Novak’s ‘scandal’ smear story starts looking shaky

November 19, 2007

Over the weekend, the big political brouhaha was over a three-sentence “scoop” in Bob Novak’s latest column.

Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the party’s presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama, but has decided not to use it. The nature of the alleged scandal was not disclosed.

This word-of-mouth among Democrats makes Obama look vulnerable and Clinton look prudent.

Even by Novak standards, it’s shamelessly unethical to pass along unidentified rumors about rumors. Joe Klein suggested that Novak may have “simply abandoned all pretense of being a journalist.” Regardless, it prompted the Clinton and Obama campaigns to engage in some heated back-and-forth.

Given that his column was a textbook case of news-free innuendo that shouldn’t be published in a responsible paper, Novak needed to elaborate. This morning, Novak appeared on Fox News to add some additional insights to his story.

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.

Oh my.

So, what are we left with here? Novak talked to a Democrat (whom he will not name), who talked to Clinton “agents” (whom he does not know), about Obama-related rumors (which he cannot identify) addressing an Obama scandal (which may not exist).

Novak took this “story” and put it in a nationally-syndicated column. A wide variety of editors saw this, and concluded, “Sounds good to me.” Wow.

For what it’s worth, Sam Stein added that Novak’s column wasn’t nearly as ambiguous about the degrees of separation between these Clinton “agents” and himself.

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 Novak hearing about this second-hand from someone whose credibility is unknown; the claim is simply asserted as fact.

I’ve seen some suggestion that Novak may have simply made up this story out of whole cloth. That strikes me as unlikely — Novak is a sleazy, offensive, right-wing columnist who’s perfectly willing to undermine our national security on a whim. But I can’t think of any instances in which he simply fabricated a story. In this case, I suspect Novak really did talk to someone who talked to someone else about rumors dealing with rumors.

But it’s still hackery, not journalism.

Dick Morris?

  • I have information from a reliable, though secretive, source that tells me things about Robert Novak which would not only get him arrested and imprisoned, but probably shanked in prison by convicts who wouldn’t tolerate even this kind of crime. But this source has decided not to use it to discredit Novak.

    This word of mouth amongst the Very Serious People in Washington makes this source look like one to be seriously trusted and makes Novak look like one lucky child molestor.

    Prove me wrong, Bob! Prove me wrong!

  • “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.”

    So Novak talked to a “friend-of-a-friend” as a source for his story? And he got a second “friend of a friend” to confirm? Big deal — I can find you a hundred people who will swear that they know someone who knows someone who got dumped in a bathtub filled with ice with their kidneys removed. That don’t make it true. Will the ‘media’ be using The Urban Legend Reference Pages as a standard source now?

  • But, you know, bloggers are the ones who really shouldn’t be trusted because many haven’t had any undergraduate-level journalism classes.

    What’s most troubling is that Novak won’t lose a single column inch after all is said in done. Instead, he’ll still be on the teevee and in the papers and treated like some sort of credible pundit.

    Thus is the Rule of Punditry in the incestuous, ethically-challenged little Village they inhabit.

  • We know the Clintons leak to Drudge, an ethically reprehensible, socially awkward right-wing misfit at war with his own nature who spared no effort or sensibility to attack then ten years ago. Is then really much of a stretch to imagine them leaking to Novak, an ethically reprehensible right-wing slimebag who’s known all the inside DC players for decades and is well-established as willing to use his column to reward friends and sources and punish enemies and those who won’t dish to him?

    This isin’t complicated. Just look at who benefits–and the respective responses of the Clinton and Obama camps.

  • Does the WSJ and others in the syndication have to accept and print his column…NO, they don’t. So they are accomplices in spreading this kind of gossip. Usually even gossip has some basis in reality, here Joe Klein is absolutely right when he said Kovak has given up all pretense of being a journalist. He knew better than to write something like this and did it anyway which says a lot of what he thinks of his readers.

    Why and how did this get approval from the editors? Are they so willing to dispense with integrity? Are they so desperate to smear democrats that they are willing to resort to trash and ambush journalism? Take it with a grain of salt has now turned into a salt lick block on page 3. Next they will print, “Kovak has heard from space aliens inside the Obama camp…”. Writer and editor both knew better than to let this kind of trash go out in a national publication…and they did it anyway.

  • Hackery or journalism?

    Looky…

    Novak doesn’t care which noun gets tossed at him.
    He is a professional right wing agitprop.

    If he writes something that causes left blogs and their commenters to rail like stuck pigs its “mission accomplished.”

    Which is another way of saying:
    Novak’s gratuitous calumny is aimed at raising your left eyebrow.
    He’s an old goat who is paid to get your goat.

    The sad thing is that the Obama and Hillary camps let this irrelevant old fart jerk them along.
    How tragic.

    If either of the camps had any class they would have come together on this one and issued a joint statement that would have driven a stake into Novak’s wizened old heart. This was a great chance not knock his dentures down his throat.

    Shame on both houses for failing to sucker punch this sucker…

  • 1. Novak makes BS assertions about Obama.

    2. Obama immediately responds, and forcefully, “I won’t be swift-boated!”

    3. Clinton camp plays the “See, Obama’s not ready to handle it.” card.

    Seems to me that Clinton stood to gain from this either way (in theory)…Obama ignores (ala Kerry) and the rumors fester. Advantage: Hillary. Obama responds, they paint him as reactionary and falling for right-wing traps. theoretical advantage: Hillary.

    I don’t think it woorked out that way however. Novak looks like an ass. Obama loooks forceful and like he won’t be trifled with like every other Dem, and Hillary’s camp is left releasing non-denial denials…

    Obama wins.

  • Pingback: But… TWENTY YEARS!! » Comments from Left Field

  • I’ve been told by someone that Robert Novak is a undead spawn of Satan. Others have said this as well. Sadly, I don’t have a national column and a free pass to Faux News Channel.

    I also have it, on more reliable sourcing, that Robert Novak personally exposed valuable covert CIA assets, damaging our nation’s ability to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. So why does he still have a job?

  • The sad thing is that the Obama and Hillary camps let this irrelevant old fart jerk them along. -ROTF

    You’d have to assume Clinton had nothing to do with it. That is an assumption I am unwilling to make.

    When can we start judging her by the company she keeps? Murdoch? Novak? Nice guys.

  • Reminds me of the “pass it on” game (I think, in English, it’s called “telephone”) we used to play as children. What went in as “the spirit is willing but the body is weak” came out as “vodka was very good but kielbasa was rotten”

  • Holy smokes…People just need to grow up and take it like a man. Thats the problem with this world. We all know that Hillary is already President. Who’s going to be laughing loudest at the end? We all know its a conspiracy…Bush…Clinton…Bush…Clinton…The journalists are just doing their job…spinning information that’s already been spun!!

  • At least it’s just a column. I hope people aren’t read columns for solid information. I just read them to think about different viewpoints, not to see who is doing what.

    This does bring up a more serious issue though. Almost every “news” story has anonymous sources (many without bylines from the AP). It’s almost impossible to verify this stuff. Anonymous sources should be used as a very last resort and even then with extreme caution. I’ll tell you anything you want to hear if you don’t say I said it. Ethics have given way to entertainment and quickness.

  • Novak has a book for sale right now. In case you’re thinking he does have real secrets, you’d have to plunk down to buy it. This is just his way of getting you to say his name over and over and think you might want to learn more. Now we’re all repeating his name and THE rumor. Sounds like Rush Limbaugh’s competitor to me.

    • Comments are closed.