hidden agendas. And their research over the years.

These guys are heroes.

I totally agree with your post.

[Harper_is_Bush]

158. Ev-ry time I see you fallin'..

..I get down on my knees and pray.
I'm waiting for that final moment
To la la la la la la la

You know the rest!

[VolcanoJen]

159. The statute of limitations on Leopold's "scoop" has passed.

By definition of the 24-hour news cycle, even if Rove is indicted, I just don't think anyone's going to give credit to Jason. It will become some sort of Andrea Mitchell scoop, to confirm it, to really nail it down moments before the paperwork comes down.

It's Tuesday. The "scoop" expiration date has passed.

Problem is, if Leopold is wrong, I feel strongly it will be an embarrasment to our entire community.

I wish everyone would take a deep breath, stop taking sides, stop getting personal, and start paying attention.

[midnight]

160. Call me crazy, but all my hope is on Jason.

We all need this movement in the Country.

[NoSheep]

161. This entire thread disgusts me. A contest. You sound like a bunch of

freepers! I'd laugh like hell if it didn't make me want to vomit. I hope the other side isn't reading this shit. Go do something valuable like write a letter to someone who needs a little enlightenment. Or..you can just "catch and release". :puke:

[Harper_is_Bush]

163. Ouch!

I hope the other side did read that!

[NoSheep]

164. Ugh. Truth Hurts.

Seriously. I'm reminded of the Dan Rather shit. I see people turning on each other here. It's unbelievable. ;(

[mtnsnake]

166. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx

[NoSheep]

167. are those kisses? thanks,

:+

[upi402]

168. Rush, Colter, O'Liarly - wrong everyday. Is there bone showing?

What will the rightards do? Take away a journalist's birthday away -like Dan Rather? Reichwingers would never resign for having spewed misinformation.

If it's wrong... eh:shrug:
It'll be great watching rightards choking on the taste of their own medicine.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

173. Too. Much. Melodrama.

Just like the Duke stuff, there is so much premature hand-wringing and angsting on this subject.

How about we just wait and see what happens during the rest of this week? If Rove gets indicted, I'm sure more information will come out about when -- specifically -- he was indicted. And if nothing is reported for the next few days, that will be telling as well.

Until then, I don't really care. Once we have more information, maybe I'll start caring. But even if the guy ends up being wrong, there are still about a million other things I'm more concerned about, rather than a single liberal alt-media reporter's credibility. If he's wrong? Then he's wrong. Live and learn and move on.

Meanwhile, Bush is still screwing up our country.

DTH

[Liberal In Texas]

174. It may be bad form to post on your own

kind of "appreciation" thread...

But, Mr. Pitt, you are one of the reasons I am here.
Andy was too. We lost him. I do not want to lose you too.

I don't know what's going on. Apparently you've been bashed by the Freepers and the trolls; or the simple among us the espouse discord because it gives them some sort of pleasure.

Fuck them. The Gods of Discord will always be around.

And the rest of us? Hanging, not perhaps on every word, but finding you in this wilderness and recognizing not only good writing, but someone who speaks truth to power.

You speak for me. Don't go away. Please.

=L

[laylah]

175. I believe in them

and support them all the way. Will has been a beacon of hope (laced with his wonderful humor) for me since the inception of DU. Jason, while having made mistakes, I believe, is dedicated and passionate about what he does and goes to great lengths to expose the frauds at the top.

Hang in there, Will and Jason, you have many supporting you. :hug:

Jenn

[npincus]

178. Me too.

[Vidar]

179. I support Truthout And Will Pitt regardless of how this story pans out.

[Snivi Yllom]

181. sort of appropriate

[Seabiscuit]

184. WTF??? So if it turns out they fucked up royally and did a sloppy job

screwing up the facts just to rush to press with a phony "scoop" you "stand with them"???

Look, Leopold already did a very sloppy job writing the article about Rove already being indicted. The inconsistencies raise several doubts about the story's authenticity. And I can't fathom why Will Pitt would hitch his credibility wagon to such a poorly written story.

Your post smells of cult personality worship.

Look, I don't know *that* much about truthout.org, but I don't think one reporter making a false prediction and another reporter rather numbingly staking his reputation on the false prediction has anything to do with the general track record and worthiness of the cause truthout has supported during these trying times. Truthout will remain, Leopold will survive, and Will Pitt? Well, he'll probably post something about "I'm leaving DU" again, whining about all the nastiness here, vilifying and questioning the motives of his detractors and critics, but he'll be back posting some of his better articles, and occasionally sprinkling DU with posts where he shows us his arse again. Business as usual.

