Coincidence? I don’t think so.
Over at the Washington Examiner, Byron York cites corrections New York Times editors (or writer Eric Lipton himself?) made from the original online version of their story attacking House Minority Leader John Boehner for his ties to lobbyists, corrections which reveal the method behind the Old Gray Lady’s “hatchet job“:
The statement that a lobbyist “won” Boehner’s backing was changed to one in which a lobbyist “sought” Boehner’s backing. That’s a rather critical change. The Times also added Boehner’s defense that these were long-held positions.
We should also note that Lipton doesn’t name this lobbyist in his article while a named Boehner staffer.
Boehner Spokesman Michael Steel, however, was wiling to explain to the Times why his boss voted the way he did on the issues where the paper alleged lobbyist influence:
Steel says he received a fact-checking email from Times reporter Eric Lipton Friday evening asking if Boehner did in fact oppose the cap on greenhouse gases, the tax change for hedge fund executives, the debit card fee cap, and increased fees on oil and gas companies. “Yes, that is correct,” Steel responded to Lipton, adding “I can tell you why, if you care.” Steel says he received no further notes from Lipton.
This gruel, as they say, is pretty thin, with John Steele Gordon at Commentary Contentions wondering if Boehner’s ties to lobbyists are “‘especially tight’? Who knows? The Times gives no examples whatever of the dealings of other Congressional leaders with lobbyists“: (more…)