Are you talking about the story about the hoax? The hoax was a hoax. It’s everywhere on the internet.
11/12/2008 Fox news reports that Cameron was not the victim of a hoax but that MSNBC and NY Times were. Fox stands by the story to this day as far as I can find.
The liberal blogger I think you are referring to, Eisenstadt, in Nov. published that he was the source of the Africa thing and said he made it all up. The liberal media flew with it and made Cameron look bad. FOX quickly reported that Eisenstadt wasn’t the source forcing MSNBC and NY Times to retract their claims and admit THEY didn’t vet Eisenstadt.
So what about the Africa claim? Per Fox website, “The hoax was limited to the identity of the source in the story about Palin _ not the Fox News story itself. While Palin has denied that she mistook Africa for a country, the veracity of that report was not put in question by the revelation that Eisenstadt is a phony”
Here is the last link.
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_wires/2008Nov12/0,4675,PalinHoax,00.html
Anything retracting the story by Fox? Not that I can find. Cameron and Fox stand by it.
I’ve given enough comment on the Fey thing
Oh then it must be true. It's on snopes and factcheck./s
11/12/2008 Fox news reports that Cameron was not the victim of a hoax but that MSNBC and NY Times were. Fox stands by the story to this day as far as I can find.
Sure... because they are too cowardly to admit they were also victims of the hoax. "Standing by the story" is worthless if Cameron won't disclose his source. If the source is valid, Cameron has to disclose it. Otherwise it's just amateurish grandstanding. Again you seem to take every word by Cameron and Fox for gospel.
The liberal media flew with it and made Cameron look bad.
There is one MSM and Cameron is part of it. He is not the "victim" of the liberal media you paint him to be. What made him look bad was his own reckless and amateurish reporting.
Anything retracting the story by Fox? Not that I can find. Cameron and Fox stand by it.
The Obama camp also stand by their lies. Yet they won't disclose dozens of documents on Obama. I guess their word is good enough for you. Only because they stand by a lie, doesn't make it true. Palin and McCain's staff called it absurd and offered counter evidence (Palin's knowledge about Darfur i.e.). Yet Cameron standing by his claim, while not disclosing his "source" is good enough for you.
Figures. You believe it, because you want it to be true. Meh.
Just answer me one question: Why hasn't Cameron disclosed his source?