Powered by TypePad

« Newsweek Goes To Duke (Again) | Main | Just One LA Minute »

June 19, 2006



I wonder if Leopold cut a deal? There's no other way to explain why there's no "more comprehensive accounting" yet.

Gary Maxwell

Maybe the more comprehensive accounitng has been put under court seal? Or did he mean " business " June 19th which is different cuz no one works on lazy summer days which are a Monday thus pushing the business 19th to the 20th or even later. Hey no flack, it makes as much senses as their reporting on this matter.

Rick Ballard

C'mon, the article never said 2006.


It is IMPOSSIBLE to put one over on Rick, isn't it?

Gary Maxwell

No no I got. Their long standing policies wont allow them to disclose the " more comprehensive accounting," Yeah thats the ticket.

Tom Maguire

I wonder if Leopold cut a deal?

LOL. Where is the trust?

FWI, Luskin's cat has assured me that there is no deal requiring Leopold to cooperate, or even remain in Earth orbit.


Obviously the meaning was never 24 business hours. The meaning was always within one season of 24, which doesn't even start until the fall.

Jesus, don't you wingnuts know anything?

Carol Herman

Lauria does point out he congratulated Leopold; which is how Leopold got hold of his email address. He also interviewede Leopold on his book that dealt with his cocaine abuse (and, yes, his abuse of journalism ethics, if such a dog exists, I doubt that it hunts).

But in reading the piece I thought Lauria was worried his own name got trapped into a hoax Leopold was pulling. Well, is Lauria really an innocent party? Or just some sucker? He really, really, really wanted what Leopold was saying to be true. Do you notice how not everybody suffers from the Bush sickness syndrome?

Then, he paints with such a broad brush he says the Blogosphere (sweeping it all in), as unworthy of journalistic credentials, since we're all a bunch of narcisists.

Narcisists unwilling to toss back the tar.

Luria's wrong. His profession is dying. At some point, some (who aren't singing like Connie Chung), are trying to find graceful ways to exit the set up.


They have now released a statement of sorts, which means they have said nothing. It is the 6th item down under the "on the issues" portion.


Lauria was pretty quick to e-mail a congratulation though eh! Then he trawled the net looking for clues and just happened to find a blog run by the one who called Corallo? Right!



This sentence in the Luria article may be the key to the entire Leopold/Truthout/Story:

"He did break big stories, but he lied to get many of them. He admits lying to the lawyers for Enron executives Jeffrey Skilling and Andrew Fastow, making up stories to get them to spill more beans. "I was hoping to get both sides so paranoid that one was going to implicate the other," he wrote.""

Jason was chumming the waters hoping for a bite.


Jason Leopold Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Truth Out Fools
By Jackson L. Appalled
t o o t h o u t | Report

Monday June 19 2006

Special Persecutor Clarice Feldman spent more than half a day Friday at the offices of Duie, Cheatumj and Howe, the law firm representing ToothOut.

During the course of that meeting, Feldman served attorneys for former Deputy Tooth Out Chief of Staff Jackson L. Appalled with an indictment charging the embattled so-called reporter with perjury and lying to the public related to his role in the CIA noone leaked case, and instructed one of the attorneys to tell Appalled that he has 24 business hours to get his affairs in order, high level sources with direct knowledge of the meeting said Saturday morning.

Marc Ass, Appalled's enabler, did not return a call for comment. Sources said Feldman was in Washington, DC, Friday and met with Ass for about 15 hours to go over the charges against Appalled, which include perjury and lying to the Fools who read Tooth Out about how and when Appalled discovered that American Hero Karl Rove was exonerated of all charges and totally not guilty of anything except defeating Liberals.


Patton LOL


"Jason" at ameriblog:

Hi Everyone

I just want to say that these past few days have been the worst in my life. I feel like the worst human being in the world. I was only reporting the truth. Everything I wrote in my book, News Junkie, is now being used against me in the worst way. There is more to this story than you know. I cannot believe Joe Lauria would print such bullshit. Worst of all, he contacted me via email and wrote to me saying he was "very good friends" with Wayne Madsen and he believed my story to be true. He asked me three weeks ago about Corallo and I said I had no idea where Corallo came up with this story. But Joe never told me that my private communication with him would be used for a story. So here is a guy questioning my ethics and never even bothers to tell me that my email correspondence with him was for a story. I'll tell you all this much. No one has been harder on me than me. No matter what these people write about me I broke my own story first. I was the one who came clean about my past, my crime, my substance abuse. I put it all out there.

