The Sacramento Bee ran a piece on Sunday claiming al-Maliki supports Obama's 16 month withdrawal plan - even though al-Maliki said on Saturday his remarks had been mistranslated.
McClatchy's Margaret Talev wrote the piece, which was based on an interview al-Maliki gave to German magazine Der Spiegel. In the interview, al-Maliki appears to endorse Obama's 16 month withdrawal plan. But by Saturday afternoon, al-Maliki had said his remarks had been mistranslated, and CNN and other outlets were reporting that al-Maliki had not endorsed Obama's plan. I saw this CNN report on Saturday afternoon, so the new information was available to Margartet Talev in time to correct her story.
.
So what is McClatchy's excuse for printing this piece on Sunday?
.
Previous:
Amateur Hour at the Obama campaign: Obama "welcomes" mistranslated al-Maliki remarks, claims al-Maliki has embraced Obama's withdrawal plan
Prime Minister Brown: "No artificial timetables for withdrawal"
Iraqis like Obama but are nervous about his surrender plan
Washington Post slams Obama's "willfully ignorant" Iraq policy
No comments:
Post a Comment