Leopold sets the record straight: Part one

I received two additional emails from Jason Leopold of Truthout.org of two items that he wanted me to post on the blog. From those who are not familiar with the reporter Jason Leopold, Jason has been one of the few quality reporters who reported alot more inside information to the public about the CIA Leak Investigation from beginning to end. I had read and followed Jason's reporting from the beginning of the leak investigation. And he has been very accurate in his reportings and the truth behind the cover-up by the Administration in the leak investigation. A lot of Jason's reporting has been overshadowed. Jason also was way ahead of reporting his findings in the leak investigation than the media. In May 2006, Jason received very heavy scrutiny from readers , media, and journalists about his article in May of that year (06 cr 128 Sealed vs. Sealed document) about Karl Rove being indicted by Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald didn't charged Rove. Fitzgerald's actions still remained a mystery as both Patrick Fitzgerald and Jason became victims of scrunity and received a black eye from the media. With the current rising scandal of the missing White House emails, we hope this will shed some light to how the White House made sure that these two people, Fitzgerald and Leopold, would never be close to the truth. And I hope in time that both names, Fitzgerald and Leopold, are finally cleared and restored. Here is a letter emailed to me by Jason:

June 19, 2006

VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL
Evan Cornog, Publisher
Columbia Journalism Review
Journalism Building
2950 Broadway
Columbia University
New York, New York 10027
Re: Jason Leopold / "Three Strikes, You're Out ­ Jason Leopold Caught Sourceless Again" by Paul McLeary

Dear Mr Cornog:

I am writing on behalf of our client, Jason Leopold, with respect to thearticle written by Paul McLeary and published by Columbia Journalism Reviewon June 13, 2006. The article contains a series of false and defamatorystatements concerning our client, Jason Leopold.

We request that Columbia Journalism Review, CJRdaily, Paul McLeary, and theUniversity of Columbia School of Journalism ("CJR"):

Issue an immediate written correction and retraction of those defamatorystatements and publish such correction and retraction in substantially asconspicuous a manner as the original defamatory publication(s), in a regularissue thereof published or broadcast;

Immediately remove, and cease and desist from publishing any furtherdefamatory statements concerning Mr. Leopold; and

CJR immediately identify in writing any and all media, editors, andpublishers to whom CJR has sent the subject article, including via email,and immediately advise all such media of the correction and retractiondemanded herein.

The defamatory statements concerning Mr. Leopold in the subject article areas follows:

"Jason Leopold Caught Sourceless Again"

The statement that Mr. Leopold has been caught sourceless on multipleoccasions is untrue."We wonder if the folks over at Truthout.org are rethinking theiraffiliation with reporter and serial fabulist Jason Leopold."

The true facts are that Mr. Leopold is not a "serial fabulist"."Leopold, you may recall, is the freelance reporter who was caught makingstuff up in a 2002 Salon.com article, and had his own memoir cancelledbecause of concerns of the accuracy of quotations."

"But the book was not to be"The true facts are that Mr. Leopold was never "caught making stuff up in a 2002 Salon.com article"

The true facts are that Mr. Leopold's book was not only published but was on Los Angeles Times Bestseller List at the time this article was published.While it is certainly fair to note that Mr. Leopold's first publisher did not publish Mr. Leopold's book, it is not acceptable to defame Mr. Leopold with the false claim that his book was cancelled because of concerns overaccuracy or to imply, as the article does, that the book was not to be, andwas never published."Leopold¹s latest addition to his application for membership in the StephenGlass school of journalism came on May 12 of this year..."Stephen Glass is know for being an admitted liar and fabricator of stories.The clear implication is that Mr. Leopold is also a fabricator is stories.


Mr. Leopold is not a fabricator of stories.After all this certainty comes Leopold's latest version of the story,published yesterday, where he writes that he based his original article "onsingle source information and general background information obtained fromexperts. The conclusions we arrive at should be considered carefully, butnot taken as statements of fact, per se."The true facts are that Paul McLeary falsely puts these quoted words inJason Leopold's mouth making it appear that Mr. Leopold¹s work is improperlysourced and otherwise unreliable.


These words were never stated or written by Mr. Leopold, but rather appeared under a byline by Mark Ash, the Executive Director of Truthout.Leopold says that he knows "for certain" that there exists a federalindictment called "06 cr 128" which he refers to as "(Sealed vs. Sealed)"since neither party's name is on the document. He also knows that this indictment "was returned by the same grand jury that has been hearingmatters related to the Fitzgerald/Plame investigation."The true facts are that Paul McLeary falsely puts these quoted words in Mr.Leopold's mouth making it appear that Mr. Leopold's work is improperly sourced and otherwise unreliable. These words were never stated or writtenby Mr. Leopold, but rather appeared under a byline by Mark Ash, the Executive Director of Truthout.So much for what Leopold knows. Apparently, Leopold is a very religious man,because he "believes" quite a bit about the alleged indictment. He believesthat it "is directly related to the Fitzgerald/Plame investigation. That'sbased on a single credible source."


He goes on to list several other things he "believes" to be true, all fed to him by, in his words, the "same single credible source."The true facts are that Paul McLeary falsely puts these quoted words inJason Leopold¹s mouth making it appear that Mr. Leopold's work is improperlysourced and otherwise unreliable. These words were never stated or writtenby Mr. Leopold, but rather appeared under a byline by Mark Ash, theExecutive Director of Truthout."Salon removed Leopold's August 29, 2002 story about Enron from its siteafter it was discovered that he plagiarized parts from the Financial Times and was unable to provide a copy of an email that was critical to thepiece."


The true facts are that Mr. Leopold was able, and did in fact; provide theaforementioned email to Salon.com. Salon's concern had to do withauthenticating the email.The above statements are unprivileged and defamatory per se, in that theytend directly to injure Mr. Leopold in that they are an unprivileged andexpose Mr. Leopold to "to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy, or whichcauses him to be shunned or avoided, or which has a tendency to injure himin his occupation" Cal. Civ. Code § 45.Surprisingly, Mr. Leopold was never contacted for comment on this article.Quotes were wrongly attributed to Mr. Leopold and then used by the author tobolster the attack on Mr. Leopold¹s credibility. A basic investigation intoMr. Leopold reveals that his book was published and is available.

Further,Mr. Leopold's book is cited with a link on every story he writes forTruthout, including the ones Paul McLeary cites in his article. McLearyignores those facts and gives the impression to CJR's readers that Mr.Leopold's book was never published and is not available.The article has caused damage to Mr. Leopold and continues to cause himdamage. Mr. Leopold is currently promoting his book. This article is harminghis ability to secure interviews and otherwise harming him professionally.We demand that you immediately take steps to mitigate the damage yourdefamatory actions are causing.Please contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss the matter.

Sincerely,