As Twitchy reported, both The Washington Post and The New York Times have issued corrections, indicating that Nathan Phillips did not serve in Vietnam as he claimed.

When the first, edited clip of the Covington Catholic High School boys emerged, a lot of reporters relied on the reporting of Indian Country Today for their background on Phillips, and that’s likely where most news sources got the idea that Phillips was a Vietnam combat veteran.

Now, Indian Country Today is going all the way back to 2008 to correct an article in which Phillips described how he was spit on when he returned home from Vietnam.

“Phillips also described coming back to the U.S. as a veteran of the Vietnam era” — but back from where? Not Vietnam.

Now the article has this note:

Note: This article has been adjusted from it’s original version to show that Nathan Phillips was a Vietnam-era veteran and that he was spit on while in uniform as opposed to when he was returning from combat.

Pardon us for being skeptical, but how are we supposed to believe he was ever spit on by anyone? And what does “as opposed to when he was returning from combat” mean in that context? Returning from combat where?

While we’re at it, Vogue published an absolutely fawning piece on Phillips (“The Power of Nathan Phillips’s Song”) by someone who claimed to know him personally but had no idea he hadn’t served in Vietnam.