[arwalden]

190. ~

<< Your post smells of cult personality worship. >>

Excellent observation.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

207. I'd Like To Ask You To Come Forward And Explain Why That Is An Excellent

observation. Can you back up the assertion or is it just a quick rah rah for sake of agreement without any real contexual thought behind it?

Cause I wrote the OP, and from the way I see it there is nothing cultish about it. It is a very non-provocative statement about respecting the individuals mentioned and choosing to err on the side of trust while the truth has yet to be known. Has nothing to do with cult behavior, has all to do with simple decency and respect to those who have earned it. So calling it cult worship is extremely over the top and melodramatic in my opinion, so I'd like to hear your explanation as to why calling it such is actually an "Excellent Observation" as opposed to pure exaggerated malarky.

[arwalden]

210. Apparently Your Standards Are Lower Than Mine.

<< Has nothing to do with cult behavior, has all to do with simple decency and respect to those who have earned it. >>

Earned it?



<< So calling it cult worship is extremely over the top and melodramatic in my opinion >>

Melodramatic? Oh brother! -- It does appear, however, that a nerve has been struck. :hi:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

211. Hi. I'd Like To Formally Ask That This Time You Answer The Question,

as opposed to dancing around it and avoiding it.

If you can't back up your confident exclamation of it being an "excellent observation", then by golly, just say so. We'll forgive you for it. :hi:

[arwalden]

212. Oh, Brother! -- Grow Up!

<< If you can't back up your confident exclamation of it being an "excellent observation", then by golly, just say so. >>

What's there for me to "back up"?

My response to the other poster was about as straightforward as anyone could make it. I agreed with the other poster... I thought it was an excellent observation... and I said so.

What more do you want? I don't owe you anything. -- Whatever it is you're looking for... whatever satisfaction you hope to gain won't be provided by me. You'll just have to nurse your wounds, cover your raw nerves, and get a thicker skin.

I think whatever fight you're trying to pick is with the person who made the original statement, not with those who agree with it. You're not really in any position to "defend" your pride by making vanity demands of me.

<< We'll forgive you for it. >>

"WE"? "...come forward..."? "...formally ask..."?

Good grief! Who do you think you are? Will Pitt? :eyes:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

214. Please Don't Attack. I Just Want You To Answer The Question. I Ask Again

You declared it was an excellent observation, that this OP is of a cult worship mentality. Well I thought it was an absurd observation, so I was inquisitive as to how there could be such a disconnect of logic. Since you so wholeheartedly agreed that this OP is of a cult worship mentality, you should at least be able to justify that characterization to some degree without resorting to attack and avoiding the question. It is merely an inquisitive request. You claim this is a cult worship thread. Well is it? If it is, can you back it up? Can you answer the question this time instead of avoiding it? If you can't, will you take back your 'would then be false' comment that this is a cult worship thread?

I'm not attacking you. I'm asking for you to back up your rhetoric. It would be greatly appreciated if you comply.

Thanks in advance!

[arwalden]

215. Here Is Your Reply...

<< You declared it was an excellent observation, that this OP is of a cult worship mentality. >>

Yes. You're partially correct. What the other poster actually said was "Your post smells of cult personality worship."

And it does.

<< Well I thought it was an absurd observation, so I was inquisitive as to how there could be such a disconnect of logic. >>

It's not surprising that you would think such a thing... but it still sounds to me like your beef is with someone else.

<< Since you so wholeheartedly agreed that this OP is of a cult worship mentality, you should at least be able to justify that characterization to some degree without resorting to attack and avoiding the question. >>

You're a mind-reader too? I "wholeheartedly" agreed, eh? --- As I said before... I OWE YOU NOTHING. I've got nothing to justify to you.

<< It is merely an inquisitive request. You claim this is a cult worship thread. Well is it? >>

Did I make such a claim? Where? (Are you thinking of someone else?)

<< If it is, can you back it up? >>

What's my incentive to comply with your vanity demands? I've got nothing to "back up".

<< Can you answer the question this time instead of avoiding it? >>

Sorry. Not taking the bait of your "challenge". You're picking a fight with the wrong person.

