Mr. Holt opened the newscast with a lede that suggested Sen. Obama's foreign trip was running into trouble:
"Barack Obama's venture onto the world stage has already proven to be a walk onto a diplomatic and political tightrope, trying to balance his role as a US Senator versus that of a presidential candidate. He came face-to-face in Kabul today with--"
Face to face? With that tightrope, Lester?
No, with "the leader of Afghanistan to talk about a resurgent Taliban. But Obama is also talking US policy and his own vision of the future of American military power in the region. And his words tonight are reverberating from the war fronts in Afghanistan and Iraq to the Pentagon. NBC's Richard Engel is covering Obama's visit and has the latest from the Afghan capital."
So what does Richard Engel report about the "tightrope", the "reverberations"?
Engel sets out the Obama plan: "He wants to send 10,000 more troops to Afghanistan, and pull all American combat forces out of Iraq in 16 months, a timetable for Iraq the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff today described as risky."
We then see Adm. Mike Mullen, on FoxNews with Chris Wallace, saying, "I think the consequences could be very dangerous in that regard. Um, I'm convinced at this point in time, that, coming, making reductions based on conditions on the ground are very important."
Does Mr. Engel note that Sen. Obama's timetable DOES account for conditions on the ground?
No. He reports it as he said/he said. Obama wants this, but Mullen wants that. No mention that they're not actually different.
So Obama's words are "reverberating . . . to the Pentagon" in that the Pentagon wants to take potshots at the Democratic candidate, untethered to facts?
The second report comes from Andrea Mitchell, who "joins us [from Baghdad] to put this all in perspective."
And what shall we sing along with Mitch? More he said/he said!
Lester Holt asks her to explain the differences between Obama's position and McCain's, and she answers, "There really has been a lot of clarity. The differences have become very apparent between Obama and John McCain, especially, even in the last couple of days, since he started on this trip. Obama believes that the surge has not given the Iraqi enough political progress. John McCain believes that the surge has worked, and even takes credit for it."
The President's stated goal for the so-called surge was to give the Iraqi government space for political conciliation, which hasn't happened, given that the Kurds have walked out of the government. Any mention that Sen. Obama is quoting the President's own goals while McCain is moving the goalpost to the 20-yard line?
Nope.
Mitchell goes on: "Obama believes that there should be a withdrawal in 16 months, based on the conditions on the ground. John McCain says that's dangerous, and only today, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Mike Mullen, said it would be, quote, 'very dangerous'."
OK: Mitchell has mentioned that Obama, just like Adm. Mullen, agrees withdrawal from Iraq must be attuned to "conditions on the ground." Except that she, like Richard Engel, never notes that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs isn't actually contradicting Obama.
At the end of Mitchell's report, Lester Holt nods twice, briskly, as if his narrative of the "Obama tightrope" has been explained, when in fact we've now had three reporters, Holt, Engel and Mitchell, all failing to do their jobs, parroting Administration criticism--issued via Adm. Mullen--without providing any context at all for the Admiral's misleading words.
And NBC has some of the best network coverage. If that's the best, no wonder we're in such trouble.
