From Holden:

Avowed right-wing blog Ace of Spades conducted a telephone interview with “Jeff Gannon” and despite a stated bias towards JimJeff’s take on reality the “Ace” was so disappointed with the subject’s mendacious answers that he nearly junked the interview entirely.

“Ace” descibed the experience thusly.

You should know that there seemed to be a misunderstanding about what sort of interview this would be. Jeff [sic] thought it would be a mostly humorous intereview. But I didn’t go that way…

Had this been a phone interview, I would have quickly realized there were certain areas he just wasn’t getting into and dropped the point to avoid the tedium.

He even considered reconstructing the entire interview to downplay the lies.

I should also say that I had thought maybe I would re-arrange the questions, so the questions where he gave more expansive answers would come first, and the questions he disputed would come later– to avoid the reader having to read through a series of demurers [sic] and denials.

So what can we glean from “Ace”‘s efforts?

After providing several different versions about just how he happened to get his hands on a fraudulent memo about Valerie Plame, JimJeff is no longer addressing the subject.

Q: This may be a question you don’t want to answer, but you’ve given unclear statements about whether or not you saw memos regarding Valerie Plame. Did you? And what sort of memos if you did? And, importantly, can you at least say when you saw memos when you did — was it after the general revelations about the matter, or before?

JG: Because of the ongoing investigation into the “leak” of Valerie Plame’s identity, I cannot comment further, especially since Congressional Democrats have asked the Special Prosecutor to interview me again. Sorry to disappoint, but this is what I’m paying lawyers to tell me.

He did not lie to Wolf Blitzer, he created those gay prostitution web sites for a “client”.

Q: It appears that some of your earlier statements about your websites — that you were just registering them as part of your job, for someone else — were untrue.

JG: What I said to Wolf Blitzer on CNN regarding those sites is 100% true. They were reserved for a private client who never moved forward with website development of any kind. These domain names were never hosted nor was anything every posted to them.

In fact, he never lied about anything.

Q: First, give us your general state of mind during these revelations about you, and what caused you to lie. I imagine you didn’t have access to a PR person or crisis management expert, and so you were flying by the seat of your pants; but did you think that you could put your critics off the chase, or were you just too surprised and anxious to the point where you weren’t even thinking clearly?

JG: This question is so wrong in its premise that I won’t even begin to answer it.

No, really, JimJeff is as honest as a dewey spring morning.

Q: Do you imagine that there might have been a better outcome had you been more truthful from the outset, or at least declined to answer questions at all? Or did you think you were sort of cooked at that point, and that trying to avoid further digging was your only realistic alternative?

JG: Again, you are assuming something that isn’t accurate.

Q: Do you think that any of your dishonesty about your past history was a betrayal to either your employers or the White House?

JG: Once again, there was no dishonesty. Anything my past had nothing to do with my reporting.

JimJeff never said or wrote anything that any resonable human being might consider homophobic.

Q: In an article you called Kerry potentially the “first gay president.” Coming from a conservative writer, that reads as an attack; it might read differently coming from a gay activist writing for The Advocate. What did you mean by that? Do you think your critics are right to point out any hypocrisy on the basis of that statement? And did you feel that, in order to please a conservative audience, you needed to make somewhat-derogatory statements about homosexuality?

JG: I didn’t do any such thing, I wrote a solid article that few of the people making these allegations have even read.

Oh, and he’s NOT GAY!!! You hear that, JimJeff is NOT GAY!!!! You just won’t believe how NOT GAY this guy is.

Q: Jim also wants to know, basically, about your feelings about the Republican Party’s acceptance of gays? How great is the tension there? How difficult is it to be gay and Republican?

JG: The Republican Party appears to me to be much more inclusive than the liberal media wants to report. Those who do not embrace the entire pro-homosexual agenda are painted by the Left to be intolerant or homophobic, when in fact the Left has a radicalized position not shared by most Americans, Republican or Democrat.

I don’t feel qualified to answer the other two questions.

There you have it. Wingers can stop calling us hypocrites on the issue of JimJeff’s gayness, ’cause he’s REALLY NOT GAY.