Maggie HabermanVerified account
@maggieNYT
Hope Hicks departure is NOT about yesterday's hearing, per multiple sources. She had planned it before, had been thinking about it for months. She had informed a very small number of people prior to Hill hearing that she planned to leave.
1:50 PM - 28 Feb 2018
Maggie HabermanVerified account
@maggieNYT
Hicks does NOT even have a departure date yet. This is not her being hustled out of the building.
2:04 PM - 28 Feb 2018
[She does "NOT" have another job waiting, either.]
Maggie HabermanVerified account
@maggieNYT
She told colleagues she felt like she had done all she could do in the job. She had never liked Washington and never become part of its ecosystem.
2:04 PM - 28 Feb 2018
[And that "ecosystem" was not polluted with white--or non-white--lies.]
Maggie HabermanVerified account
@maggieNYT
Maggie Haberman Retweeted Ari Melber
I like how you keep thinking this is a regular White House where things are done regularly
Maggie Haberman added,
Ari Melber
Verified account
@AriMelber
If a person planned to resign, and had a Russia interview scheduled, and is a messaging expert, one could imagine the person putting resignation info out before said interview.…
2:17 PM - 28 Feb 2018
Maggie HabermanVerified account
@maggieNYT
Maggie Haberman Retweeted Josh Marshall
The timing is clearly going to raise questions. But the fact that non-reporters believe their partisan analysis over actual reporting is a facet of the whole fake news problem in the first place
Josh MarshallVerified account
@joshtpm
Oh man, I don't want to be critical. But I can't believe that Haberman is actually going with this claim that Hicks departure is unrelated to yesterday, that she'd been thinking of leaving for some time and there's 'no perfect time.'
1:42 PM - 28 Feb 2018
[That is such an arrogant response by Haberman. Let us count the ways:
[1. "non-reporters." Only reporters know. Does this reporter know what Hicks' "white lies" concerned? No one has told us. If they don't know what the lies were about then they are just repeating Hicks' characterization of them being "white." If they don't know then they're not omniscient.
[2. non-reporters "partisan analysis." What is "partisan" about Josh Marshall's tweet? Haberman acknowledges that "the timing is clearly going to raise questions"--like Josh Marshall's!
[3. "over actual reporting." See #1.
[4. "a facet of the WHOLE FAKE NEWS PROBLEM"!!!! A "clearly" appropriate "question," a deduction, is of a sudden "partisan analysis," "FAKE NEWS," over objective, non-partisan, omniscient reporting. MAN. Haberman needs to get out of that ecosystem.
Wait..Who...There's a #5...
5. Where did Haberman get this "reporters only" rock solid, lead pipe intel that the announcement today was "NOT" related to the "white lies"? "She told colleagues she felt like she had done all she could do in the job." SHE DID NOT TELL HABERMAN. "Colleagues" of Hicks told Haberman. Hicks never told Haberman. These "colleagues" are other Trump White House employees, THEY told Haberman, "No, Reporter, this has nothing to do with yesterday, we're just not regular around here, you know that, Hope told me, whew, long time ago, months, before Rob, before her long interviews with Mueller...Or was it after? I'm not sure...She told me, I remember her exact words "Colleague, I feel like I have done all I can do in the job, I have never liked Washington and I never became part of the ecosystem, I'm going to go to a more likable ecosystem" sure that sounds all rocky and lead-y. ]
Maggie HabermanVerified account
@maggieNYT
Maggie Haberman Retweeted southpaw
If you want to assume that all reporters only learned what they know in the last two hours, cool
Maggie Haberman added,
southpaw
@nycsouthpaw
No one is suggesting that’s not what they’re saying, just that it isn’t credible. It was NYT reporting that broke the story of this very individual admitting to telling self-serving falsehoods just yesterday.
3:36 PM - 28 Feb 2018
[Oh my. So Haberman knew about Hicks' plans to resign some time ago and didn't report that to us. Why not? Would it have been "partisan" to have reported it when she learned of it? Was it then "partisan" to not report it? OR Are those incommensurate things, reporters are not partisan, can never be partisan because they're reporters I bet that's it.
[Since Haberman learned of it before reporting it to us non-reporters was today's date chosen as a "hard" come-what-may date? No, it wasn't. We know this date was not chosen weeks or months ago because Hicks hasn't left yet! Jimmy Olson done already told us "Hicks does NOT have a departure date yet." So, today as the announcement date is just cuz things aren't done "regularly" in this White House I see. And the fact that Hope Hicks is/was Rob Porter's girlfriend and Porter "resigned" a few weeks ago that has nothing to do with it either you idiot partisan non-reporter.
Basically, I would like to say to Maggie Haberman, and I assure her and all of my thousands of readers today that I would say this to a male reporter, SUCK MY DICK.]
