On Friday, Joe Nocera at the New York Times, in the words of a February 4 Times correction, premised his op-ed column "about the indictment of the longtime New York State Assembly speaker, Sheldon Silver ... on several factual errors."
The correction failed to correct yet another factual error, namely that Silver, who was arrested, as the Times itself reported, on January 22, has not yet been formally indicted. Here is the full text of that correction (HT Instapundit; bolds are mine throughout this post):
Joe Nocera’s column on Saturday, about the indictment of the longtime New York State Assembly speaker, Sheldon Silver, was premised on several factual errors.
The column misidentified the person who in 2008 placed Arthur Luxenberg, a lawyer who represents people exposed to asbestos, on a panel that recommends judicial appointments. It was Mr. Silver, not Jonathan Lippman, chief judge of the State Court of Appeals.
The column also suggested that Mr. Luxenberg’s role on that panel resulted in the appointment of a judge, Sherry Klein Heitler, to lead New York City’s dedicated asbestos court. In fact, the panel had no involvement in that appointment.
Finally, the column implied that Mr. Silver rewarded the judiciary with a pay increase. While Mr. Silver’s appointee to a state commission on judicial pay did cast a deciding vote in 2011 for a pay raise, as the column noted, the appointee actually voted against an even greater pay increase favored by some members of the commission.
One will search in vain for an identification of Silver's Democratic party affiliation in the above correction.
One will also search in vain for an identification of Silver's Democratic party affiliation in Nocera's original column.
A New York Sun editorial noted that the Times's failure to correct its still-present indictment-related error in Nocera's column, and then repeating that error in its "correction," is no minor matter, especially in the context of other recent events (bolds are mine):
... for the record, the editors the Times missed the biggest mistake of all in Mr. Nocera’s column. Sheldon Silver hasn’t been indicted — yet. Not only does the correction miss that blunder. It even repeats the error. It is a mistake that bears reflection at a time when the constitutional niceties are getting all too little attention.
What was filed by the United States attorney, Preet Bharara, against Mr. Silver is a criminal complaint. It is a serious act for America to file such a document, but it’s only a preliminary step, outlining the basis for an arrest. To actually bring a case, a formal accusation — an indictment — has to be handed up by a grand jury. It’s not a matter for mere pecksniffs. What is a grand jury, after all? It is a right, vouchsafed in the Fifth Amendment, which says that “no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury.”
Why in the world would the Times want to overlook that? Particularly because grand juries can’t be taken for granted. There may be a saying that a grand jury will indict a “ham sandwich.” But not all ham sandwiches. Our town has just been torn by the refusal of a grand jury to indict the police officers for the death Eric Garner. Our country has been rent by the refusal of a grand jury in Missouri to indict the officer who shot Michael Brown. We would be surprised if Mr. Bharara failed to get a grand jury to act against Mr. Silver. But it’s not something that we would want to report as as a fait accompli before it actually takes place.
Perhaps the Times is betraying a bit of anxiety about how the negative news about Silver, a well-known Democrat (even though Nocera and the editors' correction wouldn't own up to it — and to be clear, the fact that he is a well-known Democrat is no excuse for failing to disclose that fact), and the more visible than usual corruption in both Gotham and the Empire State, might be hurting their favored party's fortunes.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
