Novak Admits Smear Column Is Even Weaker Than It First Appeared

Bob Novak took to the airwaves today to defend his recent controversial column, in which he claimed that Sen. Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign was sitting on a bit of juicy dirt concerning her rival, Sen. Barack Obama.

Why the need to defend? Well, to put it bluntly, Novak's Saturday column has been ridiculed as - among the more noteworthy descriptions --- "shamelessly unethical" and "unconfirmed crap," for naming no names and containing no tangible information. So, to clear up the facts and keep his name in the news cycle, Novak went on Fox News this morning.

Novak disclosed that his source for the story was not anyone close to Clinton but rather, someone who was "told by an agent of the Clinton campaign" about the alleged dirt. Got that? So Novak was not privy to the dirt itself, nor did he talk to Clinton's people. Rather, he heard it from someone who had heard it from someone else. Another secondary source, Novak went on to say, claimed to have heard the same thing. Fact-checking = completed.

For the record, in the original column, Novak suggested he had more personal knowledge of that rumor-mongering. "Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton," the piece began, "are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the party's presidential nomination..." There was no mention of a source.

Also during his Fox appearance, Novak used his unconfirmed rumor to further smear Clinton, calling her campaign's supposed tactic "very similar to the kind of tricks that Richard Nixon used to pull, where he would say, 'I know some very bad information about the communists supporting George McGovern, but I can't put that out because it wouldn't be right, because I'm too good of a guy.'" Again, Novak is dragging down both Obama and Clinton.

And if it seems that this whole episode was just concocted up by some Republican operative to make Clinton and Obama look bad, rest assured.

"I haven't spoken to a single Republican," Novak told the Fox and Friends hosts. "This is all Democrats. That's the whole method of the Clinton campaign is when anything derogatory comes up, they say the Republicans are spreading it, but there was no Republicans involved in my reporting on this."

Don't worry, a source who is close to a source told the Huffington Post that this episode will all go away soon.

Watch the video:

Comments

[dmc2]

To those who would dismiss Novak because of Valerie Plame, you're missing one central point: the Plame incident doesn't go to his credibility -- it goes to his ethics. Everything he wrote about Plame was absolutely 100% true. Novak may be an a-hole, but he's not a liar.

In that light, Barack was absolutely correct in directly confronting Hillary. If he hadn't, do you think that she would've been forced to deny the rumour? No, it would've just floated around casting doubt on Barack's integrity and character. Instead, he made her deny it and that's all that matters. Now the story is that either Novak made it up or Hillary is lying -- both of which are good for Barack.

[Gonzalez]

This piece of shit don't deserve space in this blog. This garbage does not come from the great state of Illinois.

[Plowboy]

When I was young, I once heard a man proclaiming the great qualities of one candidate and running down another. When the group he was speaking to had gone, a friend of his askede what he was doing, stating that he understood him to support the man he had attacked and not the one he had praised. "Ah, yes, but I also know that all those men hate my guts and will support the one they think I dislike."
Novak probably knows that nobody respects him, so perhaps he is also giving false signals, meant to create an opposite effect from, the obvious. Doesn't Murdock raise funds for HRC? (Now, unlike words, money is money and only means money.)

[eddieinc97]

The only one Novak really pissed off about this whole thing is the guy who wishes he had thought of the smear first. (Ann Coulter)

[imsosure]

What a hack, Novak ought to be dismissed right along with that stench wafting in the air, albeit rude and obnoxious things just seem better once it's no longer noticeable and people don't have to pay it any attention.

[beatpanda]

Let's get real here, folks.

A good chunk of the people responding to any political blog are either volunteer or paid shills that are committed to a particular candidate and are a part of an organized effort to spin stories in the media a certain way.

I'll come right out and say it- I'm one of them. I'm part of a volunteer effort in the Obama campaign to magnify positive stories and react to negative spin.

Anybody on here that's trying to claim that Novak is somehow a liar is likely a part of one of these organized efforts.

Let's look at the facts-

1. Novak is a paid journalist, and is subject to libel laws.

2. Novak might be a scumbag, but lying outright would risk his entire career.

3. Novak might be an asshole for being involved in the Valeria Plame scandal, but he sure as hell wasn't lying.

Just take all that into account when you're reading any of the stories related to this flap-up, and any of the comments that follow them.

[joedirtfromaz]

Is it my imagination, or is this Novak an instigating little rat bastard?

[JohnCitizen]

REPUBLICAN SLIME MACHINE

Who’s behind this smear of both Clinton and Obama?

Simple… just answer these 3 questions:

1. Who does Robert Novak associate with?
2. Who is almost always behind “dirty tricks” politics?
3. Who benefits from such a smear?

Who else, but the lowest low life’s of our political life!

[yellowdoggie]

As much as I have enjoyed reading all the comments and arguments, I have to admit that I am puzzled by the people who so adamantly hate Hillary or deride Obama. I honestly don't know who I will vote for in my state's primary, but I can guarandamntee you that I will vote for whoever gets the Democratic nomination over whoever the Republicans put up. Could I support Hillary even though she's probably dirty and is a bitch? You bet. Could I support Obama even though he's "inexperienced"? Oh, yes. Biden? He's a honey. Kucinich? I'm a fan. I love 'em all. Get the goddamn Neocons out of the White House and let's get this country back on track.

[azhiker]

Novak needs to be in jail for treason for outing a covert CIA agent and now more lies from this vampire. Do you think lying makes you that ugly and sick looking? It must be something cuz that is one ugly lying F'er. He's probably a drunk.

GO TO HELL BOBBY and take all you RepubliCON friends with you.

[solarenergy]

Hey! Bob!

Fat, ugly and stupid is no way to go through life.

Get a clue.

[globalcitizenlinda]

Hey Cliton supporters out there, this report just came hot off the presses and it mean to make you coalm down a bit with you drum of naivette

according to a just-released ABC News/Washington Post poll, Obama leads among all likely caucus-goers with 30%, compared with Clinton at 26% and Edwards at 22%.


Obama also leads among those who are "certain to attend" the January 3rd caucus, those who have previously caucused, and those who are planning to caucus for the first time.

Obama also showed that he's the candidate who is resonating the most with women voters. 32% of women polled are supporting Obama, compared with 31% for Clinton and 19% for Edwards.

And by a 2 to 1 margin, Iowans find Obama more "honest and trustworthy" than Clinton.

In Iowa -- where voters across the state have had a chance to see all of the candidates up close and learn about where they stand -- Barack Obama continues to surge in support and is now leading the Democratic field.

I can just see a few people punching their computers

[crashingtiger]

Novak made the whole thing up. Period. When these worthless pundits lie, why are they almost never held accountable? Why are their columns still printed and why do they still continue to put on TV? Jesus Christ!

[SeanGardner]

Barack Obama pulls ahead in latest IOWA poll, even after last week's debate performance. And, he's considered more "trustworthy" in the poll. Here is the link: http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/Vote2008/story?id=3887274&page=1

I knew voters would start to doubt that Clinton has more "experience" than Barack, that she represents a "new direction" in politics, and that she actually believes what she is saying.

So Hillary can lead in all of the NATIONAL POLLS she wants, but if she is losing in IOWA state polls, then that means something.

Barack Obama: ready to shock the world.

[Hawkeye17]

Novakula needs retire to Transylvania. The guy's nothing more than a tool for the Republican Party to exploit. That and he's a tool period.