Robert Novak lied about Murray Waas and other reporters from his apperance on H&C last night claiming that nobody else picked up the story that Novak told Rove he wouldn't identify him to Patrick Fitzgerald. From Bloomberg:
Syndicated columnist Robert Novak assured presidential adviser Karl Rove that he wouldn't identify him to prosecutors investigating the disclosure of a CIA agent's name, a person familiar with the matter said.
Rove told a grand jury that Novak called him shortly after the Central Intelligence Agency asked the Justice Department to investigate who leaked the name of operative Valerie Plame to Novak and other reporters, the person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said. Novak revealed Plame's name in a July 14, 2003, column, citing unnamed administration officials. The National Journal, which reported earlier today on the Sept. 29, 2003, conversation between Rove and Novak, said Justice Department prosecutors were concerned that Rove and Novak may have been working on a cover story to protect Rove. The report, citing people familiar with the grand jury testimony of both men, said then-Attorney General John Ashcroft was briefed on the matter.
Yesterday Novak said:
COLMES: So you’re saying "Newsday" was wrong in this report, and Murray Waas, "National Journal," was wrong…
NOVAK: Absolutely.
COLMES: … and these people have purposefully misrepresented you?
NOVAK: I never give motives, but I know that the Murray Waas piece in the "National Journal," which interestingly was not picked up by anybody,...
MSNBC also carried the story on May 25th :
[S]ources close to [Karl Rove] are now confirming a story first reported in the National Journal that Rove, who was a source for columnist Bob Novak, later had a separate conversation with Novak after the investigation began.
Former federal prosecutors are convinced Fitzgerald has explored whether Rove and Novak coordinated their testimony.
TPM Muckraker: The story is particularly damaging to Novak because it raised concerns that Novak and Rove coordinated their grand jury testimony, even possibly developing a "cover story" for themselves. At the very least, the conversation was inadvisable and unethical -- and, if a false story was concocted, against the law...read on
