Below is Whitlock's published apology:
Let me first apologize to Rush Limbaugh.But wait... As John Landsberg points out, you only have to go back to the original Whitlock column to see Whitlock isn't telling the truth. Whitlock said in his initial column that he had received an email from Limbaugh stating Limbaugh never made the quotes.
Last week in explaining why NFL commissioner Roger Goodell needed to put an end to Limbaugh's latest publicity stunt, I attributed racially insensitive quotes to Limbaugh that I read in two Missouri newspapers, saw on CNN and confirmed through a Google search.
Prior to posting the article, I never found a denial of these quotes by Limbaugh, and had no reason to believe those statements were not true.
It was unfair to Limbaugh. And I regret that.
I received an e-mail from Limbaugh or one of his employees Tuesday morning somewhat disputing the authenticity of the quotes.So Whitlock's own column makes it clear Whitlock already knew Limbaugh had denied the quotes, and, the quotes were suspect because author of book hadn't listed his source material.
The e-mail reads: "We've sourced the quote," then cites a wikiquotes entry: "These quotations are currently being disputed because the author of the book did not provide air dates for the original source material quoted."
Limbaugh claimed on his radio show Monday that his staff could not find any proof that he ever joked about slavery. I'm sorry. Limbaugh doesn't get the benefit of the doubt on racial matters...
So why did Whitlock apologize yesterday?
Your guess is as good as mine. Whitlock has always been about Whitlock, not reporting the truth.
Congrats to John Landsberg for getting closer to the truth about Whitlock's apology.