Reply #18: Novak is fighting tooth and nail [View All]

[Justice]

Novak basically calls Harlow a liar. Who do you believe? Actually, as I re-read what Novak is saying - he is saying that Harlow may have said things to him, but that he didn't believe Harlow ultimately - he believed he had the facts right, that Harlow had the facts wrong.

Novak supports his belief by giving us "facts" that were determined well after he wrote the article.

Novak is trying to change the subject from the false Niger claims to Wilson and Harlow.

His selective quoting (even from the WP article) is remarkable. No where does he mention that Harlow said that he warned Novak in the strongest terms possible - that context helps inform us about the tone of Harlow's voice. Also, Novak conveniently leaves out that Harlow called him back to say it again.

I am also struck by an irony. Novak wrote this column to put his version of the truth out there, defend himself. Wilson wrote his op-ed piece to put his version of the truth out there.

I don't think we can let this one go by. Novak again relies on the unanimous Senate report and suggest Kerry dropped it b/c it was afraid Wilson was not right. Wilson never went away, yet Novak suggests Wilson re-emerged.

I think the points that need to be addressed in Novak's piece are:

1. Harlow called basically a liar.

2. Senate report was unanimous (fact that republicans would not allow Democrats to include information that showed truth of Wilson's story).

3. Novak trying to change the real story - Bush lied about Niger and yellowcake - used that to go to war.

On edit - I predict this Novak column will provoke a substantial leak of new information in order to keep the focus on the wrong doers (ie WH).