CBS, AP, LA Times failed to challenge Hadley's dismissal of Rumsfeld memo

Appearing on the December 3 broadcast of CBS' Face the Nation, national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley dismissed outgoing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's classified November 6 memo to the White House calling for a change in Iraq policy, saying that it "was a useful and constructive memo, but it was not a proposal for a new course of action," adding: "It was much more a list of things that needed to be considered." Though host and CBS chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer had previously noted that Rumsfeld "was among those who said we ... needed a change in policy," he failed to counter Hadley's claim by noting that in the memo, which was first reported on by The New York Times on December 3, Rumsfeld wrote that "it is time for a major adjustment," and: "Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough." Schieffer also did not note that the Rumsfeld memo suggested several options the White House had previously dismissed -- such as "modest troop withdrawals" and "redeploying American troops from 'vulnerable positions' in Baghdad and other cities to safer areas in Iraq or Kuwait" -- characterizing them as "above the line," or worthy of serious consideration, and separating them from "below the line" options, which Rumsfeld described in the memo as "less attractive."

Similarly, the Los Angeles Times reported on December 4 that Hadley said on the December 3 broadcast of ABC's This Week: "The president had asked agencies to begin a review of our policy in Iraq, and what Secretary Rumsfeld did, I think, very helpfully, was put together a sort of laundry list of ideas that ought to be considered." And the Associated Press, in an article discussing Hadley's Sunday show appearance, reported on December 4 that "Hadley played down the memo as a laundry list of ideas rather than a call for a new course of action." Neither the Los Angeles Times nor the AP, however, noted that rather than creating a "laundry list," which suggests a list with no ranking, Rumsfeld had categorized the various options and clearly indicated that certain options should carry more weight than others. Stephanopoulos challenged Hadley on this point by noting that troop withdrawals and troop redeployments were, according to Rumsfeld, "above the line to be considered," and that they "have been called for by Democrats."

In contrast, CNN's Wolf Blitzer, on the December 3 edition of CNN's Late Edition, challenged Sen. John Kyl's (R-AZ) similar attempt to dismiss the Rumsfeld memo as simply "a menu of options" and "not recommendations," by noting that Rumsfeld "had above the line and below the line," and that troop withdrawals and troop redeployment were "above the line."

From the December 3 broadcast of Face the Nation:

SCHIEFFER: Thank you, Mr. Hadley, for coming. I want to ask you, first, about yet another leak by the administration. Here across the front page of The New York Times today, a story that says "Rumsfeld memo proposed major adjustment in Iraq: Days before resigning, defense chief cited problems and offered a list of options."

So, now, it comes out that Don Rumsfeld was among those who said we had a change in policy -- needed a change in policy. What's that all about?

HADLEY: Well, the president, as you know, some weeks before, had asked and was aware that a variety of reviews were going on. It was clear that things have changed in Iraq. Beginning in February, we had the emergence of the sectarian violence, an additional challenge. We've also had this unity government, which is an opportunity for our policy. And the president was clear that we needed to do something we'd done before, which is change and adapt to the new circumstances. So he was interested in getting a range of new ideas. And I think what Secretary Rumsfeld did was, in some sense, put a bit of a laundry list of ideas that should be considered. The president made clear he wanted to open the aperture, really have a re-look and look at a variety of ideas. And Secretary Rumsfeld, basically, was giving a list for consideration. It was a useful and constructive memo, but it was not a proposal for a new course of action. It was much more a list of things that needed to be considered.

SCHIEFFER: Isn't that much different than what we were being told in public before the election and, in fact, in the days after the election? I didn't hear anybody talking about a change in strategy, a change in policy. Every time you heard from the president, he was saying, we're going to stay the course. He didn't use those words, anymore, before the election. But since then, he says we're going to stay in Iraq until the job is done. There seems to be a real difference here in what the administration is talking to each other about and what the public is hearing.

From the December 4 Los Angeles Times article:

National security advisor Stephen Hadley and Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad sought to portray Bush's actions as a bold leadership step, not a reaction to calls for a change in strategy by the Iraq Study Group, congressional Democrats and even his own outgoing Defense secretary, Donald H. Rumsfeld.

They said an internal Rumsfeld memo proposing major changes in Iraq policy that surfaced publicly Saturday was actually part of that initiative, not an admission of failure or a reflection of dissension.

"The president had asked agencies to begin a review of our policy in Iraq, and what Secretary Rumsfeld did, I think, very helpfully, was put together a sort of laundry list of ideas that ought to be considered," Hadley told ABC's "This Week."

"We have to make some changes," he said. "We need a new way forward in Iraq, and that's what this policy review is all about."

From the December 4 Associated Press article:

The latest [leaked memo], first reported in Sunday's New York Times, showed that Donald H. Rumsfeld called for a "major adjustment" in U.S. tactics on Nov. 6 -- the day before an election that cost Republicans the Congress and Rumsfeld his job as defense secretary.

Hadley played down the memo as a laundry list of ideas rather than a call for a new course of action.

He said that Bush just before a pivotal election was not portraying a different sense of the war to the public than his own defense secretary was giving him in private.

The president "has said publicly what Rumsfeld said, that things are not proceeding well enough or fast enough in Iraq," Hadley said.

From the December 3 edition of ABC's This Week:

STEPHANOPOULOS: So the secretary [Rumsfeld] wrote that memo just two days before the president let him go. Was this a last-minute bid to save his job?

HADLEY: No, I don't think at all. The president had, as you know, asked agencies to begin a review of our policy in Iraq. And what Secretary Rumsfeld did, I think very helpfully, was put together a sort of laundry list of ideas that ought to be considered as part of that review. The president really wanted us to open the aperture, consider all ideas, and it was input by Secretary Rumsfeld, helpful input into that process.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So the president agrees a major adjustment is necessary?

HADLEY: He said that. He has said publicly what Secretary Rumsfeld said. That things are not proceeding well enough or fast enough in Iraq. We have to make some changes. We need a new way forward in Iraq, and that's what this policy review is all about.

STEPHANOPOULOS: The president -- I mean the secretary listed several options in his memo. I want to put up three of them that he said were above the line, to be considered. Number one, position substantial U.S. forces near the Iranian and Syrian borders. Two, withdraw U.S. forces from vulnerable positions, cities, patrolling, et cetera, and move U.S. forces to a quick-reaction-force status. And three, begin modest withdrawals of U.S. and coalition forces, quote, "start taking your hand off the bicycle seat so Iraqis know they have to pull up their socks, step up and take responsibility for their country." These are major changes in U.S. policy. Some have been called for by Democrats. Are they being considered by the president?

From the December 3 edition of CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer:

BLITZER: It looks, Senator Kyl, like he's recommending what so many of his Democratic critics have been suggesting, including [Rep.] John Murtha of Pennsylvania, basically, putting this timeline in place.

KYL: With all due respect, I think you took that out of context. He had a menu of options that he said should be considered. These were not recommendations. And he didn't have a specific plan.

BLITZER: But let me interrupt for a second, Senator. Because he had above the line and below the line. Below the line were the ones he was rejecting. Above the line were recommendations he thought should be given serious consideration. This was above the line.