Sorry to revisit this but it keeps coming back like a bad penny [View all]
Today on NPR's Talk of the Nation one segment was about political opponent research, those who's job is to dig up every bit of dirt about an opponent. Neal Conan had a Democrat and a Republican researcher on the show.
The Republican at one point said that the Washington Post's story wasn't well researched because it has unraveled. The comment did fit into the context of the current point being made and neither Neil nor the Democrat chose to challenge this claim. It may be because of an off air agreement to not get into a debate on current issues or it may be because it is true.
The only thing which I have heard on the subject was a Fox News claim that according to ABC News, one of the five had said they were not present during Romney's attack. But, from what I understand the person ABC was talking about was a sixth person whom the Romney campaign had contacted to dispute the report. The sixth person said he wasn't there, so he didn't know and wasn't sure if he would help the campaign saying Romney was not that bad in high school. He then added that he felt the campaign would have problems finding many people who would agree that Romney was a good guy in high school.
Has there been any real unraveling of the Washington Post's story? Or is that just Republican wishes which they think if they say it enough it will be true, or at least people will believe it?
= new reply since forum marked as read