Why Did Beauchamp Reveal His Identity?August 7, 2007
I’ve been keeping an eye on the Brobdingnagian factcheckathon™ that is the Scott Thomas Beauchamp affair for the past couple weeks, and now that it is claimed that he has recanted his story, I’ve gotta say that I’m scratching my head a little.
Here’s what I’ve gathered so far:
Everyone and their mother on the right side of the blogosphere is yelling “gotcha” because Michael Goldfarb over at The Weekly Standard claims to have evidence that Beauchamp recanted the accounts made in the diaries he contributed to TNR.
Meanwhile, TNR is still standing by Beauchamp, and claim to have verified everything that he posted (save one detail) by conducting their own review of his accounts.
So, for the rest of us, we’re left with the decision as to who to believe.
Something I can’t figure out…
Why the heck did this guy (Beauchamp) step forward and reveal his identity in the first place? I mean, if he knew he was lying, and that the WS and righty blogs had caught him, why not just remain anonymous and/or stop penning diaries? Why expose himself like this? If he really made all that stuff up, it wouldn’t make much sense for him to reveal himself the way he did. He must have had an idea what would happen.
Maybe I’m missing something here, but the logic doesn’t seem to flow. Over at Hot Air, the running theory seems to be that the guy is simply an idiot. Could it really be that simple?
Exit question: Who’s attempting to save who’s face here?
Is it the WS and the righty blogs for having made the accusations of wrongdoing (many of those blogs initially doubted that Beauchamp was even in the military, which turned out to be incorrect). Have they gone so far that they aren’t going to rest until they find some way to be right on this?
Or, is it TNR and Beauchamp for having been caught in a precarious position? Perhaps they figure that they can just stand by the story and their anonymous sources long enough that the whole thing will just pass and leave behind little more than a lingering question mark.
Or, is it the military? Beauchamp’s diaries certainly weren’t the best PR for them. We already know that they muzzled him, so I suppose it’s possible that they are now engaging in a Tillman-esque cover-up (or intentionally relying on the rightosphere to push an angle that would at least establish reasonable doubt about Beauchamp’s accounts).
Update: Joe Tobacco has more on how much trouble Beauchamp might be in.