![]() Meanwhile, Trump, still revelling in his defeat of Hillary Clinton, cast her as another antagonist, the embodiment of the “Failing New York Times.” She and the President invited doppelgänger comparisons: the flashy fabulist and the buttoned-down institutionalist locked in each other’s sights. Portions of the electorate learned to associate her with distressing updates about the country. Washington, D.C.,’s power players, a wider swath of whom than wishes to admit it has Haberman’s number saved, grew habituated to her presence, if not exactly thrilled by it. To some, she upheld the tradition that Woodward and Bernstein built others condemned her failure to criticize Trump’s behavior more vocally. She was a fixture on cable news, her face framed by eyeglasses that Trump, who shares her aptitude for pithy description, accused of being “smudged.”Īfter Trump rose to political prominence, Haberman became a player in the theatre of the Trump era: an avatar of journalism’s promise, but also of its shortcomings. ![]() Her tweets frequently numbered more than a hundred and forty in twenty-four hours. Her reporting, much of it written with other Times staffers, mingled Pulitzer-winning discoveries (Trump told Russian officials that firing James Comey relieved “great pressure” on him), palace intrigue ( John Kelly clashed with Corey Lewandowski), and bathetic details (Trump watching television in his bathrobe). As his star climbed, she served as one of his most diligent chroniclers: in 2016, her byline appeared on five hundred and ninety-nine articles more recently, she has averaged about an article a day. The Times hired her to cover the 2016 election five months before Donald Trump declared his first Presidential campaign. Since 2015, Haberman’s career has revolved around the most untrustworthy man in national politics. Is she, in fact, “friendly” to Trump’s people? Or is she simply good at her job-a job that requires her, at times, to win the trust of the untrustworthy? “I was somewhat surprised to see that,” Haberman said when I asked her about the conversation, characterizing her call as “routine.” Shortly after Hutchinson’s deposition, she notes, the Times published a story on the January 6th committee’s progress that included the news that at least one witness was willing to testify that Trump had approved of rioters chanting “Hang Mike Pence” and that Mark Meadows, the former White House chief of staff, had burned documents in a fireplace. The scene underscores a question that has shadowed Haberman for the past several years. “Don’t worry,” Passantino allegedly reassured her. ![]() “I don’t want this out there,” she remembers saying. Hutchinson asked her counsel not to take the call. ![]() According to Hutchinson, Passantino’s phone rang-it was the Times reporter Maggie Haberman. ![]() Passantino, her lawyer at the time, was in a taxi with her on the way to a restaurant. Hutchinson had just finished her third deposition with the committee. Among the revelations in the recently released materials from the January 6th committee was an account of a conversation that took place in May, 2022, between the former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson and the former White House ethics attorney Stefan Passantino. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |