Reuters was forced to issue a major correction and perform multiple rewrites on a recent piece about new Iran sanctions legislation that was penned by National Iranian American Council (NIAC) founder Trita Parsi, whose organization has long been suspected of taking orders from the Iranian regime and disseminating its "propaganda" on Capitol Hill.
Parsi, who has been accused of being an agent of the Iranian government and of skirting lobbying rules, wrote an op-ed earlier this week that incorrectly stated the number of Democrats currently supporting new legislation to increase sanctions on Iran.
Reuters was forced to append a correction and rewrite several portions of the piece, which argues that President Obama’s bid to block new sanctions has reassured leaders in Tehran.
Parsi’s NIAC has lobbied against sanctions on Iran and for increased diplomacy with the Islamic Republic, despite its ongoing work on a suspected nuclear weapons program.
Experts and lawmakers alike have harshly criticized NIAC’s efforts to roll back sanctions on Iran and portray it as a peaceful nation.
When one NIAC representative falsely claimed that U.S. sanctions have stopped the flow of medicine to Iran, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R., Calif.) pushed back.
"That’s propaganda put out by the Iranian regime," Royce told the NIAC representative during a 2013 even on Capitol Hill.
Critics of NIAC say Parsi intentionally misstated the support for new sanctions in order for further a false narrative claiming that key Democrats do not back the bill.
"CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated the number of Democratic senators who are co-sponsoring the Iran sanctions bill," reads a correction at the end of Parsi’s piece.
Reuters also deleted a part of Parsi’s piece claiming that just two Democrats back the new sanctions bill, which would impose greater economic penalties on Tehran should negotiators fail to reach a deal aimed at curbing Tehran’s contested nuclear program.
A threat by Obama to veto the legislation "worked," Parsi originally wrote. "As of today, only two Democratic senators have co-sponsored the new sanctions bill. Unless sanctions supporters manage to get at least 14 Democrats to commit to the measure, they cannot override Obama’s veto and will only embarrass themselves trying."
Two new paragraphs were later added to the piece:
As of today, eight Democratic senators have co-sponsored the new sanctions bill. Unless sanctions supporters manage to get at least 14 Democrats to commit to the measure, they cannot override Obama’s veto and will only embarrass themselves trying.
[A staffer in Senator Mark Kirk's (R-Ill.) office, who is not authorized to speak publicly, also points to five other Democrats who have signaled support for the bill, one way or another. But whether they would vote for the current version of the bill if it comes to a floor vote, is not known. Kirk is one of 16 senators who introduced the current version of the sanctions bill.]
One D.C.-based foreign policy operative critical of NIAC said Reuters should have been more careful about providing Parsi a public forum.
"Reuters shouldn't be surprised," the source said. "Pro-Iran lobbyists are on the wrong side of this debate. But they've still got a job to do. So corrections are going to be inevitable."
In addition to pushing a soft-line on Iran, Parsi’s NIAC was ordered by a judge in 2013 to pay nearly $200,000 in "sanctions" to one of its principal critics after the group launched a failed defamation suit aimed at silencing him.
During the course of the trial, NIAC was found to have altered key documents about its lobbying efforts and to have withheld others potentially exposing alleged pro-Tehran lobbying efforts.
"It does appear that something very odd is going on with this file," the judge in the case wrote in his 2013 opinion. "The Court is prepared to find by a preponderance of the evidence that [NIAC] intentionally altered the document."