And for the record, I posted this on Talk Left when the question about "outing" sources came up Like much of the misinformation being peddled about what I said or didn't say or "invented" about this story the issue of "outing" my sources has taken on a life of it's own. It seems that people hear what they want to hear and then post it as fact--ironically, doing the same exact thing I have been accused of doing as it relates to my Rove story.

For the record, I did not "boast" about outing my sources if my story turned out to be wrong. On the Ian Masters radio show on Pacifica radio on May 14th I said, and I quote, "if my sources knowingly led me astray... then they know I would no longer be obliged to protect their anonymity."

That comment was made in a very general sense and was in response to a specific question.

People heard it and like children playing a game of telephone passed it on and on and on until it became "Jason Leopold said he would out his sources if his story is wrong."

Neither I nor the staff of Truthout believe we were lied to or knowingly led astray or manipulated or duped by our sources with regard to the specific details of my story.

And there you have it.
Jason Leopold | 06.18.06 - 2:24 am |

and there you have it....right!!!


It must have been spillover from the Magic Dust we sprinkled on Zark-Man's spiritual advisor.

Cecil Turner

It is the 6th item down under the "on the issues" portion.

Thanks, but that's not from TruthOut, but a repro of a CBS News piece. Money graf:

This is not a defense of Leopold, whom we have called on to name his sources, as he promised to do if his story turned out not to be true. He clearly seems unconcerned with journalistic ethics, to put it mildly.
Here's CJR's take:
We wonder if the folks over at Truthout.org are rethinking their affiliation with reporter and serial fabulist Jason Leopold. Leopold, you may recall, is the freelance reporter who was caught making stuff up in a 2002 Salon.com article, self-admittedly "getting it completely wrong" in pieces for Dow Jones, and had his own memoir cancelled because of concerns over the accuracy of quotations.
But nary a peep from Marc Ash, AFAICT.


ROFL, Patton.

Everyday JL reminds me more of the shnook the Iraqi mastermind of the WTC bombing persuaded to TWICE return the rented van for the deposit money while he made his getaway.


Ahhh, if only y'all expected the same accountablity from our leaders that you expect from this reporter.

Jimmy's Attack Rabbit

Nada-gate, it's hard to care.

brenda taylor



Brit Hume announced that Truth-out was standing down from the Rove indictment story. He said Leopold whom he mentioned by name has lied before.Leopold will never name his sources because Wilson can't afford to be exposed with the Libby indictment still out there.
On Hardball today Nora,O'Donnell Howard Dean,and David Shuster made an appearance. The show has officially become unwatchable.

Other Tom

As I understand it, our leaders are held accountable at the ballot box. The only recourse we have against scumbag journalists is to hold them up to scorn and ridicule.

It appears to me that today's item on Truthout is from Associated Press, not CBS, but I have a little trouble navigating that site, and its format is not the clearest in the world.

Keep Hope Alive, fools! (I haven't had so much fun since watching the meltdown of the seven-hour presidency of John Kerry.)


Someone on another Board posted this"(One of the posts at the bottom of a page at TruthOut says "Truthout will post another update on the Rove matter this evening at 5:00 Pacific on our blog" which means 8:00 PM Eastern.) "


thisspaceleftintentionallyblank....LOL. How appropriate for your comment.


They have something up now.

Unbelievably they are sticking with their story.

What appears to have happened is that - and this is where Truthout blundered - in our haste to report the indictment we never considered the possibility that Patrick Fitzgerald would not make an announcement. We simply assumed - and we should not have done so - that he would tell the press. He did not. Fitzgerald appears to have used the indictment, and more importantly, the fear that it would go public, to extract information about the Plame outing case from Rove.

Yes, it does appear that Truthout was used, but not lied to or misled. The facts appear to have been accurate. We reported them, and in so doing, apparently became an instrument. From all indications, our reports, first on May 13 that Rove had been indicted, and then on June 12 when we published case number "06 cr 128," forced Rove and Luskin back to the table with Fitzgerald, not once but twice. They apparently sought to avoid public disclosure and were prepared to do what they had to do to avoid it. "


And another delay

We are well aware of the Lauria article and the series of attacks The Washington Post has launched against Jason Leopold and Truthout. As always, we will carefully consider all information and then publish a thoughtful response. In this case, we will publish our response on Wednesday, June 21, at 5:00 p.m. Pacific time.



