Posted on 05/29/2019 9:16:14 AM PDT by Liz
New York Times reporter Nick Confessore jabbed at Trump critics Tuesday over their claims that White House officials bucking subpoenas might herald the end of democracy.
In just two tweets, Confessore pointed out that there is precedent for a showdown between a White House and an oppositional Congress over who does and who doesn’t comply with the inevitable subpoenas.
“Another crazy NYT story here about the White House ignoring a congressional subpoena, like it’s a choice or something,” Confessore tweeted, along with a NYT story about an Obama official refusing to comply with a subpoena.
He followed that with a story about Harriet Miers, White House Counsel to former President George W. Bush, doing the same. “These are staple battles between a White House controlled by one party and a House or Senate controlled by another, not some weird thing Maggie Haberman invented last week,” Confessore added.
Confessore’s defense came on the heels of a number of critics who attacked his Maggie Haberman his colleague at the NYT, over her treatment of former White House communications director Hope Hicks.
Haberman headlined a piece on the topic, “Hope Hicks Left the White House. Now She Must Decide Whether to Talk to Congress” and was immediately attacked by critics who thought she had framed the article in a way that treated Hicks with kid gloves.
The Rolling Stone’s Jamil Smith suggested that Hicks was escaping the threat of harsher punishment because she was “white, wealthy, and connected.”
Freshman Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez accused Haberman of framing the story as if it were “a Lifetime drama” and using a “glamour shot” of Hicks.
Soledad O’Brien offered a similar critique of the story’s framing and photo.
Veteran newsman Dan Rather did the same.
Hicks has given no indication whether or not she intends to appear before Congress.
This Congress should not be cooperated with; the Democratic majority is illegitimate, based in election fraud.
All Democrats should be removed from their offices and new, free and fair elections held, with the military guarding ballots.
Amen.
Wow! Did Hell freeze over?
He’ll be fired in short order. Honesty and objectivity are not tolerated at NYT.
How any citizen, not employed by the Federal Government should react to a congressional subpoena: “No. I’m YOUR investigator and will render my verdict at the polls in November.”
Exception - employees (appointed and elected) of the Executive branch: Executive privilege.
Oh, he’s so fired.
An honest reporter! Someone needs to make sure he gets a great job when NYT fires him for being truthful.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.