Outlets Disguise Agenda of Ex-Journalist's Group as Iraq 'Lies' Hyped

Photo of Brent Baker.
By Brent Baker | January 24, 2008 - 06:55 ET

AP, MSNBC, CNN and the New York Times on Wednesday all promoted a “study” by a couple of affiliated far-left groups, supposedly documenting “935 false statements” about Iraq made by Bush officials, but in hyping the proof of “lies” which led to war, the news outlets disguised the ideology of the groups -- led by a former ABC and CBS reporter/producer -- and how many of the “false” statements were about Iraq possessing WMD, which FNC's Brit Hume pointed out was “a concept nearly universally accepted by most of the world's intelligence services at the time.”

Keith Olbermann, who in 2006 slammed the Media Research Center as a “rabid right-wing spin group,” Wednesday night on Countdown with “935 lies” on screen on top of a picture of Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney, described the Center for Public Integrity and Fund for Independence in Journalism as merely “two non-profit groups” who have “done the algebra” on “the administration's countless lies about Iraq.” Last September, CNN's Jack Cafferty accurately described the MRC as a “conservative media watchdog outfit,” but he euphemistically tagged the left-wing groups as “two non-profit journalism groups” with a study which “found President Bush led the pack with 260 lies.” Cafferty's labeling echoed AP's reference to “two non-profit journalism organizations.”

MSNBC's Dan Abrams lent the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) credibility as “a non-profit, non-partisan investigative journalism group.” On WashingtonPost.com, Dan Froomkin hailed the “non-profit group pursuing old-fashioned accountability journalism” and a Wednesday New York Times story cited CPI as “a research group that focuses on ethics in government and public policy.”

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

(For much more on the January 23 New York Times article, check this posting, “'Remarkable' New Left-Wing Database Shows Bush Lied Us Into War,” by Clay Waters on the MRC's TimesWatch site.)

The CPI report, “False Pretenses: Following 9/11, President Bush and seven top officials of his administration waged a carefully orchestrated campaign of misinformation about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq,” carried the bylines of Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith. CPI's bio for Lewis noted how he founded CPI “in 1989 and served as its executive director until December, 2004. He is now the president of The Fund for Independence in Journalism.” The bio also recalled:

From 1977 through 1988, Lewis did investigative reporting at ABC News, and at CBS News as a producer for senior correspondent Mike Wallace at 60 Minutes.

He may look familiar, since from the late 1990s through 2004, he was a frequent source in TV network stories about money in politics. The screen shot above is from a soundbite on the May 11, 2004 NBC Nightly News.

FNC's Brit Hume on Wednesday night noted the common belief of many of the statements considered false and how George Soros funds CPI. From the January 23 “Grapevine” segment on Special Report with Brit Hume:

A study by two self-described non-profit journalism organizations accuses President Bush and his advisers of 935 false statements about the threat from Iraq in the two years following the 9-11 attacks. But a large number of those statements were drawn from repeated assertions that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction -- a concept nearly universally accepted by most of the world's intelligence services at the time. For example, President Bush said of Hussein quote, "He has weapons of mass destruction. He's used them before. He's used them on his own people before." In fact we know now that Hussein had chemical weapons. He was being tried on charges of killing 5,000 Iraqi Kurds with chemical weapons when he was executed for other crimes.

The study was done by the Fund for Independence in Journalism -- which is an arm of the Center for Public Integrity -- which is heavily funded by Bush critic George Soros.

In his “Best of the Web Today” rundown for the Wall Street Journal's Web site, James Taranto critiqued an AP dispatch headlined, “Study: False statements preceded war.” Taranto asserted:

Nowhere in the entire dispatch does the AP tell us anything more about the two groups than that they are "nonprofit journalism organizations." In fact, the Center for Public Integrity is a liberal-left group that has taken money from George Soros, who has compared contemporary America to Nazi Germany. The Fund for Independence in Journalism seems to be but a spinoff; its Web site says its "primary purpose is providing legal defense and endowment support" for the center.

With “935 lies” on screen in big letters over a picture of President Bush, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Vice President Cheney, with “BUSH LIES BY THE NUMBERS: IRAQ UNTRUTHS TALLIED UP” beneath, Keith Olbermann teased Wednesday's Countdown on MSNBC:

So much for the theory of the administration's countless lies about Iraq: Two non-profit groups have done the algebra and show their math: 935 between 2001 and 2003, 935 false statements to the American people about the threat from Iraq.

In the subsequent segment, Olbermann interviewed Rachel Maddow of Air America.

In the next hour on MSNBC, 9pm EST, Dan Abrams set up a segment on his show:

We have all heard about the lies, the cherry picking, the hyped intelligence in the run-up to the war with Iraq, but now a new study is holding the Bush administration's feet to the fire. The Center for Public Integrity, a non-profit, non-partisan investigative journalism group has compiled a list of the instances the Bush administration made false statements leading up to the war. The magic number, 935...