<< If you can't, will you take back your 'would then be false' comment that this is a cult worship thread? >>

I don't have a clue what you're talking about. I don't recall ever having made a statement that included those words. Can you show me? (It looks like you're picking too many fights and you can't keep your thoughts organized as to who actually said what.)

<< I'm not attacking you. >>

Who accused you of doing that? I said you were trying to pick a fight and that you were doing it with the wrong person.

<< I'm asking for you to back up your rhetoric.>>

It's not MY "rhetoric". :eyes:

<< It would be greatly appreciated if you comply.>>

Get used to disappointment.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

221. Of All Those Words, Only Ones Relevant Were "I've got nothing to back up"

Quite true. You keep posting rhetoric and spin but in the end simply couldn't answer the question. No biggie, didn't really think it was going to be backed up anyway.

But here's the thing, when you post a reply to someone of "Excellent Observation", please don't get all huffy puffy for someone perceiving that statement as agreeing with the sentiment. And trying to justify a difference between "smells like a cult personality thread" or "is a cult personality thread" is petty semantics, and anyone with half a logic could see the point is for all intensive purposes the damn same.

So you agreed it smells like a cult personality thread, but seemingly can't justify why when asked to defend the position. You can post as many million word replies that avoid the question as you want, but they're irrelevant to me.

And no, I'm not picking a fight with the wrong person. This isn't about picking a fight. It is about pushing back when I see statements that require justification, and shaking my head in disgust when such justification is not forthcoming.

[arwalden]

223. But Your Question Is Not For Me To Answer.

<<Quite true. You keep posting rhetoric and spin but in the end simply couldn't answer the question. >>

Rhetoric and spin? What in the WORLD are you talking about? That's almost as confusing as your previous reference to something ELSE I never said either. (Where's the link to that, eh?)

<< No biggie, didn't really think it was going to be backed up anyway. >>

You're quick to find fault, yet I notice that you failed to provide a link to the words you attributed to me earlier. You could have provided the link, or admitted your mistake instead of pretending that it didn't happen.

The only difference is, I really didn't expect you to. I don't have the same sense of entitlement that you do.

The reason I will not comply with your vanity demands is because you're asking the wrong person. Yet, with my refusal to jump through your hoops, and my refusal to entertain you by defending someone ELSE's remarks, you pretend to have scored points.

If that's your idea of what qualifies as having "won" an argument, then your standards for what constitutes a "win" are exceedingly low. Using that yardstick, I imagine you win LOTS of arguments, eh? :eyes:


<< But here's the thing, when you post a reply to someone of "Excellent Observation", please don't get all huffy puffy for someone perceiving that statement as agreeing with the sentiment. >>

"Huffy puffy"? :eyes: Wow, are you *really* that sensitive? Nerves still tender? Awww. Poor you. -- Frankly, I really don't think you have much room to lecture someone on not being huffy-puffy.

Here's the thing... I said it was an excellent observation. You're the one who seeks to embellish that as being something that I "wholeheartedly agreed" with. You're trying to attribute someone ELSE'S comments to me, and you're wanting ME to defend them.

Sorry. I'm not playing your game.

<< And trying to justify a difference between "smells like a cult personality thread" or "is a cult personality thread" is petty semantics,>>

To you perhaps. I suppose if that's the best you can do, then obviously you'd choose to hang your hat on that. -- Petty, indeed. (You really should be more careful.)

<< and anyone with half a logic could see the point is for all intensive purposes the damn same. >>

"Intensive purposes"? :rofl: (Oh brother! Did you mean "intents and purposes"?) Classic! :rofl:

And no, it does NOT mean the "damn same" thing. You're playing fast-n-loose with quotes and facts. If you're going to try and pick a fight, the LEAST you could do is make sure you're standing on solid ground, and that you're quoting your opposition correctly. --- But again, I repeat... your beef is with someone else.

<< So you agreed it smells like a cult personality thread, but seemingly can't justify why when asked to defend the position.>>

Actually, I've taken NO position. There's nothing for me to defend. What more can I say to convince you that I thought it was an excellent observation?

<< You can post as many million word replies that avoid the question >>

And you can ask the question as often as you want... :eyes: but that's not going to change the result. Most people learn from their mistakes, ought not you do the same?

