The Guardian alleges that Lord Levy attended meetings at Downing Street which discussed honours. I am not quite sure why comes as a great surprise to The Guardian. They laughingly say: "It is understood that Lord Levy did not contribute any names to the lists nor offered honours to any financial backer." If that is the case, why put this story on your front page as the lead story? This assertion has to be a joke when you look at the names on the Honours list in question - Patel, Noon, Evans etc. If Levy didn't, who did?
Later in the article Patrick Wintour becomes rather defensive about his story yesterday. He writes: "Some police sources accused The Guardian of seeking to ruin their investigation by disclosing that the dispute between Ms Turner and Lord Levy lay at the heart of the inquiry. The Guardian contends that it has not revealed anything that is unknown to the relevant witnesses."
Er, come again? So what? That is hardly a solid line of defence when we are talking about possibly undermining a legitimate police inquiry into key witnesses allegedly seeking to pervert the course of justice.
UPDATE: The Iraq Dossier blog has another take on Patrick Wintour's writing HERE.