Well, we were somewhat wrong. Jack Cashill remains on the case of Paul Mirecki, the University of Kansas professor attacked for intemperate remarks about religion by people with their own history of intemperate remarks. Of course, Cashill wouldn't be still on the case if he couldn't continue to attack Mirecki. Cashill is now accusing Mirecki of making up the story of being beaten by attackers.
Cashill has no actual evidence of this, of course; he merely blows up circumstantial evidence into something that looks substantial.
We have no idea of what the truth is -- and neither does Cashill. But we remember what happened the last time Cashill blew up circumstantial evidence and conspiracy theories to support a preconceived conclusion.
UPDATE: Cashill's article is now up at WorldNetDaily.