Hastings Tells Colbert: ‘Obama Used Rolling Stone Article As Excuse To Get Rid Of McChrystal’

video

by Glynnis MacNicol | 9:12 am, June 29th, 2010

» 15 comments

Rolling Stone journalist Michael Hastings has returned stateside to continue his media rounds following his bombshell article on General McChrystal that resulted in McChrystal’s firing last week. Hastings told Stephen Colbert last night that he thought the White House had used “this opportunity to get rid of someone they weren’t happy with.”

I didn’t fire McChrystal. The White House fired McChrystal. I believe they used this opportunity to get rid of someone they weren’t happy with.

If so, it’s an angle on the story that I’ve not heard reported before. In fact, the general sense is that the White House was as blind-sided by the McChrystal story as everyone else, and since the administration has essentially only changed leaders not their course in Afghanistan one wonders what they’re motivation would be to switch horses in mid-race.

That said, Hasting remarks did bring to mind a Media Decoder piece David Carr posted the other day in which he wondered if the media echo chamber was more to blame for McChrystal’s firing than anything that was said in the piece.

But those who’ve read the full piece by Michael Hastings — as opposed to just the juicy bits being tossed around cable news — might be forgiven for wondering what exactly got him whacked so quickly. Or at least, you might wonder if it has less to do with what the general said and more to do with the relentless velocity and recklessness of the modern media ecosystem.
[...]
To succeed in the eyes of the current president, it is far more important to fit in than stick out, and General McChrystal’s decision — abetted by a now departed civilian press aide — to allow a reporter to embed and watch his team’s every move left him open to charges of grandstanding. From there, it was a quick pivot to insubordination and the media seemed content to play along.

Watch the Colbert segment below.

David Carr, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, Michael Hastings, Rolling Stone, stephen colbert

Liberty Banned

Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t. Either way, President Obama doesn’t look very strong on this issue.
me1ranger

So the guy is a liar..like when he told the general that much of his comments were to be kept off the record. He knows he’ll never work in the war zone again, yet he feels like he should take every opportunity he has to put the blame on someone else. Typical lib..
http://www.facebook.com/people/Kam-Fet/572005492 Kam Fet

The media needs to answer questions regarding their disgraceful behaviour last week.
http://politicsofdestruction.com/ Bobomatic

This reporter gets high fives from the Rolling Stone editors, drinks all around, knuckle bumps from his colleagues, atta boys from white house staffers…milks the article for every last drop so he can brand his name…. and the beat goes on.
timzank

Kind of funny how the two biggest career wrecking (for the subject) and career building (for the publication) stories in recent memory came from The National Enquirer and Rolling Stone. You’d think that would embarass the “real journalists” (NYT, WAPO etc) just a fuzz….
Gruenewald Michael

I should think most of us ought to be pleased that with Mr. Hastings, at least, we have some evidence that journalism is alive and well in America. That the spa is print journalism is of no surprise to any of us, I am sure.
Gruenewald Michael

timzank said:
Kind of funny how the two biggest career wrecking (for the subject) and career building (for the publication) stories in recent memory came from The National Enquirer and Rolling Stone. You’d think that would embarass the “real journalists” (NYT, WAPO etc) just a fuzz….

Indeed, although I should think broadcast and cable news would be far more embarrassed still.
timzank

Gruenewald Michael, broadcast and cable have not really “broken” any big news that I can recall. They always report and comment but they don’t seem to dig investigatively like print journos used to.
http://SailRabbits.com Magister

As I commented to the post yesterday… now that I’ve read the article, I really don’t see the big deal.
notsofast

Diane Feinstein was correct for once. She said Petraeus should be able to ask the WH to change its civilian Afgan reps.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Chris-Jones/1384303476 Chris Jones

Hastings is a scumbag
http://www.facebook.com/people/Lee-Bailey/1359161966 Lee Bailey

Hastings already has had far more attention than he’s worth for the pathetic article he wrote and for the hatchet job he has done on an American hero. In my opinion he has shown his intelligence level through his incessant and totally unnecessary filthy language. I agree with many others…the article wasn’t a big deal and was a pitiful excuse to get rid of McChrystal, something POTUS obviously already wanted to do and needed a convenient excuse. Now can we find an equally weak excuse to fire Hastings and send him into the journalistic Siberia he deserves?
timzank

Lee Bailey,

“Now can we find an equally weak excuse to fire Hastings and send him into the journalistic Siberia he deserves?”

He’ll be a hero at Rolling Stone for some time to come but he’ll find it tough to do any more “investigative” type stories or meaningful interviews because no one (as a subject) is going to let him within a mile.
Munch

I would like to hear from the guys who were wrote about to see if they thought any of the stuff he wrote about was off the record.
libra blue

If McChrystal’s people had done their homework they would have come across the 2008 GQ article that really spelled out what a hack Hastings is.

I don’t like this war, but In the interview it was more than obvious that Hastings didn’t really care what was going on in the war he was out to sandbag McChrystal and promote his own agenda to get his 15 minutes. His modus operandi is all over the GQ article.

I am not a big fan of Geraldo’s, but I think he got this one right. I am disappointed that Anderson didn’t try to challenge Hastings at all. He acted like he was unaware of Hastings’ sordid reputation.