He needs to plainly distance himself from TNR, and NOW, or he’s toast. His wife should realize this, unless her loyalty is more to TNR than to Scott.

In any case, whether Beauchamp really does stand by his stories or not, they have been very clearly and decisively shown to be fabricated, embellished, or at the least very heavily distorted. That’s something we’d all be proud to stand by, huh?

That way he gets out of the army eventually, and can claim what Foer is claiming now, and TNR has the never ending investigation the whole time.

Keljeck on October 26, 2007 at 2:46 PM

Right. Plus there’s the whole issue with his wife not wanting him to recant, which may add further motivation to keep feeding lies to TNR.

It certainly appears that Reeve was still working at TNR at the time of the first call. On 24 Sep, Mediabistro reported the Facebook comment on a blog by a friend of Beauchamp’s that Elspeth had left TNR.

Under what possible scenarios would this have ocurred in so close proximity using (1) the premise Reeve left of her own accord and then (2) been fired?

Missy on October 26, 2007 at 2:37 PM

Hmm. Beauchamp’s end goal in this, at least originally, was to become a writer. Foer used that against him in the transcript. Maybe he made the private call after, not expecting Foer to admit to having it?

That way he gets out of the army eventually, and can claim what Foer is claiming now, and TNR has the never ending investigation the whole time.

That makes sense. He’s an idiot, so I doubt he would realize that military transcripts can be requested, and there are people who would.

Its front half was completely severed from its rear, which was twitching wildly, and its head was still raised and smiling at the sun as if nothing had happened at all.

You know…with all the other nonsensical crap he wrote, I never looked at the feasibility (or lack thereof) of this statement before.

What’s the width of a Bradley track? From photos it looks like it’s about two feet wide. So…exactly how big are the dogs over there? I’m thinking if the front half was pristine other than not being attached to the rest of the body, the back half would be completely crushed, not twitching wildly. But if the front half was to have enough weight and balance to remain upright and smiling at the sun, and any of the back half was to have enough structural integrity to twitch wildly, that dog had to be about six or seven feet long before getting run over!

(Now if you’ll just take a look at this model dog I made out of chicken wire….)

I thought he was French.

Oh, ok, nevermind then…

Scott is Italian?

bnelson44 on October 26, 2007 at 2:37 PM

I thought he was French.

However, which one is which?

baldilocks on October 26, 2007 at 2:36 PM

The Army is the wife, TNR the mistress.

Priceless.

Only Foer can gain from this, if only briefly, and with a small group of people.

Keljeck, I agree with your premises but not your conclusion. This is Sir Real Scott Thomas we’re talking about here. He’s the moron that made up the stories and peddled them to TNR in the first place. The Army might be able to pound some sense into him, but it’s likely going to take longer than a few weeks.

Foer has big problems but, especially at this point in the game, he is not so stupid as to make up an entire phone call. Everything we know about Beauchamp says he IS stupid enough to lie to TNR after coming clean with the Army.

This entire narrative is about Beauchamp making up stuff to sell to TNR. Hey, they bought it the first time, why not the second?

It is not lying when a man tells his wife one thing and his mistress something entirely different.

Scott is Italian?

It is not lying when a man tells his wife one thing and his mistress something entirely different.
- Rudy Giulianai

MB4 on October 26, 2007 at 2:30 PM

Excellent metaphor, though I question the attribution. ;-)

However, which one is which?

He has put himself on the scene of a discovery that he recanted under oath. If he told Foer that he stands by his work, then he either lied to Foer or he lied to the Army under oath. It’s a binary choice, one or the other. Given the relative consequences of either action, which is the more likely?

It is not lying when a man tells his wife one thing and his mistress something entirely different.
- Rudy Giulianai

1. Beauchamp never intended to recant his “diarist” and only issued his stern “no comment” under duress from his Army superiors.

2. Beauchamp did intend to recant his diarist, but for some reason (perhaps to protect his wife) told Foer that the Army essentially forced him to recant.

So even though we can say with reasonable certainty that the diarist was, shall we say, counter-factual, the issue of whether or not Beauchamp intended to recant is still unknown and unproven. And frankly, given how badly the waters have been muddied at this point, this issue will likely never be resolved. Lefities will always believe that the Army gestapo pressured Beauchamp, and we on the right will always assume that Beauchamp is a wannbe-Hemingway whose tall tales got away from him.

Either way, I don’t think you can argue that Beauchamp is a world-class a-hole. Either he hung TNR out to dry, or he hung the Army out to dry. Tosser.

STB is going to have to come forward now with a public statement.

TNR has hit every single one of them square on the nose. Can we move this whole kit and kaboodle up out of “hypothesis” range into “theory” territory yet?

He already confessed publicly to lying about the Burned Woman. This proves he lied about the other two incidents in “Shock Troops” as well: Read Bryan at Hot Air for comment on those. Foer’s claim that Beauchamp did not recant……