Roll Call executive editor Morton Kondracke accused Democrats of attempting to politicize the Senate Intelligence Committee, falsely asserting that the committee had already investigated allegations that the Bush administration "lied about weapons of mass destruction" in the run-up to the Iraq war. In fact, no governmental entity to date, including the Intelligence Committee, has investigated the administration's use of prewar intelligence.
New York Times staff writers David Sanger and Elisabeth Bumiller used the opportunity presented by President Bush's March 3 visit to Pakistan to contrast Bush's "more public landing" on Air Force One with Clinton's 2000 visit, in which, Bumiller wrote, he "slipped into Islamabad for six hours on an unmarked military jet." However, both Sanger and Bumiller ignored the historical and political context of Clinton's trip to Pakistan and the security measures taken by Bush that undermine any notion that he "arrived with a roar on Air Force One."
A March 6 Associated Press article misstated what Rep. Duncan Hunter outlined as the scope of his proposal to ban foreign companies from owning or operating any U.S. installations deemed critical to national security. According to the article, on the March 5 broadcast of ABC's This Week, Hunter said his proposal would "require foreign governments to divest of critical U.S. installations." In fact, Hunter stated that his legislation would require that all "critical infrastructure[s]" in the United States "be operated by Americans and ... be owned by Americans," meaning that the ban would apply to all foreign companies, not only those owned or controlled by foreign governments.
Michael Barone claimed that the Senate Intelligence Committee's 2004 report on prewar intelligence assessments of Iraq showed "that the CIA did obtain evidence of an al-Qaida-Saddam relationship from foreign intelligence and open sources." In fact, the report was critical of the U.S. intelligence community for using foreign sources too heavily, and it concluded that the CIA "reasonably assessed" that contacts between Saddam and Al Qaeda "did not add up to an established formal relationship."
On NBC's Meet the Press, Tim Russert failed to challenge several misleading claims made by Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in support of his assertion that the Iraq war is "going very, very well."
On Fox News Sunday, Boston Globe Washington bureau chief Nina Easton attributed President Bush's failure to adequately respond to Hurricane Katrina to what she suggested was his desire not "to be an ambulance chaser, as he saw [President] Bill Clinton being."
An Associated Press clarification of a previous story about video footage showing President Bush being briefed about Hurricane Katrina not only echoed the Bush administration's explanation of why the AP videos do not contradict Bush's claim about not anticipating a breach of the levees, it omitted key facts that undermine the administration's explanation.
Articles in The Wall Street Journal and Los Angeles Times both noted that the state-owned Dubai Ports World has agreed to a 45-day investigation of the potential national security implications of its bid to acquire operational control of six U.S. ports. However, both articles omitted the highly relevant fact that the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United Sates opted not to conduct such an investigation when it first reviewed the deal.
The Wall Street Journal's Daniel Henninger repeated the false claim that the Robb-Silverman commission exonerated the Bush administration from the charge that it had misled the public about evidence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. In fact, the commission did not even consider the question.
CBS anchor Bob Schieffer reported on deals in which Dubai Ports World (DPW) would assume control of terminal operations six U.S. ports and in which "another Arab company" plans "to buy plants in the United States that make parts for planes and tanks." However, in both instances, Schieffer failed to mention that the companies involved are owned by the government of Dubai, a member state of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) -- a legal distinction that is central to whether each deal should be subject to an additional 45-day review for national security concerns.
On the second day after the release of videos showing President Bush was warned of possible catastrophic flooding in New Orleans because of Hurricane Katrina, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and The Wall Street Journal published no news articles following up on the controversy.
In a flawed correction and a new report, The New York Times continued to misrepresent congressional proposals on port security in the wake of a proposed agreement that would allow a company owned by the government of Dubai to control port terminals in six major U.S. cities.
Faced with widespread criticism in recent weeks, the Bush administration and some of its supporters have promoted numerous false and misleading claims intended to downplay the approval of a deal that would turn over control of terminal operations at six U.S. ports to Dubai Ports World (DPW) -- a company owned by the government of Dubai, a member state of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) -- and cast critics of the transaction as racist, politically opportunistic, or both. The media, in turn, have often repeated these claims without challenge or correction.
For the second night in a row, in reporting on newly released video showing President Bush receiving warnings that Hurricane Katrina could cause New Orleans levees to fail, ABC's World News Tonight did not mention Bush's comment, made days after the storm, that "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees."
NBC's Nightly News and Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume uncritically reported the new White House explanation for President Bush's claim that "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees." The administration now claims that Bush was warned only of the levees "overtopping," not breaching. However, some key facts undermine this White House explanation.