I'm glad you pinged some of the folks who are following this. I'll be interested in their take on why Novak chose now to respond, even if it is to just one specific allegation against him.
Novak's not just responding. He's denying the truth of what a CIA officer, Bill Harlow, testified to under oath. That's significant, isn't it? I mean, if a CIA official lied under oath, for sure he's going to get prosecuted for perjury. The same would hold true for Novak, but no doubt reporter Novak has the contemporaneous notes to prove his case. Not only that, Novak probably had a pre-existing agreement with Fitzgerald long before Harlow was called to testify, an agreement that would hinge on Novak's honesty.
The media, talking heads and others have been basically painting Novak as being somewhat dishonorable in his handling of reporting in this matter .. while poor poor Judy Miller is sitting in jail and poor poor Valarie is being smeared .. according to Wilson and the liberals, that is
If I was to guess .. Novak is sending a warning shot across the bow to those of concern that he knows the scoop ... and he ain't liking what is being said about him.
I stated when I first read Harlow's public comments that I doubted their veracity. It's been clear from the start that some within the CIA lied about facts surrounding this (like denying the documented fact of what Novak reported: Anti-Bush Joe Wilson was sent to Niger at least in part because of his CIA connected wife).
As to what Harlow actually said to the grand jury? I'm sure he couched his phrasings carefully to avoid perjury but if he did lie to them, I hope Fitzgerald is aware of these various public accounts of who is saying what they said to whom.
I am very glad Novak clarified this Harlow point as my main concern from the beginning was why some in the CIA were passing along disinformation to reporters like this. (An argument any Congressman worth his salt should consider when deliberating any ill-advised reporter shield legislation).
Not only that...the public documentation that we know of completely supports Novak's account and as each piece gets revealed it only cements what he has to say. The only thing here is establishing beyond doubt that Harlow directly spoke with Novak. I believe Novak, no question.