Reporter Gina Chon defended her relationship with husband Brett McGurk in the wake of leaked emails detailing their relationship when they were working together in Iraq.

The pair drew scrutiny after emails between them were leaked last Tuesday, one day before a Senate panel on McGurk's nomination to become the ambassador to Iraq. The messages revealed that they began a romantic relationship when Chon was the paper's Iraq correspondent and McGurk was working for the National Security Council.

Chon had to resign from the Journal on Tuesday. BuzzFeed reported that she emailed her friends, thanking them for their support during a very difficult time.

She went on to clarify some details about the emails, saying that McGurk never gave her classified information and that the messages had been "misinterpreted."

Chon also defended their relationship, writing, "underneath the half-truths and outright lies is a fairly simple tale of two people who met in Baghdad, fell in love, got engaged and later married. In the process we formed a strong connection with Iraq, a place where we lost many friends."

However, she also apologized for making "stupid mistakes" during her stint in Iraq. "I'm not trying to absolve myself of responsibility. People were hurt along the way and for that, I am truly sorry," Chon wrote. "I made stupid mistakes four years ago in Iraq while working for the Wall Street Journal and for that, I’m also sorry. I had to leave my job at a news organization I love and for that, I am heartbroken."

Her colleagues also defended Chon in statements to BuzzFeed, which described her as a "well respected and admired" correspondent who covered the Iraq War during "some of the most dangerous and most deadly times in that conflict."

Below, read the full text of Chon's email (via BuzzFeed).

from: Gina Chon to: xxxxxxxxxx date: Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:02 PM subject: Thank you

Dear friends,

Thank you for the many kind notes, emails and calls you have shared over these trying days. I appreciate the support. I also want to take a moment to correct what you may have heard or read about Brett and me, especially because you know us well – and that we are not who we are being misrepresented to be.

As many of you know, I’ve been shot at, survived rocket attacks, and lived through a truck bomb explosion that killed more than 150 Iraqis. In Haiti, there were a few times I thought I would be crushed under a pile of rubble.
But I’ve never felt so vulnerable, so targeted and so exposed as I have in the last two weeks.

On Tuesday, I resigned from the Wall Street Journal in the aftermath of leaked emails from 2008 between me and Brett, who as you know is the nominee to be the next U.S. ambassador to Iraq.

I feel like I have become collateral damage in this process. And, after witnessing all I have, I’m amazed that anyone would want to become a public official.

Many of Brett’s colleagues have already made the move to the private sector, using their connections from Iraq to make a lot of money as consultants to oil companies and other firms.

But Brett always turned to public service and went back to Iraq every time he was called. Even now when people are saying horrible things about me and him, he still wants to serve. We’ve both had to tell our crying moms not to look at the news.

I’ve seen the ugliness in human beings in war zones and natural disasters but I’ve never seen it up close and personal in the comfort of the U.S. The venom of Washington politics makes Wall Street, which I covered for the last two years, look like a playground.

But underneath the half-truths and outright lies is a fairly simple tale of two people who met in Baghdad, fell in love, got engaged and later married. In the process we formed a strong connection with Iraq, a place where we lost many friends.

I’m not trying to absolve myself of responsibility. People were hurt along the way and for that, I am truly sorry. I made stupid mistakes four years ago in Iraq while working for the Wall Street Journal and for that, I’m also sorry. I had to leave my job at a news organization I love and for that, I am heartbroken.

I want you to know, though, that while I worked in Iraq for the paper, Brett never gave me sensitive or classified information nor did he trade his knowledge for my affection. We were both dedicated professionals too committed to our jobs and had too much respect for each other to do anything like that. And as individuals, it's simply not who we are or how we approach our work. Nor did he need to. He was authorized to speak on occasion on background with journalists and did so with me, the Washington Post, the New York Times and other news outlets.

Our emails, which were exposed just before Brett’s confirmation hearing, reflected flirtatious banter and nothing more. I have to wonder, do people really think I get my stories by asking sources if I can hide in their briefcase?

Brett talking about having “pull” to get me in somewhere has been magically reincarnated as him taking me to a high level meeting. In reality, he was joking about his ability to take me to the embassy cafeteria, where the ice cream sundae bar was one of the few treats for non-embassy employees in Baghdad.

I never thought those emails would come back to hurt us and become so twisted and perverted by others that they became unrecognizable even to me.

Fast forward to Tuesday, June 5, when a disgruntled State Department employee began pitching a flickr web site to some blogs and news outlets.

The image on that site showed a print out of emails between me and Brett – copies someone had kept all this time, waiting for the right moment to unleash them.

And that’s exactly what happened the day before Brett’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The emails didn’t really catch fire and the hearing came and went without any questions about them, even though Brett was prepared to address them. Later that day, I received an email from someone named “Brett McGurk.” It read “I am missing you so bad right now….how is your day going?” The real Brett was sitting next to me in a cab. I guess the impersonator wanted me to write them back so he or she could post those emails, too.
Since then, people have jumped to unfair and inaccurate conclusions using our own words against us. Yet, nobody knows what we meant, what was in our heads, or in our hearts, better than we do.

The question I continue to have is when will the conversation return to issues? Because when they do, I know Brett will become the next ambassador to Iraq. So I am getting up each day, hoping that my belief in the good and fairness in people is proven true. And I remain as hopeful that the man I love gets to serve the country he loves, as I do confident that he would do so with honor. And most of all, that our finding love with each other does not imperil his chance to serve.

Thanks again for all your support.

Hugs,
Gina


Related on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow...
  • #25: Detroit Free Press

    Total Average Circulation: 230,739 <a href="http://accessabc.wordpress.com/2012/05/01/the-top-u-s-newspapers-for-march-2012/" target="_hplink">Source: Audit Bureau of Circulations</a>

  • #24: San Diego Union-Tribune

    Total Average Circulation: 230,742

  • #23: Seattle Times

    Total Average Circulation: 236,929

  • #22: Cleveland Plain Dealer

    Total Average Circulation: 246,571

  • #21: Oregonian

    Total Average Circulation: 247,833

  • #20: Newark Star-Ledger

    Total Average Circulation: 278,940

  • #19: Orange County Register

    Total Average Circulation: 280,812

  • #18: St. Petersburg Times (now Tampa Bay Times)

    Total Average Circulation: 299,497

  • #17: Minneapolis Star-Tribune

    Total Average Circulation: 300,330

  • #16: Phoenix Republic

    Total Average Circulation: 321,600

  • #15: Philadelphia Inquirer

    Total Average Circulation: 325,291

  • #14: Houston Chronicle

    Total Average Circulation: 384,007

  • #13: Newsday

    Total Average Circulation: 397,973

  • #12: Denver Post

    Total Average Circulation: 401,120

  • #11: Dallas Morning News

    Total Average Circulation: 405,349

  • #10: Chicago Tribune

    Total Average Circulation: 414,590

  • #9: Chicago Sun-Times

    Total Average Circulation: 422,335

  • #8: Washington Post

    Total Average Circulation: 507,615

  • #7: New York Post

    Total Average Circulation: 555,327

  • #6: San Jose Mercury News

    Total Average Circulation: 575,786

  • #5: New York Daily News

    Total Average Circulation: 579,636

  • #4: Los Angeles Times

    Total Average Circulation: 616,575

  • #3: New York Times

    Total Average Circulation: 1,586,757

  • #2: USA Today

    Total Average Circulation: 1,817,446

  • #1: Wall Street Journal

    Total Average Circulation: 2,118,315