During a washingtonpost.com discussion, when John Solomon was asked why a recent article he co-wrote on fundraisers did not mention Alan B. Fabian -- Mitt Romney's recently indicted former national finance co-chairman -- he did not mention Fabian but claimed that the article included a passage on Robert Lichfield, another Romney fundraiser facing several lawsuits, but that "it was edited out," adding that this "sometimes happens ... to make room for late-breaking news."
A Washington Post editorial arguing for legally mandated full disclosure of campaign donation "bundlers" left out key facts about the two cases that it cited, Geoffrey Fieger and Norman Hsu. The editorial did not note that prosecutors have reportedly confirmed that John Edwards' campaign was unaware of alleged illegal contributions made by Fieger and absolved the campaign of any wrongdoing; similarly, the editorial failed to note that the Wall Street Journal article it cited offered no evidence implicating Hillary Clinton with regard to Hsu.
The Washington Post and the Associated Press uncritically reported Bush's statement that "General [David] Petraeus and Ambassador [Ryan] Crocker tell me if the kind of success we are now seeing continues, it will be possible to maintain the same level of security with fewer American forces." But neither noted reports -- including by the AP -- that Petraeus and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have said that the number of U.S. troops in Iraq will have to decrease next year regardless of success.
The Washington Post twice reported that Republicans need a "net gain" of just one seat in the 2008 elections to recapture control of the Senate. However, a "net gain" of one seat for Republicans would result in a 50-50 split. For the Post's assertion to be correct, a senator currently caucusing with the Democrats would have to defect or the GOP would have to keep the White House, neither of which was noted by the Post.
The Washington Post wrote that Gen. David Petraeus "is expected to report to Congress next month that there are some signs of progress in Iraq and that a precipitous U.S. withdrawal could be disastrous." But Murray gave no indication that the term "precipitous withdrawal" is used by Republicans to attack Iraq withdrawal plans, nor did she cite a single lawmaker who has called for a "precipitous U.S. withdrawal" from Iraq.
The Washington Post has recently portrayed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as opposing meetings with leaders of countries hostile to the United States. In fact, Clinton has opposed committing to meeting with such leaders without preconditions and within her first year in office.
In reports on a recent advertisement buy by Freedom's Watch in support of the Iraq war, media reports have failed to resolve the question of which members of Congress the ad buys are targeting, despite the apparent newsworthiness of the issue. For instance, The Washington Post suggested that the ad campaign is an attack on Democrats, a suggestion repeated by Time's Karen Tumulty; other reports have not even mentioned the issue; while still others have asserted that the ads target both Democrats and Republicans. However, according to analyses by war opponents, the buys target mainly Republicans, a charge Freedom's Watch called "propaganda by our enemies."
In reports on President Bush's speech arguing that withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq would "lead to widespread death and suffering as it did in Southeast Asia" following the Vietnam War, numerous media outlets failed to point out Bush's previous statements disavowing parallels between Iraq and Vietnam, while other reports did not note any criticism of the speech.
Washington Post columnist David Broder asserted that "[Karl] Rove had drunk deeply of the magic potion dispensed by Lee Atwater, the South Carolina whiz who had absorbed the anger and frustration of the white Southern blue-collar families with whom he was raised." But Broder did not mention Atwater's repeated attempts to play on white voters' sentiments about race.
A Washington Post article reported that the pro-Iraq war campaign by the nonprofit organization Freedom's Watch is part of a "burst of effort" that "has been striking, if only because Democrats left for their August recess confident that Republicans would be on the defensive by now. Instead, the GOP has gone on the attack." However, two analyses of the Freedom's Watch ad buy concluded that some 90 percent of those members of Congress targeted by the campaign are Republicans.
An August 20 Washington Post article stated that "Congress is awaiting a report from Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and U.S. ambassador to Iraq Ryan C. Crocker on the war's progress, and their view is likely to go a long way toward determining how Congress votes on further funding for the war." In fact, the 2007 supplemental funding bill for the Iraq war requires that President Bush prepare and submit the report to Congress, after receiving input from Petraeus, Crocker, and other senior foreign policy and military officials.
Fox News' Jim Angle asserted that the upcoming report to Congress on the Iraq war will be "General David Petraeus' report." In fact, the bill mandating the report requires that President Bush submit the report to Congress and that Petraeus "be made available to testify in open and closed sessions before the relevant committees of the Congress." Similarly, a Washington Post editorial contradicted its own paper's reporting in asserting that Petraeus is "expected to elaborate" on his claims of progress in Iraq "in a report to Congress in September."