Proving a negative is hard to do, but the Times gives it the old college try. As Josh Marshall puts it: ...after what seems to have been a pretty exhaustive bit of reporting, they didn't come up with any solid evidence that such a woman existed. And they came up with a lot that points in the other direction. The Times seemed to talk to everyone under the sun -- family, friends, neighbors, other nannies in the neighborhood -- and they either knew nothing about a nanny or wouldn't talk."
So now it seems like this whole "nanny" story wasn't just an excuse, but quite probably a lie -- one which Kerik and the White House have been pushing for days.
[Related:NYT: Mystery Woman in Kerik Case:Nanny]
[VIA]
