Apparently the AP isn't the only one who has botched the story of the IG's report. The Washington Post has major egg on its face today. We're talking "crawl under the desk" and "wake me when it's over" kinds of egg.
As Hot Air says,
They’re calling it a “correction,” but is it really a correction if you’re quoting from an entirely different document than the one you thought you were? And your story kinda sorta hinges on which one it was?
....Got that? The big scoop was that the Pentagon itself had concluded that Feith floated bogus intel on the links between Iraq and AQ and suggested that he’d done so at Bush/Cheney’s behest. Except the Pentagon didn’t conclude that. Anti-war Democrat Carl Levin did.
Wow.
UPDATE: Sensible Mom has a... well... sensible point:
Most shocking is the obvious fact that the reporter and editor never read the IG's report. If they had, they would have realized the quotes were wrong. Do they proofread their work or is the rush to judgment more important?
Ace of Spades makes another good point:
"Confirmation bias," they call it-- the press simply will run anti-Republican stories that ought to sound a little implausible or sketchy because, to them, they sound pretty darn reasonable. Such "facts" are "self-checking" -- they just prove themselves by how wonderfully they fit in with the liberal worldview.