@maggieNYT
Hope Hicks departure is NOT about yesterday's hearing, per multiple sources. She had planned it before, had been thinking about it for months. She had informed a very small number of people prior to Hill hearing that she planned to leave.
1:50 PM - 28 Feb 2018
Maggie HabermanVerified account
@maggieNYT
Hicks does NOT even have a departure date yet. This is not her being hustled out of the building.
2:04 PM - 28 Feb 2018
[She does "NOT" have another job waiting, either.]
Maggie HabermanVerified account
@maggieNYT
She told colleagues she felt like she had done all she could do in the job. She had never liked Washington and never become part of its ecosystem.
2:04 PM - 28 Feb 2018
[And that "ecosystem" was not polluted with white--or non-white--lies.]
Maggie HabermanVerified account
@maggieNYT
Maggie Haberman Retweeted Ari Melber
I like how you keep thinking this is a regular White House where things are done regularly
Maggie Haberman added,
Ari Melber
Verified account
@AriMelber
If a person planned to resign, and had a Russia interview scheduled, and is a messaging expert, one could imagine the person putting resignation info out before said interview.…
2:17 PM - 28 Feb 2018
Maggie HabermanVerified account
@maggieNYT
Maggie Haberman Retweeted Josh Marshall
The timing is clearly going to raise questions. But the fact that non-reporters believe their partisan analysis over actual reporting is a facet of the whole fake news problem in the first place
Josh MarshallVerified account
@joshtpm
Oh man, I don't want to be critical. But I can't believe that Haberman is actually going with this claim that Hicks departure is unrelated to yesterday, that she'd been thinking of leaving for some time and there's 'no perfect time.'
1:42 PM - 28 Feb 2018
[That is such an arrogant response by Haberman. Let us count the ways:
[1. "non-reporters." Only reporters know. Does this reporter know what Hicks' "white lies" concerned? No one has told us. If they don't know what the lies were about then they are just repeating Hicks' characterization of them being "white." If they don't know then they're not omniscient.
[2. non-reporters "partisan analysis." What is "partisan" about Josh Marshall's tweet? Haberman acknowledges that "the timing is clearly going to raise questions"--like Josh Marshall's!
[3. "over actual reporting." See #1.
[4. "a facet of the WHOLE FAKE NEWS PROBLEM"!!!! A "clearly" appropriate "question," a deduction, is of a sudden "partisan analysis," "FAKE NEWS," over objective, non-partisan, omniscient reporting. MAN. Haberman needs to get out of that ecosystem.
Wait..Who...There's a #5...
5. Where did Haberman get this "reporters only" rock solid, lead pipe intel that the announcement today was "NOT" related to the "white lies"? "She told colleagues she felt like she had done all she could do in the job." SHE DID NOT TELL HABERMAN. "Colleagues" of Hicks told Haberman. Hicks never told Haberman. These "colleagues" are other Trump White House employees, THEY told Haberman, "No, Reporter, this has nothing to do with yesterday, we're just not regular around here, you know that, Hope told me, whew, long time ago, months, before Rob, before her long interviews with Mueller...Or was it after? I'm not sure...She told me, I remember her exact words "Colleague, I feel like I have done all I can do in the job, I have never liked Washington and I never became part of the ecosystem, I'm going to go to a more likable ecosystem" sure that sounds all rocky and lead-y. ]
Maggie HabermanVerified account
@maggieNYT
Maggie Haberman Retweeted southpaw
If you want to assume that all reporters only learned what they know in the last two hours, cool
Maggie Haberman added,
southpaw
@nycsouthpaw
No one is suggesting that’s not what they’re saying, just that it isn’t credible. It was NYT reporting that broke the story of this very individual admitting to telling self-serving falsehoods just yesterday.
3:36 PM - 28 Feb 2018
[Oh my. So Haberman knew about Hicks' plans to resign some time ago and didn't report that to us. Why not? Would it have been "partisan" to have reported it when she learned of it? Was it then "partisan" to not report it? OR Are those incommensurate things, reporters are not partisan, can never be partisan because they're reporters I bet that's it.
[Since Haberman learned of it before reporting it to us non-reporters was today's date chosen as a "hard" come-what-may date? No, it wasn't. We know this date was not chosen weeks or months ago because Hicks hasn't left yet! Jimmy Olson done already told us "Hicks does NOT have a departure date yet." So, today as the announcement date is just cuz things aren't done "regularly" in this White House I see. And the fact that Hope Hicks is/was Rob Porter's girlfriend and Porter "resigned" a few weeks ago that has nothing to do with it either you idiot partisan non-reporter.
Basically, I would like to say to Maggie Haberman, and I assure her and all of my thousands of readers today that I would say this to a male reporter, SUCK MY DICK.]
