A Washington Post editorial adopted several claims that the Bush administration has made in defense of its agreement to let a company owned by the government of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) manage six U.S. ports, even though those claims are contradicted by the Post's own news reporting. News reports in the Post and The New York Times also cited without challenge the administration claims about the length of the review, even though their own previous reporting directly contradicted the claims.
In detailing the evaluation process the Bush administration purportedly undertook before agreeing to permit a company owned by the government of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to manage port terminals in six major U.S. cities, several media outlets reported that the administration approved of the deal only after a thorough review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). But none of the reports noted the glaring inconsistency in the administration's account: that Donald Rumsfeld, a key member of CFIUS, acknowledged in a February 21 press conference that he possessed "minimal information" about the deal because he had "just heard about this over the weekend."
In an article about President Bush's renewable energy tour, The Washington Post overlooked the White House's retreat from Bush's pledge to "replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025." The article also reported on Bush's planned visit to the National Renewal Energy Laboratory without mentioning that just before his visit, the federal government had reallocated $5 million to restore the jobs of 32 employees who had been laid off as a result of administration budget cuts.
Despite multiple reports on the subject, The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Associated Press have ignored several important issues concerning a proposal by Sen. Mike DeWine (R-OH) to resolve any potential legal problems involving the Bush administration's warrantless domestic surveillance program by crafting legislation that would exempt the program from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
In her February 19 column, Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell claimed that liberals have complained that Post columnist and reporter Dana Milbank has "skewered Democrats." But Howell said next to nothing about complaints liberals have registered about Milbank's work. Instead, she simply wrote that liberals have objected to Milbank's columns "skewer[ing] Democrats" and made no effort to consider the actual flaws in his January 31 column, including at least one outright falsehood and one distortion.
A February 15 USA Today article suggested that criticism of Vice President Dick Cheney's decision to withhold information concerning his accidental shooting of a hunting companion came only from Democrats. But a separate article in the same edition of USA Today noted that the conservative National Review was also critical of Cheney's handling of the shooting, and other newspapers also have quoted conservatives and Republicans criticizing the vice president.
Reporting on Vice President Dick Cheney's admission that he had consumed "a beer at lunch" prior to accidentally shooting a hunting companion, numerous media outlets failed to report that Cheney's admission contradicted earlier statements by Katharine and Anne Armstrong, co-owners of the ranch where the accident occurred, who had said that Dr. Pepper was served with lunch and "heavily implied," according to The New York Times, that "no alcohol was served at all."
A Washington Post article characterized a Senate vote blocking a bill that would have created a trust fund for asbestos victims as a "victory for Democrats and their trial-lawyer allies." In fact, 11 Republicans voted with Democrats to prevent the bill from moving forward.
The Washington Post's Dana Milbank falsely suggested that former Rep. Bob Barr was the lone conservative critic of the National Security Agency's (NSA) warrantless domestic spying program to attend the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). Focusing largely on the negative reaction of CPAC attendees to Barr's criticism of the program, Milbank called Barr "the skunk at CPAC's party this year," while failing to report that David Keene, the chairman of the American Conservative Union, which sponsored CPAC, and another prominent conservative who spoke at the convention, Americans for Tax Reform president Grover Norquist, have also criticized the warrantless surveillance program.
A Washington Post article about the Bush administration's warrantless domestic surveillance program falsely claimed that the program's critics are "some Democrats." In fact, many Republicans, including Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Arlen Specter, also disagree with the administration's legal justifications for the program.
A Washington Post article about the debate over asbestos legislation described support for the bill as bipartisan, but referred only to "Democratic" foes. In fact, the bill has bipartisan opposition and bipartisan support.
Most major news outlets did not report the dispute over Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Arlen Specter's refusal to swear in Attorney General Alberto Gonzales at the committee's hearing on the Bush administration's warrantless domestic surveillance program.
Few major news outlets have covered the fact -- first reported by the New York Daily News -- that in a letter to I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's defense attorneys, special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald said that numerous emails from 2003 are missing from the White House computer archives.
Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank depicted advocates of impeachment as a fringe element of the Democratic Party, while ignoring polling that shows that a majority of Americans believe Congress should consider impeaching Bush over his authorization of warrantless domestic surveillance. Milbank also falsely reported that Sen. John F. Kerry (D-MA) "got only 25 of the 60 needed votes" to mount a filibuster against President Bush's nomination of Samuel A. Alito Jr. to the Supreme Court. In fact, it was Alito's supporters who "needed" the 60 votes to end debate on the nomination.