It's out - we are back to multiple sources now. Truthout went from multiple, to one credible source, and back to multiple. Again - no proof. Just statements of mysterious law enforcement sources.


Like Rove would still be employed if he was giving up info on Cheney. Just another wet dream from Marc Ash and his Phony Journalism site.


I like how they've decided to become part of the story.

From all indications, our reports, first on May 13 that Rove had been indicted, and then on June 12 when we published case number "06 cr 128," forced Rove and Luskin back to the table with Fitzgerald,

JM Hanes

From CJR per Cecil above: "We wonder if the folks over at Truthout.org are rethinking their affiliation with reporter and serial fabulist Jason Leopold."

Marc Ash has already hoist himself on Leopold's petard, having explicitly http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2006/6/12/9216/61823>distinguished between "what we know for certain" and "what we believe" and having http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2006/6/14/182858/234>asserted that "[Leopold's] work, sources and conclusions were reviewed carefully at each step of the process."

THIS JUST IN: Mr. Ash has just posted what he bills as a http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2006/6/19/185947/499>frank discussion over at TruthOut.




I guess making up stuff appears to be more effective than investigation and old fashioned facts for these folks.

From Tollhouse's report, character(s) on Fantasy Island are the likely sources for Truthout.

Now all we have to do is figure out which ones.

Gary Maxwell

Know how Berman made a big name for himself on ESPN giving cute nicknames to sports figures? How about we ask him to try it on Truth Out proprietor? Think we get Mark "pulled it out his " Ash?


From taxexemptworld.org:

(c/o MARC ASH) PO BOX 55871
SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91413-0871

Educational Organization
( Printing, Publishing)
$69,320 (Reported assets)

$627,091(Reported income)

04/2004 (filing date)

Excuse me, but that's a chunk of change for such a two horse e-zine. What are their stats?


Why are these sources using Truthout/Leopold? If true, this is blockbuster stuff. Why not WaPo, NYT's, LAT's? This is the kind of stuff Priest, Korn, Kristof, Pincus, etc would kill for.


It's the BDS. Remember Gannon? The leftwing thought that Cheney and the WH were using him to channel good news to the masses. This is more of the same. Cheney is some evil puppet in the background using Truthout to force Fitzgerald or force Rove or well I don't know, the logic sort of falls apart at that point.


Ash just put up his reply.

They're sticking to their guns, doubling down, claiming that their reportadzhddzhjzh was responsible for Fitgerald withdrawing his indictment of Rove.

This was due to some background machinations by Rove's minions (and his ilk) during the time between the reported indictment and the subsequent statement by Rove's attorney.

So, we gots ourselves a ballgame.


richard mcenroe

Please. If Rove was giving up Cheney, he would have been invited grouse hunting by now...


That is a LOT of money for this outfit...and tax exempt? Why? Let me guess--starts and ends with S..and rhymes with Bore Us.


I seem to remember some comment recently about "nincompoops in their underwear". Maybe "truthout" was the inspiration for that comment.

Someone should type up some phony Rove indictments and then lay them on the sidewalk, stomp on them a few times to get them all dirty, then release them to the wind somewhere near Fitz's offices. Someone will probably find one and go running to someone with the "evidence". Oh good grief that would be funny to watch.


Maybe the GJ actually took a vote and declined to indict Rove. And maybe Leopold knew the vote was taking place and based his whole story on the notion that there was no way that the GJ wouldn't indict.

Or maybe he just made it all up.

Another Bob

Only one comment regard TO and TL:

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?


Maybe they've been watching too much Texas Holdem on tv.

All In.


vnjagvet, Of course, just making up stuff pays more..AND it's easier. Ask "Spikey" Isakoff or anyone at Newsweek and Time, for example.


OK, I think Scott Galindez is the one calling the shots. And based what I just sniffed out--forget about ever getting those sources. As suspected, truthout is nothing but a commie funded PRAVDA wannabe--take your pick for funding sources--Tides, Soros, Ford Foundation, Stewart Mott--could be any of them.

