Hell hath no fury
Frey was the proverbial deer in the headlights, largely admitting his fraud, yet still hedging on some of the most absurd points of his story. Once you get over the fact that he even agreed to appear (maybe because of the threat of legal action?), it's about what you'd expect. He's a dweeb.
It was Nan Talese's appearance that really surprised us; she was little better than he was. I think she lied repeatedly on the show. Columnists Richard Cohen of the Washington Post and Frank Rich of the New York Times came on later, underscoring that. Rich couldn't resist making an analogy to President Bush, when a far better one, one that's actually true, would have been Mary Mapes. But otherwise they argued that Frey's "memoirs" smelled from the start and that a rookie fact-checker would have found Frey out in half an hour.
Talese didn't agree, and continued portraying herself as one of the victims of Frey's deception. Would a victim plan a second printing, possibly re-edited, but for sure with a disclaimer? No, but a co-conspirator would think like this: Maybe the book is real; maybe not. If it doesn't sell, nobody will raise much of a fuss either way. If it does, I'll make a lot of money, and if he's exposed, I can just say I was taken in - as long as I don't do any fact checking.
In her defense, she said she believed Frey's account of having root canal surgery without Novocaine because an "extremely incompetent" dentist had once done that to her. I'd like to check that story, too.
As it happened, Joel Stein of the Los Angeles Times who Hugh Hewitt cross-examined into a whining puppy this week appeared in a couple of "cameo" quips. So did Maureen Dowd, another columnist who has only a casual relationship with the truth. For these two columnists to pass judgment on Frey and Talese in effect showed just how easy it is for these con artists to succeed, albeit temporarily.
Good job, good show, Oprah.