The Washington Post media critic Erik Wemple has for many months been upfront in asking the paper to come clean about their egregiously bad reporting on the Steele dossier. We noted a couple of days ago that the Post has gone as far as to add a disclaimer of sorts to their story about the indictment of Igor Danchenko, a Russian analyst who worked on the dossier. The Post’s story on the arrest concludes this way:

The Post continues to try and work their way through without making any retractions, which Wemple says might be necessary:

Journalist Glenn Greenwald goes through what seems to be unfolding, starting with Wemple explaining why retractions might be necessary:

A media critic attempting to get comment from his own paper but to no avail just sums it all up perfectly:

They’re just hoping it all goes away. How very “journalism” of them.

LOL! If anything it’ll be buried inside the paper and in the smallest print possible.



WaPo fact-checker says Durham’s ‘stunning indictment’ means ‘Christopher Steele’s sources were really bad’ (then it gets awkward)