The fact that it's been 3 weeks and this mystery report still hasn't somehow surfaced certainly makes it seem less and less likely that it exists, don't you think?
Do you even believe your own bullshit at this point? Because I find that hard to believe.
Seriously. 
on saying because I'm sticking to logic that I must be biased now. You really don't get how far off the rails you hare do you? This is just amazing to me. It really is. 
WHERE IS THE REQUEST FOR IT TO BE MADE PUBLIC?
He’s not fabricating the article but you absolutely are accusing him of just fabricating evidence, because that won’t wnd his career.
Entirely possible. That. Just that. Elements of sloppiness due in part to no longer having a full editorial staff to support him like he's been used to if nothing else.
He changed his story when the facts changed and posted about it after he did so! He failed miserably to annotate it inside the story itself which is customary. Again, he's not used to 5,000+ word expose type articles on FB without editors, but it's inexcusable to make rookie mistakes like that. This is why I said he's a hack.
If the report was never released, how'd he supposedly see it in the first place?
He said himself when interviewed that he every much went to media day and travels to meet 'inside' sources face to face because you have to in order to stay relevant. That does NOT by default mean he is desperate enough to risk what he is fighting for by lying and making things up when there isn't any history of him doing that before.
No comment on the second part?
Do we know if he was mailed all of the info he had under the initial FOIA request? It isn't unusual for reporters to go to government agencies and view documents. I'm not saying that happened here, but there are certainly other answers than he made it up and lied on a part of a massive article that doesn't otherwise kill it if it isn't correct. That's such a demand of a stretch that it cannot be reached without real evidence. Period.
Nobody has called him out BECAUSE HE MADE THE EDIT. Nobody is accusing him of still reporting that Smith got arrested.
Nobody knows any of this, but you are more than happy to give him the benefit of the doubt without batting an eye. All I want to know is why he would change his story without hesitation, go so long without noting that he changed it, and not one single time stand by his original story. Facts don't change. If he saw a report that said Smith was arrested, why did he not even one single time stand behind his initial report?
All the Chief has said is "if this report supposedly exists", he's never once come close to confirming that it does.
Jeff Snook said he's had off the record conversations with national media members and some people are saying editors will not allow them to dig on the other side of the story like he did because it wasn't the politically correct thing to do in today's climate
