How often do you read something like this:
A previous version of this story mentioned that a source witnessed Cain and the woman entering a taxi together. This was incorrect. The previous version also mentioned that the woman awoke in Cain’s bed — the source only claimed that the woman awoke in Cain’s apartment. The previous version incorrectly attributed comments from one source to the other source.
Apart from that, what a scoop! Weigel makes the point here as well. Not only that, but PJM uses two anonymous sources to cite one anonymous claim. But Joe McGinniss’ book is “unattributed crap.” If an employee emerges who can testify to sex with Cain while on a work-related social event, then it matters a great deal, it seems to me. Especially if she thinks “he had taken advantage of me.” But on this sourcing, I don’t think we can know what truly happened at all. I guess we’ll find out.
The Dish 