Per the Times Caucus blog Sarah Paulson picked up the Washington Times story that Obama interfered with and attempted to influence Iraqi Foreign Minister Zebari while the Bush Administration was trying to negotiate the status of US forces in Iraq. However, the Times reporter seems to be unwilling or unable to actually read the story on which he pretends to report. Here we go, with my emphasis:
In making her remarks, Ms. Palin cited a disputed report in The Washington Times today that said Mr. Obama, on a trip to Iraq with other members of the Senate, had encouraged an Iraqi official to delay an agreement that would extend the presence of American troops in Iraq. Mr. Obama’s campaign denied that claim, as did other attendees on the trip.
Wrong! As the Wash Times made clear (and I had explained at tedious length last September) there were *two* relevant contacts between Obama and Zebari - a June phone call while Zebari was in the States and the Baghdad meeting in July. Today's Wash Times is not exactly impenetrable on this point:
Mr. Obama spoke June 16 to Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari when he was in Washington, according to both the Iraqi Embassy in Washington and the Obama campaign. Both said the conversation was at Mr. Zebari's request and took place on the phone because Mr. Obama was traveling.
However, the two sides differ over what Mr. Obama said.
"In the conversation, the senator urged Iraq to delay the [memorandum of understanding] between Iraq and the United States until the new administration was in place," said Samir Sumaidaie, Iraq's ambassador to the United States.
He said Mr. Zebari replied that any such agreement would not bind a new administration. "The new administration will have a free hand to opt out," he said the foreign minister told Mr. Obama.
Mr. Sumaidaie did not participate in the call, he said, but stood next to Mr. Zebari during the conversation and was briefed by him immediately afterward.
Not too mysterious, is it? June, a phone call, Zebari in Washington - clear enough? Yet in addition to the error already emphasized above, the Times continued with this:
The Obama campaign, which faced these allegations in mid-September, reiterated its denials today. It called them categorically untrue, citing spokesmen for other senators who attended, including Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, and Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, who agree that Mr. Obama informed the Iraqis at the beginning of the meeting that the United States spoke with one voice on foreign policy and he would not contradict the Bush administration.
Well, if the Obama camp really rebutted the allegation that the June phone call to Washington was improper by citing attendees from the July meeting in Baghdad they were sort of missing the point. But with tough, hard-nosed reporters like those of the Times asking the questions I suppose they could have said anything at all and gotten a pass. Ridiculous but unsurprising.
Michael N. Grynbaum is the Times "reporter" who provided this outstanding effort. If anyone has an email address where we should sing his praises to whomever is pretending to be an editor at the Times that would be lovely.
Three and half more weeks of this sort of silliness and they can start reporting again, if anyone is still bothering to read them.
You are so cool sometimes.
Posted by: happyfeet | October 10, 2008 at 10:43 PM
Well, I posted your thread in the comments --Here's the best I can do on email addys:
NEWS DEPARTMENT To send comments and suggestions (about news coverage only) or to report errors that call for correction, e-mail nytnews@nytimes.com or leave a message at 1-888-NYT-NEWS. To contact a reporter, click on the byline of one of his or her articles to access the reader e-mail form. You can also find any reporter's archive here (alphabetized by last name; reporters' names are italicized): Times Topics: People
The Editors
executive-editor@nytimes.com
managing-editor@nytimes.com
The Newsroom
news-tips@nytimes.com; thearts@nytimes.com; bizday@nytimes.com; foreign@nytimes.com; metro@nytimes.com; national@nytimes.com; sports@nytimes.com; washington@nytimes.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLIC EDITOR To reach Clark Hoyt, who represents the readers, e-mail public@nytimes.com or call (212) 556-7652.
Posted by: clarice | October 10, 2008 at 10:56 PM
TM:
If anyone has an email address where we should sing his praises to whomever is pretending to be an editor at the Times that would be lovely.
I suppose you could go here and click on the link for "Send an E-Mail to Michael M. Grynbaum" if you so desired...
(it's middle initial "M", not an "N", FWIW)
Posted by: hit and run | October 10, 2008 at 10:58 PM
Now that we have that solved, help me raise $1.5 b by Monday--Chaco needs it to pay off an unfortunate bet he made here today. (I do think TM should ban wagering at JOM.)
Posted by: clarice | October 10, 2008 at 11:01 PM
I do think TM should ban wagering at JOM
2 to 1 he doesn't.
Posted by: I Am Not Tom Maguire | October 10, 2008 at 11:02 PM
Three and half more weeks of this sort of silliness and they can start reporting again,
Not really, because there certainly not going to do any real reporting about the Obama Administration. The permanent campaign of the Obama White House will beget a permanently in-the-tank NYT.
Posted by: R C Dean | October 10, 2008 at 11:03 PM
Check ACE - LUN
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | October 10, 2008 at 11:05 PM
I wouldn't bet against you , I am Not TM.
Posted by: clarice | October 10, 2008 at 11:06 PM
Cool, ts--you now when you sent that to me I was so tired I missed the third party(New Party) at that address..
Posted by: clarice | October 10, 2008 at 11:11 PM
I saw that Tops. Very nice work.