BIO. Galindez:

Scott Galindez is a graduate of Syracuse University, a US Army veteran, and currently the managing editor of Truthout.org. For over two decades, Scott Galindez has been one of peace activism and social justice's defining leaders.

Scott's activism began at an anti-nuclear vigil in Lafayette "Peace Park" across from the White House. Scott also worked with the Washington Peace Center, the Atlantic Life Community led by Phillip Berrigan, the Community for Creative Non-Violence led by Mitch Snyder, American Peace Test, and the Coalition for World Peace.

Over the years, he has also worked on the electoral campaigns of Paul Wellstone, Jerry Brown, and Bill Bradley. ˇ

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Galindez"


Four members of the Los Angeles Catholic Worker affinity group arrested May 19 in the backcountry of Vandenberg Air Force Base faced trial July 31 in federal court. Brian Buckley, Scott Galindez, Marcus Page and Elizabeth Wyrsch were convicted of misdemeanor conspiracy and two counts of trespass. Buckley, who had refused bail since his arrest, was released from jail in mid-August and was sentenced with the others on October 15. Scott Galindez was ordered to prison for three months, and he and Page were ordered to pay $60 court fees. Buckley, Wyrsch and Page were sentenced to one year probation, with Buckley and Wyrsch also being fined $500 plus fees. The three sentenced to probation told the court they would not pay fines or fees, and were likely to resist compliance with probation. Galindez w as given two weeks stay before beginning his imprisonment.

As he prepared to go to jail, Scott Galindez wrote to friends, "...These are not easy times for any of us, our faith in our work is tested. We wonder if we are making a difference. We are. A young Marine who was a conscientious objector (CO) during the Gulf War, Erik Larson, credited the writings of [slain Salvadorian Bishop] Oscar Romero for making him question our government's military. If it wasn't for the campus activists that handed out literature he may have gone to the Gulf War. Activists may have saved his life... During the next 90 days I will be thinking of all of you out on the front lines working for peace. What you will be doing is much harder than what I will be doing. The hardest part for me will be not being able to join you... So remember when you hand a flier to someone you may be reaching a future activist that could make great accomplishments for peace and justice."


OT: But have you seen the depths to which MSNBC has fallen?
http://www.youtube.com/p.swf?video_id=TcozKfpbmaA&eurl=http%3A//www.drudgereport.com/&iurl=http%3A//sjl-static6.sjl.youtube.com/vi/TcozKfpbmaA/2.jpg&t=OEgsToPDskKa_xfQvBMEmEOGqjO-26lc>Choonie Chung Freakout


I spoke too soon:
"""For the record, we did reach Kimberly Nerheim, a spokesperson for Patrick Fitzgerald, and asked her these questions: Did a grand jury return an indictment of Karl Rove? Did Patrick Fitzgerald send a fax to Robert Luskin similar to that described in recent press reports? Is Patrick Fitzgerald's probe of the Plame matter still ongoing? Her response to each question was identical: "I have no comment."

BAM! GOT YA DEAD TO RIGHTS ON THAT ONE ROVIES!! What do you have to say now!!?

"I have no comment" indeed, that sounds alot like he's guilty to us!

Gary Maxwell

Good lord Father Berrigan would have been enough for me. But its a moonbat convention. Mitch Snyder, Governor Moonbean Brown. WELLSTONE! Tie dye, birkenstocks and this strangely sweet odor floating through Lafayette Park. Ahh the 60s, just like it was yesterday.

Barney Frank

There is a mess here for the IRS to stick its nose into if it so chooses.
An organization engaged in the kind of political opinion and influence that Truthout is engaged in cannot use a non profit as its corporate structure.

That is why churchs have to be careful about giving out voter guides. That is also why something like the American Spectator has a seperate non profit foundation for tax exempt activities.

I believe they are in pretty clear violation of IRS regs if they only have one entity. Am I missing something here, Clarice or other sharpies?


I'd love to see Dan Rather put on a gown and sing like that. It would be a fitting farewell.


Leopold is a Lefty Internet Elmer Gantry. A LIEG. Doling out for the chatterers of the more moonbattish of sorts faithhealing, hope, and revelation. The adoption of his comments were taken as matters of faith, what the flock wanted to see, with a smidgen of authority and gnosticism.

Could make some money of this with donations and web ads.