Matthew Balan's earlier NewsBusters posting, “CNN's Cafferty Overlooks Soros Connection to 'Bush Lied' Study,” recounted how on Wednesday's Situation Room Cafferty lamented the fact that American troops were still in Iraq and that thousands of them had died: “President Bush said that at the time he and other officials made these statements, the U.S. intelligence community and other nations thought Iraq had WMD. But they didn't. And yet, we're still there, and almost 4,000 of our troops are dead because of it.”

Cafferty began his January 23 segment in the 4pm EST hour:

President Bush and top administration officials publicly made 935 false statements -- that's a polite way to say lies -- about the risk posed by Iraq in the two years following 9/11, according to a study done by two nonprofit journalism groups. The study found President Bush led the pack with 260 lies. But he wasn't alone. Other officials include: Vice President Cheney, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice (before she got promoted), and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, among others. The study points to at least 532 times where officials said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to get them or had links to al Qaeda. They say the statements “were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.”

His question of the hour: “What do you make of a study that shows President Bush and his top aides made 935 false statements about the threat from Iraq in the two years following 9/11?”

Back later in the hour with the posted and e-mailed replies, Cafferty read one message which pointed out the Soros connection, but all the rest of the replies he highlighted condemned the “lies,” urged prosecution for “war crimes” or called for impeachment:

The question this hour is: What do you make of a study? It was done by two nonprofit groups of journalist, a study that shows President Bush and his top aides made 935 false statements about the threat from Iraq in the two years following 9/11.

Larry writes: "I don't think anyone would be surprised that they lied, and this often. But, what's going to happen? Nothing. They will get away with this, like they have gotten everything else for the last seven years. What is wrong with this country when we have allowed this to happen? By tomorrow, you will never hear about this story again."

Dave in Brooklyn writes: "If I had any say in the matter at all, I would make a very strong case for impeachment out of it. But my question is, where were these journalists six years ago?"

Nelson in New Jersey: "Quick, someone make a copy of this database, so we'll have a proper backup in the event it disappears, like the administration's e-mails. This will come in handy when they're prosecuted for war crimes."

Vinny writes: "Hey, Jack, you failed to mention that the study was done by the Center for Public Integrity, which has ties to George Soros and which he funds through his Open Society Institute."

Michael writes from Connecticut: "Now that the truth has come out about what we already knew about Iraq, this Congress has a duty to bring impeachment against Bush and Cheney, as this is very serious and they must be held accountable -- billions and billions of dollars spent on top of thousands of innocent people dead because of this Iraq War based on lies. Congress must act."

Ben writes from Louisville, Kentucky: "What is worse, 935 lies or the watchdog press not doing anything about it for seven years?"

And Judy writes: "When I read your blog, my stomach turned: 4,000 kids who will never see the light of day again and their families, all for a pack of lies. Some legacy, this Bush and company."

—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

How can you doubt this???

How can you doubt this??? It comes from a "nonpartisan" group called "Center for Public Integrity" for crying out loud!!

<sarc off>

Well, in the words of John Hawkins, "If Bush Lied, So Did These People"

And didn't Her Royal Clintoness claim that she didn't take Bush's word, she talked to people herself, people that she "trusted"....before she went along???

Please, someone, dredge up the video where she talks about whose counsel she got before voting.

....and how about her inestimable "closest adviser"....her own Bill? He
had nothing to say, no advice to give her on her war vote?


Update at 0801
: At a Code Pink meeting in 2003, HRC had this to say about her war vote:

“There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm's way, that is for Saddam Hussein to disarm. And I have absolutely no belief that he will. I have to say that this is something I've followed for more than a decade. If he were serious about disarming, he would have been much more forthcoming... [... ].. I ended up voting for the resolution after carefully reviewing the information, intelligence that I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount the political or other factors that I didn't believe should be in any way part of this decision...”

I had the quote saved. I see by the video that it part of it was cut out (the ellipses...I can't remember where I got it) but it's all in the video.

 

 

Talk about lies?

Exactly, seems this "nonpartisan" group only keeps up with so called Repub lies. Guess they don't have the resources to keep up with the Dems.

Good grief.

 

 

"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain

It will be a great America

It will be a great America when the day comes that the MSM does not lie in their reports. As it stands now they lie with stories that are figments of their imagination. They lie by omission. They lie by claiming they are not biased. They lie by taking items out of context to further their agenda.

lying about Bush lying:)

Dear Jackass Cafferty, 

it's at least a good 935 lies everyday by you MSM traitors - actual lies - as in YOU KNOW YOU ARE SPOUTING ABSOLUTE LYING B*LLSH*T PROPAGANDA BUT GLADLY DO IT ANYWAY:)...

By your libtard standards how many "lies" do the weather forcasters tell every damn day...?

