Reporting on Reid exchange, ABC's Tapper suggested without evidence that Sen. Graham wants "a new direction in Iraq"
On the July 12 broadcast of ABC News' World News with Charles Gibson, ABC News senior national correspondent Jake Tapper aired a clip of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) attacking Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and then asserted, "Republicans on the Hill ... are looking for a new direction in Iraq, but say Democrats are not reaching out to them to forge a consensus for a responsible way forward" -- an assertion for which Tapper provided no support. In fact, Graham has argued in support of the current military strategy in Iraq, and on July 11 issued a press release in which he expressed support for President Bush's "belief that we must give General [David] Petraeus [commander of U.S. forces in Iraq] and our troops time to carry out the new strategy."
Further, although Tapper reported that Republicans accused Democrats of "not reaching out to them," the Senate amendment that was the likely subject of Tapper's report has three Republican co-sponsors: Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR), Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME).
Contrary to Tapper's suggestion, Graham does not appear to be "looking for a new direction in Iraq" and waiting for Democrats to "reach[] out" to him. Following a trip to Iraq, Graham released the July 11 statement in which he expressed his support of Bush's assessment that U.S. forces need more time to implement the current strategy. From his press release:
"I appreciate the opportunity to meet with President Bush and brief him on my recent visit to Iraq.
"President Bush remains firm in his belief that we must give General Petraeus and our troops time to carry out the new strategy. He understands the new strategy has already greatly diminished Al Qaeda in Iraq. The military progress is undeniable, even if the Iraqi political reconciliation efforts have not been as successful.
"General Petraeus is making great progress in crushing Al Qaeda in Iraq. Al Qaeda overplayed their hand by engaging in incredible acts of brutality and barbarism against Iraqis living under their control. In turn, Iraqis are breaking free from them and joining forces with us. The only thing that would allow Al Qaeda in Iraq to make a comeback would be to prematurely stop the surge.
Also, while reporting that the Senate will vote on a troop withdrawal "measure" that is "similar" to a bill the House of Representatives passed on July 12, Tapper highlighted an exchange he had with Reid. During that exchange, Reid discussed a proposed amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for 2008 sponsored by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI) and Jack Reed (D-RI). Harry Reid described the measure as "critically important" because "[i]t transitions the mission within 120 days, and by the first day of May of next year ... our combat troops will be out of there." Continuing, Reid noted that the amendment states that the non-combat troops remaining in the country after April 30, 2008, would be "left to do counterterrorism" and to "continu[e] to train the Iraqis and protect[] our resources." According to Levin's press release on the proposed legislation, the amendment "would require the president to begin reducing the number of American troops in Iraq within four months and to transition the mission of our remaining military forces there to force protection, training of Iraqi Security Forces, and counterterrorism missions. It would further provide that our troops be out of Iraq by April 30, 2008, except for those needed for the specified limited missions." (The House bill would require most troops to leave Iraq by April 1, 2008.) While Tapper did not air the portion of his exchange with Reid making clear that he was talking about the Levin-Reed amendment, he did highlight it on his blog.
In introducing Tapper's report, anchor Charles Gibson reported that President Bush "was trying to buy some time, for the troops and the surge," whereas "many Democrats ... made clear, they have no intention of waiting" -- suggesting that Bush is on the side of the troops, while Congress is not. Media Matters for America previously has identified a pattern in the media of suggesting that defenders of the Bush administration on Iraq support the troops, while those who advocate withdrawal do not.
From the July 12 edition of ABC News' World News with Charles Gibson:
GIBSON: Well, the president, as Martha indicated, was trying to buy some time, for the troops and the surge, but on Capitol Hill, many Democrats, today, made clear, they have no intention of waiting. Jake Tapper has that part of the story. Jake?
TAPPER: Good evening, Charlie. Well, just moments ago the House of Representatives passed a bill, 223-201, that would withdraw most U.S. combat troops from Iraq, by April 1st, 2008. The bill the House passed tonight would require U.S. combat troops to start coming home within four months.
REP. JOHN LEWIS (D-GA) [video clip]: This resolution is not a panacea. It will not get us out of Iraq tomorrow, next week, or next month. But it is a step that will bring an end to this madness.
REP. TOM PRICE (R-GA) [video clip]: Once again, the majority is placing politics over national security, politics over reasoned policy, politics and partisanship over citizens and sanity.
TAPPER: The Senate will vote on a similar measure next week. Some foreign policy experts predict that such a U.S. withdrawal could unleash genocide against innocent Iraqis. It's a subject Democrats do not want to discuss.