Or PIER Political Internet Elmer Gantry.

Anyone with some other acronyms?

BTW, all. Read the recent Vanity Fair. They've elevated the Niger docs to the docs that led to war!


Barney, I'm not a tax expert, but I think IRS should take a cllok. It seems to me that TO engages in too much political advocacy to warrant an exemption. You want to draft the letter?


Patton- ha!

But what? No question about the 15 hours on the 4th floor that Joe Wilson has first hand knowledge about? Although I suspect we know Fitzgerald's answer to that as well.

Joe Wilson knows how to work the press, and I suspect this was all about getting a meme going calling for Rove to resign again.
It is kind of sad that he's lost the WaPo though. And possibly the NYTs. He's got Larry Johnson and Truthout. Best indication yet that this investigation is losing steam.


TS:I wonder if Leopold cut a deal? There's no other way to explain


Gary Maxwell

So just like Charlie Brown, the lefty moonbats are going to let Jason and Marc to convincve them to run up and try to kick the football once again? How many times does Lucy have to pull the football away and you land on your Marc Ash, before you learn a lesson? Gullibility is never an attractive trait.

Rick Ballard


I think I have this almost figured out - I printed

06 cr 128

on a piece of paper and held it to my forehead - I get an image of letters - 'n' then something blurry then - 'a' followed by MOM. Try it - maybe we'll be able to narrow down what Sealed v Sealed was really about.


ROFL--The image I get is Crock..(But Rick, why are we laughing at these idiots when we could be fleecing them? I want to so badly I can taste it.)

Barney Frank


I'll certainly draft it on two conditions and with one caveat.

First condition, I don't have time for any research on the applicable regs or where to send it. If someone could look into that it would be a great help.

Second, I just got done with an audit last year in which the IRS tried to assess me in the five digit range. We were scheduled for tax court; had a date. I used their pre trial appeal process and actually got back a couple hundred bucks. The audit division didn't like that. Someone else can sign the letter as Truthout seems to be in my home state. I don't need a bigger target on me than the one I already have.
The caveat is I am computer challenged so it would need to be through e-mail type communications.


Truthout is obviously monitoring the left blogs, and has discovered that the idea that Rove rolled has taken root.
So they print "Hey, guess what? Our story made Rove roll!"
And all the Left blogs say-- you know, that just confirms it! Rove has rolled!

Like a dog chasing its tail.
(ps. in a nod to Jeff, I will admit that TNH doesn't believe Leopold, but does believe that Rove Rolled! Also, seem to believe Leopold made up the story but Wilson heard it from credible sources. Go figure. But anyway, Rove Rolled!)


To give you an idea about why that 600k smells to high heaven--

The Alexa stats on truthout.org are currently


The alexa for free republic.com are


The alexa for Charles Johnson's blog LGF are


Now, excuse me, but that is a lot of money. I know that FR has quarterly fundraisers to pay expences, and if I'm not mistaken, they don't have an operating budget anywhere near $600k.

And sorry, but other than the occasional Plame-o-mania generator, I don't see much there.

Who do they have working for them other than Ash, Leopold and Galindez?

I'm with you Clarice--the IRS needs to look into it.


More meme's shattering but after the damage is done:Instapundit confirms that HRW 's "military expert" admits he cannot contradict the IDF's report that it was not responsible for the Gaza Beach explosion and the LAT'S buries the news that the reports of mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners proved after investigation to be meritless.


verner, Barney--truthout org may be separate. Truthout's webpage on donations does not indicate contributions are tax deductible. (They also claim to get 4 million views a week. ROFL..)

I have no idea what Truthout. org does..It may well fit within 527 which says more about the regs than it does about truthout.


If it's a 527, it should be on the FEC web page, No?

I'll check.

Other Tom

What is most fun to contemplate, at least for me, is the Endgame. What will they be saying when the last door is closed, the investigation and the grand jury are terminated, and there is nothing left but the trial of Scooter Libby? Let me guess: (1) Fitz was pressured by Secret Service hitmen to dismiss the charges (secretly, of course, and without anyone else knowing--except Judge Walton, who himself was threatened by the Secret Service, aka the SS). (2) Fitz was promised the Attorney General position in the next Republican administration. (3) The dog ate the indictment. (4) Cheney, Fitz and Rove have secretly agreed to mount a third-party candidacy in 2008, with Lyndon Larouche at the top of the ticket, and lucrative Halliburton perks to be distributed to the conspirators.

