Statement of John Solomon regarding The Hill columns
I am also grateful that The Hill’s newsroom review did not identify a single factual error in any of my columns
I am grateful that The Hill has published an update to its review of my Ukraine reporting and other articles. This points out what I have said that I did not engage in a conflict of interest by quoting Joe diGenova or Victoria Toensing in 2017 because they were not my attorneys at the time.
I am also grateful that The Hill’s newsroom review did not identify a single factual error in any of my columns. Indeed, after months of digging into claims from liberal media and impeachment witnesses that my reporting was false, The Hill found nothing to fault under my reporting.
Although the Review ultimately did not undermine what I reported, I remain disappointed that The Hill did not seek to interview me.
The criticism of my work in the newsroom’s review involved a determination that my columns departed from standard opinion content because they contained too many facts and revelations. To that, I plead guilty. For over a century of great journalism, opinion columnists from Jack Anderson to David Broder to Robert Novak broke enormous stories, factually documented, on the opinion pages of their publications, just like I did at The Hill. I feel no need to apologize for trying to follow in that tradition or to inform the American public.
I wish all my former colleagues at The Hill the best of success. I will continue to read The Hill’s pages, and hope that it always publishes balanced, factual reporting that characterizes the best of journalism.
News, not Noise
- Trump flexes his muscle again with primary wins, as Dr. Oz race ends as a cliffhanger.
- Rep. Cawthorn loses North Carolina GOP House primary, concedes race
- Former inmate pleads guilty of using drones to smuggle drugs into prison
- Mastriano wins Pennsylvania GOP gubernatorial primary
- FBI agents, Neustar employee testify in Sussmann trial, more prosecution witnesses for Wednesday