<< as you want, but they're irrelevant to me. >>

Irrelevant to you? Really? -- Somehow I find that difficult to believe. Your behavior, demeanor and overall fascination with me does not indicate that you find it all "irrelevant".


<< And no, I'm not picking a fight with the wrong person. >>

Yes you are. Your feelings are hurt and this is how you act out.


<< This isn't about picking a fight. It is about pushing back when I see statements that require justification, >>

I don't owe you anything. Nothing. Nada.


<< and shaking my head in disgust when such justification is not forthcoming. >>

Clearly you're accustomed to getting your way. But, I cannot account for whatever *other* sense of entitlement is motiving you to be so demanding of me. I've got nothing for you.

Whatever it is that you think you want from me... that you think you "deserve" from me... I'm just not going to indulge you. It's as simple as that.

You'll just have to learn to live with your "disgust" and disappointment. Stop being so overwrought, delicate and sensitive. -- Get over it. Move on. Hold a grudge. Throw a temper tantrum. Pout. I don't care.

I think I should let you know something... the behavior I've seen from you so far really does NOT do anything to help your case. In fact it only serves to reinforce the original poster's position and observations.

I also think I need to let you know that I've had enough of your shit. Whatever other questions you have, whatever other demands you make... whatever you think it's going to take to soothe and console your ego... you'll just have to take it up with the original poster.

You're wasting my time. I'm done with your game. I'm done with you.

You may now have the all important "last word"... accuse me of "avoiding" questions (that you should be asking someone else) and then gleefully declare yourself the defacto winner. Enjoy your big "win"! I'm so impressed. :eyes:

[Misunderestimator]

225. You are sooo intensive, Allen!

:loveya: :rofl:

[arwalden]

226. Can You Believe This Shit?

Fucking groupies!

[Misunderestimator]

227. I was never into the whole groupie thing myself.

I prefer facts.

[arwalden]

228. The Amount Of Goodwill Someone Is Entitled To...

... is inversely proportional to their ego and blood alcohol level.

[Misunderestimator]

229. Entitlement is a funny thing...

at some point you have to prove something.

[Bluebear]

236. Where have YOU been, doll?

XOXOX

[Misunderestimator]

238. I've been around...

Not posting as much, but around. How's things with you? :loveya:

[Bluebear]

239. Going well...

...except my new job which is 50 miles each way and the gas is eating me up alive. But I am around too. :hug:

[U4ikLefty]

231. Oh man, this is funny stuff!!!

I declare you the winner....WITHOUT EXCEPTION!!! ;)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

234. Actually It Was, Yet You Keep Dancing Around It. Your Legs Tired Yet?

Wow, what a long winded post about nothing. :rofl:

You like to talk I see. It appears it makes you feel a sense of importance or something.

Trying to convince DU'ers that a reply of "Excellent Observation" is not a message of agreement has got to be one of the most absurd attempts at spin and deceit I've ever come across. You can't really believe you're fooling most of these people do you? Seriously? :rofl:

Talk all you want and chop this one up into a million pieces while thinking that you have some great victory over this debate LOL Yeah, keep thinking you won (like this was about winning) :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

See, posts like the ones above always crack me up more than any other types of posts. They are so long and have so much effort put into them, but in the end say absolutely nothing.

In the end, this comes down to one thing and one thing only. You posted a message of obvious approval to a sentiment that this "smelled like a cult personality thread". You already have admitted that you agreed. Yet, when I called you out on it, and said "oh yeah? Why was the observation so excellent", you simply could not answer. Of alllllllll your words and arrogance throughout a long line of posts, you still quite simply couldn't provide justification.

You can frame that however you want. You can deny all you want that it isn't a question for you, and that you didn't do this and didn't do that, and you aren't going to answer it and post a million snarky comments and blah blah blah. It all comes out the same. You were called out to justify your statement, and you simply flat out failed to do so. And that, kemosabe, means you won nothing. It means to me that your original reply was empty and provocative, with no substance behind it. I thought it may have been. That's why I challenged you for an explanation. Shame that after a brazillion words you simply just could not give one.

Maybe next time.

Goodnight. :hi:

[fudge stripe cookays]

235. And it's a shame that you read nothing of the reply.

He wrote a full reply, you're just too dense to understand that he's not GIVING you an answer. And he said so.

:eyes:

[jeanarrett]

242. From the OP's comment line in his profile:

"I can get opinionated and act like a know it all. I can't help it. Please forgive me LOL."

