Some other yahoo tried to peddle this same shit yesterday, at which point I noted that his source (Fox Noise) provided zero quotation of an original NYT story that would have been "retracted".
This one actually does print that elusive text:
Quoted: NYT January 8>>
“Mr. Sicknick, 42, an officer for the Capitol Police, died on Thursday from brain injuries he sustained after Trump loyalists who overtook the complex struck him in the head with a fire extinguisher, according to two law enforcement officials.” <<
What all these Insurrectapologists looking around desperately for ways to evade the stark fact of sedition, keep missing, and I have to think deliberately missing, is the last phrase:
"according to two law enforcement officials.”
That means it's "two LE officials" speaking --- not the NYT. That's just basic journalism. So whatever new info comes in, isn't a "retraction" .... the two LE officials DID render that description. THAT'S THE STORY: "TWO LE OFFICIALS SAID...". The verb there would be "said".
The same blog page the OP linked goes on to ass-ess, directly after that quote:
>> The account of Sicknick’s death was
reported as fact, not speculation or rumor. <<
WRONG. It was attributed from the start to "two LE officials". If it were "reported as fact" there would be no need to cite that it came from outside analysts.
Blogpage goes on:
>> Further, it appears that the anonymous sources were not law enforcement officials but people “close” to the police department—which means they could have been anyone from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to inveterate liar U.S. Representative Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) to the Democratic mayor of Washington, D.C., Muriel Bowser. <<
"It appears"?? To who?? A blogger engaging in wishful thinking? NONE of these named people are law enforcement officials. Further the phase shoots itself in the foot as obviously unable to arrive on the scene with "clean hands', describing one of those purported "law enforcement officials" as "inveterate liar" and describing all three of them with the Composition Fallacy of their political party. And only one of them, two being from California, would be actually "close to the police department" anyway. So this blogger just did exactly what he falsely accused the NYT of ---- "representing as fact" the characterization of "inveterate liar".
In the realm of journalism this is the shit that somebody forgot to flush. I guess it's predictable that it would be trotted in by a poster named "Dookie".