Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

October 2024
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Archives

Yesterday's TNR Non-News [Dan Collins]

JD took me to task for not commenting on it, but what is there to say?  “Foer” has already entered the lexicon as the noun derived from the internet verb, “to fo”.  So, stop tasing me, bro.

Set stunners to faze:

20 Replies to “Yesterday's TNR Non-News [Dan Collins]”

  1. McGehee says:

    For some reason I feel like if I blink I lose.

  2. serr8d says:

    Damn~!

    Pulchritude!

  3. Melkor says:

    Snack Time!!

  4. B Moe says:

    McGehee takes the first one out of the park. lmfao.

  5. happyfeet says:

    That’s disturbing cause of the cancer but I guess it’s like arty and defiant.

  6. happyfeet says:

    You know? I think it is rather arty and defiant. Good on her.

  7. happyfeet says:

    I started this comment in the pub but I am going to finish it here.

    What I read that transcript as is that Scott wants to assure the TNR thugs that he’s not going rat them out … “hey – you guys wanted some anti-war stuff and I gave you anti-war stuff. I held up my end, and I’m not planning on telling Newsweek or anyone about that, but that’s what was starting to look like my only out for awhile there.”

    The TNR thugs are saying hey “what’s your reaction going to be if we retract these stories and trash your reputation? You’re not going to tell anyone that your original assignment was to produce some anecdotal difficult-to-verify antiwar shit are you? And also we have your wife and we’ll kick her fucking teeth in if you don’t play nice.”

    This explains the timeline I think – the long drawn out pseudoinvestigation – and also the whole incongruence between Frankie and the other goon being quite open about the very real possibility of retracting the stories, and their very obvious reluctance to do so. It’s like they are asking Scott for permission to retract, as if they fear what he might do should they retract without his blessing. And that’s so backassward I challenge anyone to come up with a better interpretation than outlined above.

    When Scoblic says that bit about you know your writing career is over right? What he’s saying is that you know we are going to trash you and what you can’t do is come back at us and say you were only writing on the spec you and Frankie had agreed on.

  8. happyfeet says:

    It’s easy to forget as this story slowly unwinds that the original deal Beauchamp had with TNR was that he would write his articles anonymously. An obvious inference is that there was a quid pro quo in place that when Scott got out he would have a TNR job awaiting, and Scoblic is making it clear that they are not going to honor that part of the deal, and he wants to make sure that Scott knows better than to talk about that deal and its terms. After they call him a deceptive little shit and throw him overboard.

  9. Big Bang (pumping you up.) says:

    – Feets, I think the popular term among the short attention spanners is “under the bus”. The problem TNR has at this point, is the bus left several weeks back. Most think its too late.

  10. happyfeet says:

    Exactly BBH – that’s why the question of why they haven’t – you’re right – under the bus is better – thrown him under the bus deserves a closer look. Scott is holding the cards here, and TNR is being very, very careful with him. They want to negotiate the terms of his getting thrown under the bus.

    They don’t want him to say that they knew all along that accuracy was not a concern with respect to the pieces they commissioned. Frankie boy is scared, and Scoblic is trying to cover his own ass.

  11. happyfeet says:

    The idea that Scott was going to talk to Newsweek and the Post (same company by the way) scared them bad. Why? Kurtz is Frankie’s pal. It’s not mere spin control. There are specific things they fear Scott will say.

  12. Big Bang (pumping you up.) says:

    – Well its big red letters as to whats at work here. We know what they all are. At this point its just a question if Beau can resist the fat check to do a 180 on his former bosses. Would need to be a good offer. His wifes job is in the deal too.

    – TNR has to be straining to find an escape hatch. With all the witnesses debunking the emtire fantasy not much meat left on the bones for tjem to work with.

  13. happyfeet says:

    They’re desperate for Scott’s statements so they can use them to discredit anything Scott might say by pointing to the statements and asking why Scott’s “new” statements were not reflected therein.

    Frankie is one evil bitchqueen.

  14. happyfeet says:

    Jonah Goldberg thinks he’s peaches though cause they like the same beers and stuff.

  15. happyfeet says:

    Where’s corvan? He’ll back me on this.

  16. happyfeet says:

    And get the writers in here. We need rewrite on the title of this post.

  17. back you up on what? Goldberg? I think somewhere early on he was kinda defending Foer. too lazy to look it up right now, though.

  18. happyfeet says:

    Exactly. Goldberg. Here’s his initial post. This should get you the sum total of Jonah’s opinions on the matter. Pretty thin record, as most of the entries are on unrelated discussion of Foer’s thinking on the other things the voices in his head whisper to him about.

    Michelle noted this week that…

    Meanwhile, the Drudge link is now gone and NRO’s The Corner is oddly downplaying the transcripts and waiting for TNR’s talking points. From Peter Beinart, perhaps?

  19. happyfeet says:

    You’ll notice in fact that Jonah doesn’t venture any comment after his first take – he has two posts that link elsewhere. (Scan those results for just the 2007 entries).

    Jonah might as well be holding Elspeth’s wrists as Frankie has his way with her.

  20. happyfeet says:

    Actually that just confuses the timeline. With Elspeth no longer under TNR’s thumb, TNR is left with nothing to threaten Scott with. The only endgame I can see Frankie surviving is a very quiet retraction, but until they know what’s in Scott’s statements, that’s a very tricky proposition.

Comments are closed.