[start video clip]
TAPPER: Do you think the Iraqi people will be safer with U.S. troops out?
REID: It is clear that the Iraqi people don't want us there. It is clear that there is a state of chaos in Iraq, and it is up to the Iraqi people to make themselves safe.
TAPPER: With all due respect, Senator, you didn't even -- you didn't answer my question.
REID: This is not a debate. We're answering questions. Yes, young man.
TAPPER: Will the Iraqis be safer?
REID: Anyone else have a question?
[end video clip]
TAPPER: This week's renewed push to withdraw troops, two months before General Petraeus reports to Congress on progress of the surge strategy, has Republicans saying these votes are more about politics than national security.
GRAHAM [video clip]: Harry Reid was quoted as saying, "We're going to pick up Senate seats as a result of this war."
TAPPER: Republicans on the Hill who are looking for a new direction in Iraq, but say Democrats are not reaching out to them to forge a consensus for a responsible way forward. Democrats say Republicans need to build up the courage to sign on to their efforts. Charlie?
GIBSON: Jake Tapper, reporting on the events on Capitol Hill today.
Too bad Reid didn't check the handbook: after ignoring or slighting Tapper's question twice, he is entitled to ship that sucker off to Gitmo.
Isn't he? Or is that just the Deciderer? Or Gitmo is reserved for those who offend the Repugnants?
You know, it's funny how it's always the Democrats who are supposed to reach out to the Republicans on this or any topic.
TAPPER: With all due respect, Senator, you didn't even -- you didn't answer my question.
I find it interesting that Tapper is being so combative here. If he thought Reid was evading the question--which by the way was a moronic one to begin with--he could have simply asked a followup to try to draw him out. But instead he adopts an accusatory tone, as if he is a lawyer grilling a hostile witness. I mean how the heck is he supposed to answer the bloody strawman question anyway? I don't recall Reid or any of the Dems saying that pulling the troops out would make Iraq safer, so Tapper had no basis for framing the question the way he did. His whole report, in fact, was so sneering and derogatory towards Dems that it could have been produced from the Fox news gutter.
Reid did answer the question though. He basically said the Iraqis would decide that but Tapper did not like the answer.
NOT SURPRISE! TAPPER WILL DO GREAT AT FOX NEWS,BUT HE AND ABC NEWS ARE FOX NEWS ANYWAY. HE IS ALWAYS HARD ON THE DEMS BUT GIVE REPUBLICANS A FREE PAST.
The righties are beginning to see the writing on the wall. They KNOW this war is going to end, sooner or later, and they are now trying to position themselves to take credit for the withdrawl.
Of the 33 senate seats up for re-election next year, either 20 or 21 (I forget) are REPUBLICANS. At least half of those are going to switch sides sometime between now and next year's convention. And at least half are going to lose their re-election campaigns. The one's who don't want that to happen are going to come around, and the right-wing media is going to try to give them all the credit for ending the war, instead of the Democrats who failed to "reach out to them".
BTW, Jake Tapper is a smarmy little prick.
Julie Millican blares in the headline that there is no evidence that Graham wants a new direction in Iraq...this followed by the quote of Graham:
"President Bush remains firm in his belief that we must give General Petraeus and our troops time to carry out the new strategy. He understands the new strategy has already greatly diminished Al Qaeda in Iraq."
Millican goes beyond pandering in this delusional report...Graham has clearly articulated support for the new surge strategy.
Well, the "surge" isn't working. The government still only exists inside the Green Zone. Outside is nothing but militias, death squads, kidnap gangs, black marketeers, tribal cheifs and sect leaders. The surge has done nothing but to put Shi'a death squads at checkpoints all thru Baghdad, a predominately Sunni city, as US forces, now composed of illiterates and criminals, are ransacking entire neighbourhoods in snatch-n-grab-all raids. But this has been the Grand Strategy all over Iraq since the first years of the war.
Petreaus is too dumb and his masters too evil to get the job done. The US soldiers must stop raiding and start building. Schools and hospitals. Win the hearts with healing...but when the motive is evil, the occupation will be evil. They make no effort to win over the population, just to rule them.
I would submit to you that calling our troops illiterate and criminals is abominable. You sir, have no decency. Despite what you think of this war, to attack our troops and not the mission is unbelievable. You spit in the face of anyone who has put their lives on the line so you can freely spout your drivel. Have you no decency??????????????????
I would submit to you that it is the same strategy just with more troops.
But we've always been at war with Eurasia. . .