Max Blumenthal is attempting to stand behind his story.

His article at Salon.com remains unchanged even though the Village Voice and Dave Weigel at The Washington Independent have written detailed corrections contradicting Blumenthal’s post.

At his personal website he recounts a discussion he had with “Isis,” a photographer who, according to Blumenthal “does tend to be a little apprehensive about speaking to folks.” It seems that at this point, “Isis” is the last remaining eyewitness that Blumenthal says supports his assertions made on Wednesday at Salon.com.

As a reminder, here are the assertions that Salon.com made that “Isis” is supposed to corroborate (there are many, many more false allegations at Salon.com, and Blumenthal has not made any attempt to retract or explain them, but these are the assertions that are related to the mysterious “Isis”):

  1. In 2006, James O’Keefe “planned an event” with Marcus Epstein.

  2. The event was a “White Nationalist Conference” or “White Nationalist Confab.”

  3. While there, Mr. O’Keefe manned a table full of racist literature.

To back up his story, Blumenthal recounts a conversation he had today with “Isis”:

“What I told Weigel and what I told him to quote me as saying, is that O’Keefe was involved the same way you would be involved if you went to a party and you put out the cups and stocked the cooler,” Isis told me. “He was helping Marcus Epstein in the execution of the event so I don’t see what the issue is. It was obvious that he was there supporting the event and was involved in its execution.”

Isis added more about her discussion with Weigel. “I told him the same thing I told you,” she remarked to me. “O’Keefe and Luke Pelican and the Leadership guys helped Epstein because they were friends with Marcus [Epstein], and they are friends with him because they agree with his views on the race stuff. And I told him when O’Keefe got there he was helping Marcus set the event up. Nitpicking over where he sat is bullshit. I mean, enough is enough. They were there; they were helping out with the event and they can’t deny that.”

Remember, this is what Salon.com’s journalist Max Blumenthal is using to support his article. This is what he offers as proof and justification for smearing a man. For calling a man a racist and a white supremacist. This is the foundation of his article.

“What I told Weigel and what I told him to quote me as saying, is that O’Keefe was involved the same way you would be involved if you went to a party and you put out the cups and stocked the cooler,”

Does that quote support the assertion that O’Keefe “planned” the event with Epstein? And, why are there no examples as to what O’Keefe was allegedly doing? “Isis” uses a metaphor — “if you went to a party and you put out the cups and stocked the cooler” — but not actual facts? Wouldn’t a journalist building a foundation for an article that labels a man a racist and a white supremacist ask a follow-up question like: “Isis, what, precisely did you see O’Keefe doing?”?


“He was helping Marcus Epstein in the execution of the event so I don’t see what the issue is. It was obvious that he was there supporting the event and was involved in its execution.”

Again, what does this mean? What, specifically was entailed in the “execution” of the event? If it was so obvious to “Isis” why has she not been able to cite one example of something O’Keefe did? And, why has Salon.com not demanded this from their reporter before labeling a man as a racist on their very highly-trafficked pages?

Isis added more about her discussion with Weigel. “I told him the same thing I told you,” she remarked to me. “O’Keefe and Luke Pelican and the Leadership guys helped Epstein because they were friends with Marcus [Epstein], and they are friends with him because they agree with his views on the race stuff.

Ah, well now we get to the crux of it, don’t we? “Isis” is giving her eyewitness account of the event, and somehow she has the ability to read these racists thoughts, doesn’t she? This statement tells us everything we need to know about her take on the people in this room. Those people at Leadership Institute agree with his racist views. They are all racists.


And I told him when O’Keefe got there he was helping Marcus set the event up. Nitpicking over where he sat is bullshit. I mean, enough is enough. They were there; they were helping out with the event and they can’t deny that.

Well, O’Keefe hasn’t denied he was there. But, the allegation in Salon.com was not that he was there, but that he planned it and he manned a table of literature. Given that the charge in Salon.com gave only one actual detail about a task that O’Keefe was alleged to have performed, I think it is not “nitpicking” to ask if he was actually sitting at a table full of literature that he has been accused of “manning”. But, in this quote, Mr. Blumenthal and Salon.com’s star witness brush that detail aside as “nitpicking.”

Let’s review:


Does Salon.com believe that the quotes from “Isis” support this charge?

This has been refuted by many sources. The event was a debate with three panelists. One black conservative from the National Center for Public Policy Research (who has also demanded a correction to Salon.com’s article), a writer for National Review, and a man who holds racist views.

Does Salon.com really think that this rises to the level of “White Nationalist Conference”?

Does Salon.com agree with “Isis” that it is just “nitpicking” to ask whether O’Keefe was actually at the table they claim he was manning?

And, does Salon.com agree with “Isis” that it is obvious they were helping because: “the Leadership guys helped Epstein because they were friends with Marcus [Epstein], and they are friends with him because they agree with his views on the race stuff.”

Maybe this opinion that “Isis” expresses is the real reason why Blumenthal and Salon.com didn’t ask the extra couple of questions about this story that they should have. You see, this story, when presented to someone on the left, seems perfectly reasonable and obvious. “Of course James O’Keefe is a racist, he’s a conservative!” But someone on the right hears this story and they ask: “What? That can’t be true. Give me more information on this. Prove it.”

The trouble is, I doubt there is anyone in a leadership or management position at Salon.com who is from the right. Someone who has the authority to see an article like this and ask the extra couple of questions that a conservative would have asked.

And that is the real problem.