Commentary Readers of The New York Times were disappointed on Wednesday when columnist Thomas L. Friedman announced a change of plans. “I was going to make this my week for happy news,” he wrote, but then something had come up—something so big that to write about anything else would be, he thought, “like writing a column about the weather the day after Watergate exploded or about Ford Theater’s architecture after Lincoln was shot.” Somehow I don’t think that the journalists of former days, when they were writing about Watergate’s “explosion” or Lincoln’s assassination, had to preface their remarks by telling readers, as Friedman does, that: “This is a big moment in American history.” They already knew it. In the same way, anyone writing about a blatant falsehood shouldn’t have to keep telling readers that it is a “Big Lie.” If it really is a big lie, readers will probably be …