Less than two weeks after Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp (a.k.a. the "Baghdad Diarist") claimed he was "willing to stand by the entirety of my articles for the New Republic using my real name," comes the breaking news that Beauchamp's name is, though fancy, apparently not worth very much.

"Beauchamp…has signed a sworn statement admitting that all three articles he published in the New Republic were exaggerations and falsehoods," writes the Weekly Standard, adding that the "fabrications contain[ed] only "a smidgen of truth," in the words of a source."

In further disappointing news for Beauchamp, he's just been informed that he has approximately zero chance of parlaying his highly publicized faux-pas into a major motion picture (inspired by actual events!) starring Hayden Christensen as the unconvincing lead, Chloe Sevigny as the offbeat love-interest who doesn't really pan out and a before-he-was-famous Peter Sarsgaard in the role of crack-editor/real life douchebag Charles "Chuck" Lane.

Take that, Weekly Standard. In The New Republic's ongoing saga about its "Baghdad Diarist" column (keep up, people), EIC Franklin Foer and his team claim to have vetted and confirmed every detail about Scott Thomas Beauchamp's heavily contested accounts of U.S. solider life in Iraq.

Well, except for one: The place where soldiers mocked a woman disfigured by a bomb explosion. It was not in Baghdad, but Kuwait. Aside from that, the magazines says they "place great weight on the corroborations we have received, [but] we wished to know more." Unfortunately, the U.S. military began its own investigation into Beauchamp's claims – like soliders running over a dog, or playing with the skulls of Iraqi children – and cut his phone and computer access for speaking so publicly.

Which, if you believe many conservative bloggers' viewpoint, is exactly what TNR would've wanted: Another excuse to play pick-and-choose journalism and finger the military as evildoers. As for the Weekly Standard's Michael Goldfarb, well, he's still not satisfied.

Did The New Republic enlist Scott Thomas Beauchamp to write "Baghdad Diarist" because they wanted Iraq war "reporting" that fit their political agenda? Who cares — when there's this gossip point: Beauchamp "is married to a reporter-researcher at the New Republic, Elspeth Reeve."

"Right now, we have no reason to believe that his stories are anything other than what we first suspected them to be: a 'pastiche of the 'This is no bullshit . . . stories soldiers like to tell.'" That's The Weekly Standard's response to the self-outing of Scott Thomas Beauchamp, otherwise known as The New Republic's "Baghdad Diarist" whose Iraq war accounts have been, let's say, "questioned." As the solider tells it: "My pieces were always intended to provide my discrete view of the war; they were never intended as a reflection of the entire U.S. Military. I wanted Americans to have one soldier's view of events in Iraq."

But that's still not good enough for the Standard's Michael Goldfarb, who wants dates and names to go along with Beauchamp's trio of tales. It's like their insisting on accuracy and accountability or something.