That was yesterday.
Today, if you look at the NYT story you realize the article went on to prove absolutely nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch.
No proof whatsoever of the “evidence” (which was highlighted by the weird wording “had the evidence” — does that mean he no longer “has” it?) Still, the claim was shocking. And it directly targeted a sitting U.S. governor, who just happens to be the front-runner for the Republican nomination for president in 2016.It seems as time went on the so-called evidence became a much smaller part of the story and then seemed to disappear. Not that the original story won't still plague the governor even if it is found that the former aide lied. It will be the first report that every one will remember and that will color their perception of Christie.
And one might wonder why the newspaper didn’t ask the very first question nearly anyone else would ask when presented with such a claim: “Uh, OK, you say you have evidence, can we see it?” Then, if said evidence didn’t pan out, it’d be Spike City for the big scoop.
But no, The Times ran with the piece, which made the follow-on media follow on the story throughout the day. But few noticed the way the lede was changed — in less than 20 minutes.
But then again, that's how the LSM's character assassination machine works – come out with some story that makes all kinds of accusations without a shred of proof, let the other media outlets run with it, and then quietly print a less damning article later that is, for all intents and purposes, a retraction, and bury it somewhere on page 27. By then the damage is done and now “everyone knows” that the subject of the smear campaign is a crook/lowlife/not-a-nice-guy even though there's not on shred of proof to back it up. What used to be the news is now nothing more than gossip or propaganda pushing an agenda, and one that is more often than not something that isn't good for the American people.
And so it goes with Governor Chris Christie.