Well, The New Republic has published their editorial on Scott Thomas Beauchamp.

All of Beauchamp’s essays were fact-checked before publication. We checked the plausibility of details with experts, contacted a corroborating witness, and pressed the author for further details. But publishing a first-person essay from a war zone requires a measure of faith in the writer. Given what we knew of Beauchamp, personally and professionally, we credited his report. After questions were raised about the veracity of his essay, TNR extensively re-reported Beauchamp’s account.

WRONG MOVE, SUCKERS. When publishing material which would be defamatory and possibly treasonous if untrue, you need a hell of a lot more than “Gee, he looked honest.”

It turns out that the bit about soldiers in Iraq poking fun at a woman disfigured by an IED was sort of true. It was actually Beauchamp and one other dude harassing the woman in Kuwait, on the way to Iraq.

Though there was no mass grave discovered, TNR learned that soldiers regularly find bones and it is possible that what Beauchamp generally described might have happened. TNR has heard from some guy who said that it is possible that a Bradley could run over a dog if a certain, specific maneuver were performed. None of this backs Beauchamp.

TNR ends by blaming the army for investigating Beauchamp thus ending their own investigation.

Look for the hot water to surround The New Republic soon.

[At Redstate, see Jeff Emanuel’s excellent The New Republic meets Dan Rather (and finds that they have a surprising amount in common). I wrote my piece in my home. ]