Will the New York Times run a front-page correction for what they reported in this piece based on information that federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald now says is incorrect? National Review‘s Byron York points out that earlier today Fitzgerald sent the following to the judge in the Libby case:
We are writing to correct a sentence from the Government’s Response to Defendant’s Third Motion to Compel Discovery, filed on April 5, 2006. The sentence, which is the second sentence of the second paragraph on page 23, reads, ‘Defendant understood that he was to tell Miller, among other things, that a key judgment of the NIE held that Iraq was ‘vigorously trying to procure’ uranium.” That sentence should read, “Defendant understood that he was to tell Miller, among other things, some of the key judgments of the NIE, and that the NIE stated that Iraq was ‘vigorously trying to procure’ uranium.”
The Washington Post has posted a piece on Fitzgerald’s correction here.
