“Fake but accurate” strikes again...
The article was carefully reported, written, and edited, and we stand by the story both in its broad thrust and, except as noted, in its particular details.
So an article that has required no less than three corrections, and is still questionable (at best) is what passes for "carefully reported, written, and edited" by the NYT? My my, well, that tells us all we need to know about the standards (or lack thereof) at the NYT.
As the primary propaganda organ for the Democrat party, the New York Times had to be gnashing its teeth just to admit the few errors it owned up to. I wouldn’t expect anything more from that toilet tissue.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/08/the-times-doubles-down-on-its-issa-smear.php
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/08/the-times-doubles-down-cont.php
Two good articles from Power Line.
Layers and layers of fact ejectors.