In the sentence under discussion, inaccurate is a predicate adjective, not a predicate nominative as I incorrectly stated.

Both parts of speech are used with forms of the verb to be, such as is, are, was, were, will be and the like, refer back to the subject of the sentence, and are in the common, or nominative, case.

In the following sentence, consul is the predicate nominative:

Ceasar was consul.

So to sum up, in the sentence under discussion inaccurate is a predicate adjective, and refers back to the subject of the sentence:

News accounts...are inaccurate.

Naturally, not all news accounts are inaccurate, and there is an intervening, too-long phrase which qualifies which news accounts are inaccurate: ...that the Defense Department recently confirmed new information with respect to contacts between al-Qaida and Iraq in a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee...

While gramatically correct, this sentence is very poorly phrased, a fact which no doubt encourages miscomprehension. Whether or not the labored construction was intentional is arguable. What is not arguable is that the sentence should have been rewritten before release.

For example:

The Department of Defense has not confirmed any new information linking al-Qaida and Iraq. News accounts claiming this confirmation are inaccurate.

S