Chris Christie, whose political career is nothing if not an immaculate monument to classy conduct, has called out the New York Times on its "sloppy" coverage of former Port Authority official David Wildstein's claims about evidence that Chris Christie knew about the plot to close traffic lanes in Fort Lee.
In a document compiled by Christie's office, and obtained by hack news organization The Daily Caller, the governor's office outlines how the New York Times softened their language in the hours after publishing a story that described Wildstein's accusations. After first reporting that Wildstein claimed to possess evidence that Christie knew about the closures, the Times massaged the copy to say that Wildstein claimed evidence existed—a not insignificant distinction.
Christie's document came only minutes after the Times public editor lambasted the paper for not issuing a correction. The public editor, Margaret Sullivan wrote, "This change was more than a nuance. Acknowledging that could have taken the form of a straightforward correction. The change also could have been explained in an editor’s note or could even have been acknowledged in a sentence in the body of the article."
Does any of this deflect from the ongoing implosion of Chris Christie, politician? Oh no, no, no. Yet another aide to Christie has jumped ship, this time it's Christina Genovese Renna, the director of departmental relations in the governor’s office. Seems like relations have been pretty bad, lately.
On top of that, the first batch of documents relating to the traffic scandal that were subpoenaed by the state legislature arrived over the weekend. Surely, the most incriminating ones will see the light of day very soon (assuming incriminating documents in fact exist, of course—we wouldn't want to be sloppy and presume).
Here's the Christie document detailing the New York Times' sloppy work: