In reporting reporting the Kirk military lies story on Saturday, WaPo said:
Cmdr. Danny Hernandez, the Navy's assistant chief of information, said for several days last week that he was having trouble finding records to clarify the matter. Then on Friday, he said Kirk, an Appropriations Committee member who co-chairs an electronic warfare working group, had changed his Web site to incorporate a different account of the award.
In a message on his blog, Kirk wrote that "upon a recent review of my records, I found that an award listed in my official biography was misidentified" and that the award he had intended to list was given to his unit, not to him individually.
That "review of my records" Kirk wrote about was actually the result of a tip-off from the Navy that media was looking into his military service, according to the Chicago Tribune.
Cmdr. Danny Hernandez, a Navy spokesman, said the service notified Kirk’s office last Thursday that the Navy was releasing information to the media, including to the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Post.
“We just let him know that you, the media, were asking questions about who the Intelligence Officer of the Year was,” Hernandez said. “We let him know that there was an individual who was named reserve intelligence officer of the year.”
That person was not Kirk....
In an e-mail to campaign supporters Sunday, Kirk said "(t)he error was discovered last week by my staff. Going through my Fitness Reports for 1999/2000, we recognized that referring to an award as “Intelligence Officer of the Year” was not precise – so we corrected my biography with the official name of a very distinguished award that I am honored to have received."
The Tribune inquired about Kirk's record, including the intelligence officer award, more than a week ago, on May 24. Hernandez said today that as he was returning media inquiries last Thursday, the Navy’s office of legislative affairs notified Kirk’s office.
“That usually is the same courtesy we provide all representatives if we are talking to the press regarding them,” he said.
That's perfectly defensible on the Navy's part. But one more instance of fudging the record on Kirk's part--the error wasn't discovered by Kirk's staff. He was tipped off that the inquiries were happening, and changed his official bio in response. Then, of course, tried to minimize the damage the revelation of his serial exaggerations might bring by telling his supporters that it was his staff who found the "error." It's seeming clearer and clearer that Kirk has a pretty casual relationship with the truth.
