Joe Wilson, of Niger-uranium-"16 Words" fame, told Paula Zahn that he did not mislead reporters with anonymous leaks, saying "I'm not exactly sure what public comments they're referring to. If they're referring to leaks or sources, unidentified government sources in articles that appeared before my article in "The New York Times" appeared, those are either misquotes or misattributions if they're attributed to me."
Nick Kristof's May 6 column reported that, "In February 2002, according to someone present at the meetings, that envoy reported to the C.I.A. and State Department that the information was unequivocally wrong and that the documents had been forged."
That column drove the national debate, as Mr. Kristof gloatingly reported in the lead of his June 13 column:
Condoleezza Rice was asked on "Meet the Press" on Sunday about a column of mine from May 6 regarding President Bush's reliance on forged documents to claim that Iraq had sought uranium in Africa. That was not just a case of hyping intelligence, but of asserting something that had already been flatly discredited by an envoy investigating at the behest of the office of Vice President Dick Cheney.
Now, Mr. Wilson claims that Mr. Kristof's seminal column was based on a misunderstanding.
One wonders whether the Times plans to respond to this; so far, they have not.
Daniel Okrent is the Public Editor, and he will be thrilled to hear from you at:
public@nytimes.com
MORE: Legal problems? Mr. Kristof may be tangentially involved in both the criminal investigation into the Plame leak, and the FBI investigation into the forgeries. So what? The Times still has an obligation to its readers to address this in some fashion.
Comments