That's what the AP reports:
The Army said this week it had concluded an investigation of Beauchamp's claims and found them false.
"During that investigation, all the soldiers from his unit refuted all claims that Pvt. Beauchamp made in his blog," Sgt. 1st Class Robert Timmons, a spokesman in Baghdad for the 4th Brigade, 1st Infantry Division, based at Fort Riley, Kan., said in an e-mail interview.
The Weekly Standard said Beauchamp signed a sworn statement admitting all three articles were exaggerations and falsehoods.
Calls to Editor Franklin Foer at The New Republic in Washington were not returned, but the magazine said on its Web site that it has conducted its own investigation and stands by Beauchamp's work.
One can parse the language here, but unless Beauchamp comes forward to say otherwise...it's pretty clear the New Republic is standing by a story that even the author does not stand by.
On July 26, TNR published an indignant statement from Beauchamp in which the private said he would "stand by the entirety" of his articles. Since then, the New Republic has been forced to admit at least one "significant error" in his work. Beauchamp has made no further public statements.
I discussed this with Military.com editor Ward Carroll yesterday, listen here. And there's more reaction to the AP story around the web.