Darrell Issa demands New York Times retraction

The following lines in the New York Times original story that ran August 15 are incorrect or made on baseless assertions:

 

• The title, “Helping His District and Himself” implies that Rep. Issa has engaged in self-dealing.  The only evidence the story offers for this assertion are factually flawed assertions.

• The lede, “Here on the third floor of a gleaming office building overlooking a golf course in the rugged foothills north of San Diego, Darrell Issa, the entrepreneur, oversees the hub of a growing financial empire worth hundreds of millions of dollars.”  The building where Rep. Issa’s office is located does not overlook a golf course as the reporter Eric Lichtblau implies he personally observed.

• “Mr. Issa has … split a holding company into separate multibillion-dollar businesses.”  Rep. Issa does not own a single multi-billion business (The Times has issued a correction for this error).

• “As his private wealth and public power have grown, so too has the overlap between his private and business lives, with at least some of the congressman’s government actions helping to make a rich man even richer and raising the potential for conflicts.”  The only examples the New York Times raises of Rep. Issa’s public actions benefiting his private holdings are the erroneous examples previously noted.

• “In one case, more than $800,000 in earmarks he arranged will help widen a busy thoroughfare in front of a medical plaza he bought for $10.3 million.”  The story erroneously reports the property’s purchase price which was, in fact, $16.6 million.  It also fails to mention that at the time he sought funding for his district he did not own this property.

• “At the same time, the value of the medical complex and other properties has soared, at least in part because of the government-sponsored roadwork.”  The roadwork in question has not begun and, as noted previously, the New York Times’ assertion that the value of the medical complex has “soared” is based on false information.  The Times’ statement also conflicts with the statement of a quoted source in the story, Dean Tilton the local commercial property broker, who describes this as the worst market in twenty years.  The Times suggests road projects miles away from those owned by Rep. Issa benefit him.  By this logic, wouldn’t the entire area be booming as a result of Rep. Issa’s earmarks?

• “But beyond specific actions that appear to have clearly benefited his businesses, Mr. Issa’s interests are so varied that some of the biggest issues making their way through Congress affect him in some way.”  The New York Times fails to provide accurate examples of “specific actions that appear to have clearly benefited his businesses.”

• “After the forced sale of Merrill Lynch in 2008, for instance, he publicly attacked the Treasury Department’s handling of the deal without mentioning that Merrill had handled hundreds of millions of dollars in investments for him and lent him many millions more.”  The New York Times fails to note that Rep. Issa’s transactions with Merrill Lynch have been appropriately disclosed in his annual ethics filing.

• “In Mr. Issa’s case, it is sometimes difficult to separate the business of Congress from the business of Darrell Issa.” Again, the New York Times story fails to provide factually accurate examples for this assertion.

• “Then, Mr. Issa brushed aside suggestions that his electronics company’s role as a major supplier of alarms to Toyota made him go easy on the automaker as he led an investigation into the recalls.”  Rep. Issa’s former company is not a supplier to Toyota.

• “In one 2008 sale, months before the stock market crashed, his family foundation earned $357,000 on an initial investment of less than $19,000 — a return of nearly 1,900 percent in just seven months, the foundation reported to the Internal Revenue Service.”  This assertion is based on an incorrect document.  The actual purchase price was not $19,000, but $500,000 and resulted in a $125,000 loss.

• “That suggests the foundation may have acquired the shares from a third-party broker.”  This assertion is based on the false 1900 percent claim.

• “Mr. Issa is keenly interested in Goldman’s performance.”  This statement lacks a basis in fact as Rep. Issa does not have investments dependent on Goldman Sach’s performance.