Anybody else got any theories?


OK, they are a 501(c)3. Their only listed activity is "political newsletter". The budget was closer to $800k in 2005.

Even worse that it looked in 2004.

Barney Frank


Many, if not most 501c3's are not tax deductible. (Hey that's the IRS reg!) Only actual charities are tax deductible. Private operating foundations and such are tax exempt but contributions are not deductible.
I have no knowledge of 527 regs. They may very well be tax exempt, considering the disgrace of a law which spawned them.

Barney Frank


Didn't see your post til after I posted mine.
I'm pretty sure a 501(c)3 is limited to educational stuff not political advocacy and loses its tax exempt status if it does.


That's what I recall, Barney. Verner's dug up more--Maybe she'll draft the letter asking for an investigation. I'll sign it, but haven't time to do more on it.


OT. That's exactly what I think we have here. It took them 3 weeks to come up with this cock and bull story that allows them to scrape away with at least the deniability of it all. The sealed document that they've placed this all on won't ever be unsealed right? Regardless of what happens they can spin it any way they want, it's a religous argument now.


The thing about it too is, if they were just a political/educational newsletter that's one thing. But they are publishing DOCUMENTED FALSE DAMAGING STATEMENTS about a political enemy. Are non-profits allowed to lie on the tax payer's dime? Aren't there some kind of legal standards they must hold to?

And I've found info from a 2004 newsgroup where Ash claims donations are tax deductable, but don't know if that's still the case.

JM Hanes


"So they print 'Hey, guess what? Our story made Rove roll!'"

Can't you just imagine the editorial meeting at TruthOut? There's Leopold and/or sources saying, "But hey, don't you see? The secret indictment is why Rove got off scott free!"

I'd be interested in knowing if there's any way of even confirming that "06 cr 128" -- as they incorrectly label it -- is in fact, an indictment in the first place.

jason l

"Speak truth to power!"

(Feel free to lie to everyone else.)


From the IRS webpage:

operated—Because a substantial portion of an
organization’s activities must further its exempt
purpose(s), certain other activities are prohibited or
restricted including, but not limited to, the following
activities. A 501(c)(3) organization:
■ must absolutely refrain from participating in the
political campaigns of candidates for local, state,
or federal office
■ must restrict its lobbying activities to an insubstantial
part of its total activities
■ must ensure that its earnings do not inure to the
benefit of any private shareholder or individual
■ must not operate for the benefit of private interests
such as those of its founder, the founder’s family,
its shareholders or persons controlled by such
■ must not operate for the primary purpose of
conducting a trade or business that is not related to
its exempt purpose, such as a school’s operation of
a factory
■ may not have purposes or activities that are
illegal or violate fundamental public policy

OK my bet is on the last one. If telling a complete lie that has spun off a million conspiracy theories isn't a violation of fundamental public policy, I don't know what is--but then again, I'm not a lawyer.

Cecil Turner

Anybody else got any theories?

Sorry, I'm just not that creative. I am, however, vastly amused by the whole incident . . . especially the reactions from the loyal commentariat. At this point, I don't see how anything short of a Deus ex machina moment is gonna fix it. But apparently they do (a rather inspiring display of faith, actually). Ash&Co. seem to be banning criticism, which undoubtedly makes for some hefty selection bias, but there's still a bunch of seriously deluded folks on that board. Scary.

Bill in AZ

StrewthOut - "Rove waived his indictment"

For some reason StrewthOut, Leopold, and Ash continue to remind me of the Steven Wright joke...

"I woke up one morning and all of my stuff had been stolen...and replaced by exact duplicates"


"That leaves the most important question: If our sources maintain that a grand jury has returned an indictment - and we have pointed to a criminal case number that we are told corresponds to it - then how is it possible that Patrick Fitzgerald is reported to have said that 'he does not anticipate seeking charges against Rove at this time?' That is a very troubling question, and the truth is, we do not yet have a definitive answer. We also continue to be very troubled that NO ONE HAS SEEN THE REPORTED COMMUNICATION from Fitzgerald to Rove's attorney Robert Luskin, and MORE IMPORTANTLY, how so much public judgment could be based on a communication that LUSKIN WILL NOT PUT ON THE TABLE."