Posted by: Elliott | October 10, 2008 at 11:11 PM
"Three and half more weeks of this sort of silliness and they can start reporting again, if anyone is still bothering to read them."
Surely this was a lame attempt at a joke. They haven't been reporting for years, dating all the way back to Duranty's Pulizer Prize winning lies.
Posted by: Antimedia | October 10, 2008 at 11:14 PM
Well when Lord Obama takes over he will shut them down like his boy Hugo if they get out of line. Keep in mind the story of the press club on Lord Obama's plane. He treats them like crap and they still do his bidding. What tools.
Posted by: Paul | October 10, 2008 at 11:15 PM
Your name in lights, Tops!
Posted by: JM Hanes | October 10, 2008 at 11:25 PM
Oh, Yes, this should resonate. The lack of candor about the connection to ACORN and ACORN's involvement in voting fraud and the market meltdown may just give enough voters an inkling of the methods, to which even we are just beginning to snap. What a horror show!
===============================================
Posted by: kim | October 10, 2008 at 11:46 PM
And in the mean time Gawker is flogging a forged High School transcript for Sarah.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 10, 2008 at 11:46 PM
Now that we have that solved, help me raise $1.5 b by Monday--Chaco needs it to pay off an unfortunate bet he made here today. (I do think TM should ban wagering at JOM.)
Now, now --- the market could close unchanged on Monday.
Besides, I called today's close.
Eventually.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 10, 2008 at 11:48 PM
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005299/>Sarah Paulson? Dolphin Girl for VP!
Posted by: John | October 11, 2008 at 12:03 AM
The comments at Ace's are priceless. At least, someone is saying what I'm thinking. :/
Posted by: SunnyDay | October 11, 2008 at 12:05 AM
Chaco, that's true, but I won't be able to sleep until this is over..promise me, no more big gambles any more!
Posted by: clarice | October 11, 2008 at 12:10 AM
TM has Paulson on the brain.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 11, 2008 at 12:22 AM
Uhhh... I believe the story was from The WASHINGTON Times not the New York Times. I would expect this kind of thing from the NYT.
You might find an e-mail address at http://washtimes.com .
Posted by: Choey | October 11, 2008 at 12:27 AM
Uhhh... I believe the story was from The WASHINGTON Times not the New York Times. I would expect this kind of thing from the NYT.
You might find an e-mail address at http://washtimes.com .
Posted by: Choey | October 11, 2008 at 12:27 AM
Uhhh... I believe the story was from The WASHINGTON Times not the New York Times. I would expect this kind of thing from the NYT.
You might find an e-mail address at http://washtimes.com .
Posted by: Choey | October 11, 2008 at 12:27 AM
Speaking or reading comprehension--Choey, the NYT blog misread a Washington Times report.
Posted by: clarice | October 11, 2008 at 12:30 AM
Sarah's got a link on the other thread suggesting an ACORN RICO investigation netting big fish and reporting to Fitz. Is there something besides theophylline in what I'm drinking?
Maybe McCain's going to let Mukasey tell America they should fear Obama.
===================================
Posted by: kim | October 11, 2008 at 12:39 AM
kim, pls read my lips--I know that story['s been circulating for several days--along with another story that Rezko's talking and Obama's in trouble--I think both reports are fanciful. Even if they were true, it is unlikely that any public event will occur on such cases before the election.
Posted by: clarice | October 11, 2008 at 12:44 AM
The Fitzmas fantasy(ies) is(are) now almost tie with the fake story that the judge had signed an order requiring Obama to provide his birth certificate--another rumor based on a misreading of the legal record.
Posted by: clarice | October 11, 2008 at 12:46 AM
OK, c, the wish bears the beast. Hide and watch, hey.
=============================
Posted by: kim | October 11, 2008 at 12:56 AM
This is the State Media. One Party, One Media dedicated to the glory of The One.
Posted by: Moe | October 11, 2008 at 12:57 AM
The problem with the Berg story is that for a lousy $15 or so, Obama could produce a long form certified birth certificate, but instead he has elected to pay high-priced lawyers to file motions. Why is that?
And why is it just this week that the Obama campaign has admitted that Obama held Kenyan citizenship? Everyone pooh poohs this as being relevant, since it expired years ago, so why post about it now? The only reason anyone questioned it was because he refused to produce a legitimate birth certificate.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 11, 2008 at 01:11 AM
He's not paying out of his pocket to defend a principle--the Court has no jurisdiction, he says.
But regardless, the story is false and my point is there's no stopping it. Everytime I turn around someone else is spreading it again.
Posted by: clarice | October 11, 2008 at 01:14 AM
Let's see, Kenya, Indonesia, Hawaii; this guy pops out of wells everywhere. Must be a sign.
================================
Posted by: kim | October 11, 2008 at 01:14 AM
He's not paying out of his pocket to defend a principle
I knew he had one.
Too bad it's, "the courts can't tell me what to do."
this guy pops out of wells everywhere
Where's W'aald O.
