Why don't you walk us through your reasoning that if Novak has talked it would be public. I'm sure we'd all find it fascinating.
I don't have the article in front of me but I'm sure your statement is true in only the most technical sense...if it's true at all.
Of course it's true. I am not in the habit of posting falsehoods.
Well, let's see.
Novak testified secretly so that no one in the Press knew about it.
He didn't tell his sources either so that they would have no chance to protect themselves against the coming storm.
Fitzgerald's office had no leakers because they were all intensely loyal to George Bush and didn't want to do anything to jeopardize his election (while, of course, continuing to maintain their impartiality).
And everyone knew that the whole thing was of minor importance and no one in the press would pick it up even if they did reveal it.
Perfectly rational. Right?