...man, how those weather people constantly LIE:)!

frackin pathetic, you leftwing partisans - and you are supposedly a party of educated adults?! Just absolutely pathetic...

We are solidly EMBARASSED FOR YOU as usual... 

Correct term algebra!

Seems Keithie used a correct term for once-ALGEBRA.  Since 1 statement compounded by 935 separate times equals 935, then quess he'd be correct...you know 1+1+1+1+1, etc., etc.  Somewhere it was stated maybe there were 11 to 16 statements, all basically saying same thing and that most all on both sides agreed with the statements and assessments, then guess everyone lied 935 times except that lonesome few!  People that love Keithie's hype were probably the 1st to say "Go get 'em!" after 9-11, while sitting in their basements in their jammies.  He's kinda a Toyko rose, Hanoi Hannah, etc., type..   

935 Lies

Even if it's true, W is still 9,065 lies short of Bill Clinton's record.

→ Take one down, pass it around

934 lies on the wall.

933 lies on the wall..take

933 lies on the wall..take one down and pass it around 933 lies on the wall..too funny! cleaning up coffee.. 

 

These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day

And Counting on lies!!

And counting on lies of Clinton-BJ!!

→ A side story

All these outlets get criticized regularly in this blog, but I've never heard a discouraging word about Brit Hume.

Journalistic integrity should not go unnoticed.

CA

I make an effort to watch his show on FOX every night.  It's the only show I feel like I'm getting a fair story.  I LOVE the discussion panel at the end of the show.

Stultus est sicut stultus facit

→ Exactly OS

The show is segmented into News, followed by opinion, followed by one joke of the day.

With the round table there is an equal opportunity for multiple sides of stories.

Just the way it should be.

Just the way it should be. That is why the others hate them so, because they allow the folks to decide for themselves instead of telling them what to believe

 

"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain

I agree, OS

Brithas a nice program that focuses on political events. The panel at the end does a decent job of trying to remain non-partisan while giving us good analysis of what is going on - even Fred Barnes.

Howdy, OS, you and I are in

Howdy, OS, you and I are in agreement. I do not watch Fox News, but tune in to Brit. I especially enjoy their "roundtable" discussions at the end. Krauthammer is da man!

Evidently Soros and Company know what they can expect

Evidently Soros and Co. can depend on the MSM for coverage, and not just a little Coverage.  This is like offering Dead Bait to Crabs, they all gather around and figure out what to Omit...the Sins of Omission are rampant on this one.

The only referenced "carefully orchestrated campaign" is the Co-Ordinated Efforts by the MSM in Ignoring progress in Iraq, and YET blowing up this 5 yr. old Garbage to the Airways.

You need Sacred Heart to take another MSM poll, I think these guys lost some MORE public Trust.  

"Barack Obama is a Powerful Speaker—And so is My Bose Bass Amp"  Doug Giles

Always fighting yesterday's wars

"Progressives" are always fighting yesterday's wars and this is just a prime example of that.  In the 1950s and 1960s most Dems were against civil rights.  Once civil rights legislation passed they agitated for it.  John Kerry and much of the MSM are still fighting the Swift Boat vets.  Michael J. Fox still wants embryonic stem cell research even though better and morally acceptable research is available.  They are still trying to get revenge for Clinton's impeachment.  And so on.

Unfortunately for our country, Progressives can't ever think or do anything progressive.  Hey, what are your ideas for fighting the War on Terror?  Nothing.  How about Iraq?  Surrender and retreat.  Civil rights?  More of the same old bromides that have failed by their estimation.  Teen promiscuity and pregnancy?  Let's do more of what we've been doing even though it has failed.  Drug war?  Let's just condone it; that's worked for Jamaica.  Out of control spending?  Tax the rich more.  Slumping economy?  Tax everyone more.

Let me just give a bit of advice to these left wingers:  It's apparent that you don't care about ratings or political influence (except what you can buy) because the country has moved on from this issue.  Those who think Bush lied are of the same ilk who believe that he also purposely blew up the World Trade Center.  This is now your audience because the rest of the US has tuned out or turned to more reliable sources.  Rather than spending your time and money preaching to the tin-foil brigade, why not spend that money solving problems that you supposedly care so much about: poverty, civil rights, women's rights, real education, etc.  Unless, of course, your self-appointed moniker of "Progressive" is just a lie. 

Is there anything more

Is there anything more amusing, yet infuriating, about liberal partisan hacks who are the most dishonest people I know and lie on a nightly basis to be calling someone else a liar?

Saddam Hussein and terrorism. The rest of the story...

http://www.regimeoft...

 

liberals are logically challenged.

They seem to have a hard time distinguishing between a position held that turns out to have been wrong, and a "false statement" or a lie. With these people's logic, every person in the world who doesn't have a 100 average for all tests and statements they have ever taken or made is a lier.

The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.

This is why...

This is why Fox News is the most watched and most trusted news network.