Posted by: bgates | October 11, 2008 at 01:23 AM
I personally don't care if he is hiding something or not. If it came out that he was hiding something that would make him ineligible to be president, it wouldn't matter. The dems would just change the rules and the media would go along with it and the right would all be branded wackos for even bringing it up.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 11, 2008 at 01:32 AM
He's not paying out of his pocket to defend a principle--the Court has no jurisdiction, he says.
No one has jurisdiction over The One.
But I'm with Sara. O.K. So how many countries has Barry been a citizen of? There's just so many weird things about Barry.
Posted by: Pofarmer | October 11, 2008 at 08:06 AM
To his base, that's a feature. It seems a given that a polity so driven mad by BDS could accept a simulacrum.
=================
Posted by: kim | October 11, 2008 at 08:10 AM
You guys are forgetting one small detail: the NYT, and others like them, are now operating in their own version of reality. In this world, they can say whatever they want with impunity, disregarding any and all inconvenient facts as they see fit. In this brave new, liberal world, all that matters is their own distorted view of reality. These guys are better than Uncle Joe how?
Wait until the media's sycophants in Washington start passing laws forbidding factual reporting, relying instead on "enlightened reality" to run the country. Look how successful the left's version of reality has been during this election cycle so far. The number of regular Main street people buying into the liberal fantasy is overwhelming, facts be damned; I see it every day where I work.
Rezko can sing like a bird and it will not matter one whit. At this point, they'd vote "the One" into office if he offed his own mother on national television, lauding him the whole while for being "cool" enough to share with them in such a personal way.
Posted by: scooter | October 11, 2008 at 08:10 AM
Geez, I hope you are wrong, scooter; the double whammy of ACORN subverting the markets and the voting process is going to be telling for the next three weeks. Obama will find himself trying to explain himself in his ad buy, and there will be just enough people who've peeked behind the curtain for it to become parody.
===================================
Posted by: kim | October 11, 2008 at 08:20 AM
In July 1996, the NYT's wrote...
Then in January 2007, Time described Katz as...
Posted by: Rocco | October 11, 2008 at 08:33 AM
<>
"SARAH PAULSON"
LOL
Posted by: Coco | October 11, 2008 at 08:55 AM
Michael Barone has a hard-hitting article up at Real Clear Politics about the coming Obama thugocracy. Well worth reading.
Also, don't get too excited about the Palin "abuse" report. When you actually read it, she is exonerated for firing the official. She apparently "abused" her authority by not doing anything to prevent her husband from pressuring the guy to fire the disgusting trooper. So she abused by not abusing. This essentially is a political dispute between the legislature and the executive (sound familiar?) And that French guy who was in charge is helping conduct the Obama campaign in Alaska.
Posted by: bio mom | October 11, 2008 at 09:24 AM
I think you're right scooter. It would take something of cataclysmic proportions to get the press to turn.
But I think this information is seeping out among the people without the press. Dirty politicians who rig elections and queer up international agreements do not play well.
I'm not optimistic that McCain can still win with the system stacked against him, but Obamessiah (PBUH) will enter office bloodied and broken.
Much of the electorate will have a degree or more of doubt about His integrity. Congress will still be held accountable back in the bitter, clinging districts, and the economy will constrict tax revenue, putting a lot of Obamessiah's pet projects on the back burner. Any overtly crazy move He makes in the first two years will be met with revolt at the ballot box.
Or, I might just be mentally preparing myself for a very rough road ahead.
Posted by: Soylent Red | October 11, 2008 at 09:25 AM
Speaking of the press - in one of the blogs yesterday I read that McCain supporters booed, flipped the bird, or gave a thumbs down to the press caravan as it arrived.
Go team!
Posted by: centralcal | October 11, 2008 at 09:35 AM
They're partying like its 1789. I'm not surprised at McCain's demeanour. He may well be afraid of the mob, too.
But the Mainstream Press has become excessive and precious. Some more of their talking heads are coming off.
=========================
Posted by: kim | October 11, 2008 at 11:07 AM
Tim Russert? I don't know who can replace him, but I know the heart palpitations are getting worse and allot of people are worried about their bodies. The Messiah may use 'the power' and get things nice and neat for his White House. So, when your seeing shit and hearing shit and then your have a stroke or heart attack it's because of the the 'impeach the power of the Messiah blog.'
He's going to be impeached. It's not worth someone dying over, it's just Bush again.
Posted by: MNBi | October 11, 2008 at 11:10 AM
Watt's Up With That has nine-part video of Michael Mann of Crook't Hockey Stick fame speaking recently in Rhode Island. The last three-minute segment features a man yelling at him for demeaning Penn State University, and Mann's response speaking of 'fringe bloggers'. Anger is in the skeptical community, too. And it's about a similar creation of a false paradigm and the press's complicity in its perpetuation. This is the face of corruption.
===================================
Posted by: kim | October 11, 2008 at 11:13 AM
The power.
Posted by: LJ | October 11, 2008 at 11:22 AM
"they can start reporting again"
That would imply that at some time in the past, they reported something. I don't think you can establish that predicate.
Posted by: Fat Man | October 11, 2008 at 07:28 PM
I do not know how to use the wakfu money ; my friend tells me how to use.
Posted by: sophy | January 06, 2009 at 09:29 PM