No doubt, we will have to wait for Luskin's
cat, or rat, to be forthcoming.


OK, Here ya go:



You have to hand it to truth out.Unlike everyone else they will not take Luskin at his word..and Ftiz' failure to counter that statement as proof that Rove was not indicted.. Maestro,"a chorus of I Believe, please."


Just a few things to remember:

a) Patton Boggs are DEMOCRATS

b) If Luskin is a liar, his high powered lawyering career is up in ashes (like Ash's). Now, I know he likes Karl, but really.

He is under NO obligation to release that document to anyone. But knowing the genius Karl, I bet he eventually will--after the left has spent about a month foaming from the mouth and raging like lunatics.


"We also continue to be very troubled that NO ONE HAS SEEN THE REPORTED COMMUNICATION from Fitzgerald to Rove's attorney Robert Luskin, and MORE IMPORTANTLY, how so much public judgment could be based on a communication that LUSKIN WILL NOT PUT ON THE TABLE." -Truthout-

"Along with others in the White House, I took a sigh of relief" when the news broke this week that Rove would not be charged in the CIA leak investigation, Bush told reporters in a Rose Garden news conference. "I trust Karl Rove." A senior White House official said Bush and his staff are eager to "put this behind us as quickly as possible." WaPo Bush Reaffirms His Confidence in Rove

Does any sensible person think Luskin/Rove would be so foolish as to lie to the President?

Barney Frank

verner, clarice,

Perhaps it is only limited to campaigning. As I recall they allow non profits to, for instance, discuss differing candidates positions but not reccomend how to vote.
Wonder what the archives of Truthout look like around election time in 2004 for instance? Recommending how people vote maybe? Seems like Clinton was using the IRS along these lines to harrass people he didn't like.

If either of you know anyone at The American Spectator they might know. I've been a subscriber for many years and I know they have a tax exempt foundation that is seperate from the magazine. There must be a reason for that.

Jim Glass
Leopold, you may recall, is the freelance reporter who was caught making stuff up in a 2002 Salon.com article, self-admittedly "getting it completely wrong" in pieces for Dow Jones, and had his own memoir cancelled because of concerns over the accuracy of quotations....
And after most of that, Paul Krugman, one may recall, used Leopold as his source for his story on how Thomas White was an "evil", "evil" man, on the strength of the the damning White e-mail that Leopold supplied him that ... oooops.

One might also remember how, after that fiasco of a story blew up, Krugman said he felt so bad about it and apologized to ... Leopold.

One of my favorite Paul Krugman/NY Times High Integrity Moments.


I'm gonna stick with supporting Leopold (hahaha, you laugh) - he was IDed and conned by some Rovian cabal IMO. Keep hope preserved.


Truth out's October 2004 indicates then that donations to the website were not tax deductible. I suspect that they have divided up the operations to comply with the law , but given what nincompoops they have proven to be they may not have been sufficiently punctillious.

Cecil Turner

I'm gonna stick with supporting Leopold (hahaha, you laugh) - he was IDed and conned by some Rovian cabal IMO.

Sorry, but that doesn't work. The current TruthOut story line is that Rove has been indicted:

Fitzgerald appears to have used the indictment, and more importantly, the fear that it would go public, to extract information about the Plame outing case from Rove.
If you think he was conned, then they have to be lying now.


Sorry, I'm just catching up with the recent news... so, show me the letter damn it!

Keep hope bemused.


Yeah you have to believe that Fitz LEAKED the indictment to Leopold, in order to force Rove to come to the table...

It's absurd.

Barney Frank


Like I said earlier tax deductibility is not really the test. A 501(c)3 can be (I think) either just tax exempt or both tax exempt and tax deductible. 501(c)5's may come into it somewhere as the tax exempt only orgs. I used to serve on a board of a tax exempt but not deductible organization but its all getting fuzzy. Its been too long.
I think its more research than any of us want to do. Non profit tax laws are even more arcane than for profit ones in some ways.


Some more relevatory comments from talkleft

The best reason to stand by Leopold, TruthOut and their determined stance is because it has yet to be proven otherwise. There are too many realistic possibilities that fit their account and the contradictions are the carefully chosen words of Luskin and Fitzgerald. Those specific claims can be true and also allow Leopold/TruthOut's claims to be true.

