L. Lin Wood and Todd McMurtry, attorneys for Nicholas Sandmann, released a statement Monday addressing an editor’s note issued by The Washington Post last Friday about their coverage of the Covington Catholic boys.

“The Friday night efforts by the Post to whitewash its wrongdoing were untimely, grossly insufficient and did little more than perpetuate the lies it published –lies that will haunt and adversely impact Nicholas for the rest of his life,” the statement read in part. (RELATED: Nathan Phillips And Other Protesters Storm DC Basilica, Demand Punishment For Covington Boys)

“The Post has now double-downed on its lies. As Nicholas’s lawyers, we will now double down on truth and aggressively continue our legal efforts to hold the Post accountable and obtain justice for Nicholas in a court of law,” the statement concluded.

Sandmann’s attorneys’ statement charges that WaPo “rushed to claim leadership of a mainstream and social media mob of bullies who falsely attacked, vilified and threatened Nicholas Sandmann.” (RELATED: Nicholas Sandmann Describes ‘Terrible’ Aftermath of Confrontation with Nathan Phillips)

The statement adds that the Jeff Bezos-owned outlet “made clear that it has learned no lesson and remains willing in the future to falsely attack others to further its political agenda, including false attacks on children.”

Multiple media outlets and figures disparaged Sandmann, a 16-year-old Covington Catholic student from Kentucky, when a brief video clip circulated on social media showing an interaction between him and Nathan Phillips, a Native American activist.

In the aftermath of the media coverage, Sandmann’s attorneys filed a defamation suit against The Washington Post for $250 million.

Last Friday, the Post issued an “editor’s note” about the story, attributed to Washington Post staff. (RELATED: WaPo Issues ‘Editor’s Note’ over Covington Catholic Coverage)

The brief note addressing its original Jan. 19 story acknowledged that “subsequent reporting, a student’s statement and additional video allow for a more complete assessment of what occurred, either contradicting or failing to confirm accounts provided in that story.”