At least you admit it, now kindly shut up OMC--you're making an ass of yourself.

[fudge stripe cookays]

246. Which...

he manages to do in just about every thread in which he posts.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

247. Yeah, Your Thoughtful And Insightful Words Are Far More Valuable LMAO

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

You guys crack me up so much. I mean, this thread is soooooo like 2 days ago. You think anyone even is paying any real mind to the petty immature bickering comments that are only being done in this thread now?

All these ridiculously mindless and childish posts are doing now is attempting to cause trouble and prodding in a 5 year old poke poke type manner. Utterly useless. But hell, it seems to make you guys feel good about yourselves so have at it! It doesn't get to me anyway, just makes me laugh my ass off at the stupidity of it all. So have fun! Post like a bunch more replies like "hey, I hear OMC smells." "yeah? You heard that too? I hear keeps milk in his fridge past the due date" "*gasp* seriously? OMG!" :rofl:


Take Care! :hi:

[fudge stripe cookays]

248. I don't care if anyone is paying attention or not.

Someone replied to me, I replied to them.

We just happened to agree that you're an immature ass. Deal with it.

How much did you net on that last Wal-Mart visit?

[k_jerome]

230. i have visited this site for a long time...

it is amazing how a persons screen name prompts 200 replies of "thanks ___" and "thanks for this ___" and the most profound and insightful posts sink like a rock because there is no cheering section or groupies to respond with "this needed to be said ____"

cult of personality for those we cannot attach personality to. only post count and rank in the universe of the internet.

[Bluebear]

237. Some people can get 80 recommends for posting the local temperature

"It's 55 degrees here today."

"Well said! Eloquent as always!" ;)

[jeanarrett]

243. Hear, hear!

[novalib]

185. TruthOut and Will Pitt Have Both Done SO MUCH

TruthOut and Will Pitt have both done So much for OUR cause.

Both are TRUE heros.

They deserve our THANKS for what they have done and continue to do for WE, THE PEOPLE!!

[MADem]

195. If our cause is truth, you're right

But if you make an error, ya gotta own up to it. Otherwise it's not the truth.

Or waffle if you think your source might be BSing you, like Tweety did.

[novalib]

197. Of Course OUR Cause is TRUTH

Our cause IS TRUTH!!

Both Will Pitt and TruthOut speak the TRUTH to POWER!!

Sometimes, the truth is uncomfortable for some to hear.

But Will Pitt and TruthOut declare what is TRUE!

We should THANK them -- a lot -- for all that they do!

THANK YOU WILL PITT and THANK YOU TRUTHOUT!

Luv Ya Both!

[progmom]

232. but....

...as far as we can tell, there seems there may have been a lack of truth - or at least accuracy - in Leopold's story. :shrug:

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

186. Ever heard this band?

[arwalden]

189. Thumbsup!!

:thumbsup:

[Beausoir]

208. *snort* LOL! n/t

[BlooInBloo]

187. My allegiance is to the truth. Whichever way it goes.

Having faith in the truth always carries risk. Strong faith in the face of risk should be reserved for only those who have proven worthy. The truth, more than any person, has.

Please keep in mind that my stance is not necessarily against truthout. Yah - that's a joke - no one's gonna keep that in mind - lol

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

203. The Point Is, That We Don't Know Yet.

We don't know at this point what is true or not. Once we do, of course that truth should always be heeded with more importance than any particular individual, because I agree, truth is always priority. But the fact is we don't know the truth of the matter yet. We only have a choice to trust in Will and Jason, or choose to not trust them. My post is only to say that while the facts are not yet known that I will err on the side of trust for them, because they have earned at least that much from me.

[BlooInBloo]

233. That sounds different from your OP to my ears... but whatever....

I would certainly LIKE the author to be correct. But that's very different from actively BELIEVING it to be so. One requires evidence, while the other doesn't.

We'll see in, oh, 24 hours perhaps? ;)

[Bluebear]

245. or 48?

;)

[Sequoia]

188. Here, here!

[Marnieworld]

192. I stand with you and them

There are people using their lives for the benefit of all of us and we should support them. It's so easy to stand on the sidelines and complain and whine and stamp your feet when things aren't exactly as you want them to be. No matter what happens with this particular scoop I will continue to read and trust both Will and Jason's work.