It seems to me that as good an answer as any to Ash's question could be that Fitgerald has no need to 'anticipate seeking charges against Rove' because he has already indicted him, and has no need to seek more charges at this time.

Crazy logic.

Gabriel Sutherland

Marc Ash was paid $125,835.00 in 2005 according to their 990.

Truthout paid William Rivers Pitt $53,450.00 in 2005 for "writing".

As a 501(c)3 they ddo not have to publicly disclose their funding sources. To determine their funding one would have to troll the various grants made by Tides, Soros, et al.

Barney Frank

Sorry, meant 501(c)4.


Here's a decent article. Wikipedia is hit or miss but this one's pretty decent.
Sounds like TO should be a (c)4 not a (c)3.

Gabriel Sutherland

501(c)3 organizations pay taxes on limited expenditures. Individual salaries are obligated to witholding FICA and income taxes. Contributions made to a (c)3 are tax deductible up to $10,000 per year unless it has changed recently.

Large grants must be reported to the IRS, but they do not have to be disclosed in the recipient organization's 990. You must go to the source of the funding, ie Soros.

Barney Frank

Isn't a private operating foundation still a 501(c)3? The only difference being donations aren't tax deductible. I used to know this stuff from soup to nuts, now its all a fog.

I believe a 501(c)3 or 4 has to spend a certain amount of its income directly on its public purpose. Can't remember how much, but if TO had income of 600K and those two alone gobbled up nearly a third of its gross income as salary they may have a problem.

That's a favorite scam of conmen. Start a non profit and drain it with salaries.

Gabriel Sutherland

Barney: All the magazines have a foundation where they dump the money. They, American Spectator, Washington Monthly, Weekly Standard, Harpers, The Nation, National Review, operate in the red year after year. They are supported through gifts made to their affiliated foundations that hold the money. The money is then transferred between the entities to support their "educational" mission.

Truthout should not have endorsed or advocated any position in support or opposition to candidates for political office. If they did, they are in violation of IRS tax code and should be reported through multiple parties of review.

People don't, but they should know that most political publications, and other subjects as well, do not survive entirely on subscription rates, street sales, and advertising. Most need private financial support through their affiliated foundation.

Gabriel Sutherland

Barney: You can review the Truthout 2005 990 at Guidestar. They report receiving just over $600,000 in 2003 to carry out their mission. This is very suspicious to me because that would be the primetime that the "Bush Out" partners(Soros, Peter Lewis, Sandlers of San Francisco) were throwing money around like it was penny candy in a parade.

It's unclear from their 990 if Truthout has received any additional funding since 2003. They may simply be operating on that money until it runs out.

It does happen quite often in 501(c)3 giving where a wealthy anonymous donor will give the organzation X number of dollars in order to use that money to seek matching gifts. What the organization receives in matching gifts the anonymous donor will allow the organization to keep. The remaining money will just be there for the organization to count as its holdings until the donor wishes to take it back.

I'll keep looking around to see if Truthout has received any additional money since 2003. I would think they must be receiving funds as they are paying out nearly $200,000 per year to Marc Ash and William Rivers Pitt. Some anonymous donor is out there maintaining a left wing opinion farm team that they can use when they need it.


It's been years since I dealt with that stuff..and I don't want to bother going thru it again. And 527's have to be looked at, too.

Barney Frank

Thanks for the info Gabriel.

I distinctly remember the non profit i was on the board of being audited several years ago. There was some rule regarding direct expenditures for its public purpose as a percentage of income that had to be met to maintain exempt status. This was a private operating foundation. And I don't believe salaries qualified, but I could be wrong on that. Kind of hard for an 'educational foundation' to spend much on anything else.

Barney Frank

"It's been years since I dealt with that stuff..and I don't want to bother going thru it again."

Same here. Its one reason I didn't mind leaving the thing. The regs were a bottomless pit for part time amateurs, although we were up to snuff during the audit.


shucks, I am very late to the party but (and sorry if this obviousness has been pointed out)

If you like simple answers or quick resolutions, turn back now.

um...anyone else wonder why they gave themselves the name TRUTHOUT?


Breaking News! Karl Rove Executed!

Humor alert.


Lesley, That's hilarious!

The comments to this entry are closed.