Rove will be indicted soon. The details may change from the original report because nothing is set in stone yet. There are bigger fish to fry and it blows my mind how people are reacting around here lately. Of course once there's a press conference and indictment it will all be lost in the celebration. Such is the blogosphere.

[k_jerome]

193. thanks Skinner! i mean Will!! nt.

[ngGale]

194. Me too...

:grouphug:

[Ganja Ninja]

199. If only people got this worked up every time the MSM lies. n/t

[autorank]

200. I AGREE!!! MSM/CM has decades of BS. Leonard's doing something.

Thanks for being diligent and going for the story.

Remember Watergate? I do. Woodward & Bernstein were given a bogus lead and got nailed on it after publishing the story. It came from their source, Deep Throat. Did they give up? Did those of us
who knew things were rotten pile on and say, "hardy har, you goofed." NO we did not. And it was worth the wait.

Excellent post. Recommended.

[arwalden]

218. Leonard who?

[Joe Chi Minh]

202. Who gives tuppence whether Jason Leonard was set up or not?

If he or any of the other investigative heroes were stolid, safety-first plodders, they wouldn't do the brilliant, sometimes dangerous investigative work they do. It requires passion and as much trust in their sources as they have mistrust in the miscreants they investigate. If Jason was set up, it's not going to be "the end of the world, as we know it".

You want Polonius? Read Hamlet.

[Freddie Stubbs]

251. Good journalists aren't 'set up'

They get multiple sources and and verify facts.

[deaniac21]

205. The story may prove to be totally false but I maintain that it is

accurate.

[Pharaoh]

216. I stand with will and truthout

Patience!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Ladyhawk]

217. Damn...I'm gonna get flamed for this, but IF Leopold screwed up,

why should I stand with him or Truthout? If Leopold screwed up, he and Truthout will owe all of us one hell of an apology. Conversely, if Leopold has the goods, he and Truthout will deserve some kind of huge commendation. I'll wait and see.

I'm not big on blind trust. It's why I gave up fundamentalism years ago. I'm also not big on heroes. Everyone is human and screws up occasionally. When someone shows a pattern of screwing up, they lose my trust. When someone shows a pattern of being reliable, they earn it. I'm certainly not going to jump on the "support Truthout at all costs" bandwagon. No thank you. I gave most of my life to herd mentality already. I get to think for myself now. :)

[liberalnurse]

219. If the worst case scenario occurred,

I give them my heart felt support for trying. That 100% more than we ever get from the MSM whores who have vast financial resources and connections. There is a high level of honor and honesty invested by the Truthout and Jason. There is no intent to mislead by the article/scoop. On the contrary, the MSM deceives and misleads intentionally. There may indeed be a vast firewall by this administration to surpress the truth that Jason has exposed.

[Marie26]

240. Yeah, I agree

Sorry. I know they've done some great work in the past, but if this is false, it affects their creditability & the creditability of liberal news sites in general. There's a difference between bravery & recklessness. I'd mostly say it's Leopold's error, but Truthout has to have some responsibility as well because they ran the story. It's not uncommon for newspapers to get a story wrong (look at the NY Times & WMD), but it does bother me that they're still not admitting they made a mistake, 4 days after the fact. The professional thing to do would be to admit the error, regret the error, & move on.

[sweetheart]

224. readable accillies heels

Any observer of DU could observe that the popular opinion leaders (will pitt). Being a
good hearted fellow, there is the opportunity to play all of DU, as pretty much the sycophant
club (no meanness intended to Mr. Pitt), has grown overinfluenctial.

It makes us look like a flock of sheep, driven by a few masters of opinion, who can be whipped
in to a position by the psyops division of goebbels SS.

I wish Mr. Pitt the absolute best in life... and the sycophantic relationship between 1 individual
and a collective has become less than democratic. Mr. Pitt is weighted at 100 "other" du'ers by
the collective mass, and this foible has just been predictably played.

What, do you think your opposition is not as smart as you.? If we're to out smart the buggers,
then we need do just that... not due to 1 savior, but due to our irrepressable urge to wake up
and take back our right to have justice in our land.

[ShortnFiery]

241. Historical ... this is one issue where I agree with you 100%

Well put - K & R :applause:

[mdmc]

250. me too

:kick:

[pinto]

252. Locking. Please see this thread

for further discussion. Thanks.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1225093