It’s almost like The New York Times is nothing but a partisan gossip rag.
Yesterday, a story was put out by Maggie Haberman that made a rather convenient claim that just so happened to reinforce every media narrative. Namely, that an FDA official named Rick Bright was fired for selflessly sounding the alarm on the supposed vast dangers of hydroxychloroquine.
Breaking News: A doctor who led a U.S. agency helping to develop a coronavirus vaccine says he was removed because he questioned the promotion of hydroxychloroquine, a drug endorsed by President Trump without rigorous vetting https://t.co/WShFySmZuv https://t.co/LeiAnBnUXS
— The New York Times (@nytimes) April 22, 2020
But, like all stories that appear in the Times and other mainstream outlets, it’s always best to give them a few hours. In this case, it didn’t take long for the real story to start coming out and you’ll be shocked to learn that Haberman’s original piece was completely wrong.
For example, Bright himself requested the FDA give emergency approval for hydroxychloroquine.
In March, Rick Bright requested the FDA issue an "Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for emergency use of oral formulations of chloroquine phosphate and hydroxychloroquine sulfate for the treatment of 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19)…" https://t.co/ZKZJB17v32 pic.twitter.com/uFB6Ymkq1k
— jerylbier (@JerylBier) April 23, 2020
Does that sound like someone deeply skeptical of the drug who’s just attempting to stop that dastardly orange man from harming people?
It gets worse, though.
The Trump administration has been working to oust Bright since last year, as officials battled with him over his management and leadership.
With permission, sharing this time-stamped text from individual with knowledge of those fights. pic.twitter.com/ExYILm1pQI
— Dan Diamond (@ddiamond) April 22, 2020
Not only was Bright not fired for anything to do with hydroxychloroquine, his ouster has been in the making long before anyone was even concerned with the Wuhan virus. Apparently, Bright has a history of insubordination and believing he has more authority than he does. Knowing that he was going to be fired anyway, he’s now spinning a fake narrative that he was simply a hero trying to save lives.
But are you ready for the best part? He’s now hired Christine Blasey Ford’s lawyer, so you know this is totally legit.
BRIGHT is being represented by Debra Katz and Lisa Banks, who have a whistleblower practice (and who also repped Christine Blasey Ford) https://t.co/V7Vbxg1qxk
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) April 22, 2020
Yes, Bright is hiring Debra Katz, whose malfeasance during the Kavanaugh hearings is well known. No doubt this is an attempt to push Bright as a “whistle-blower,” either for money or via another Congressional farce. It’s also not a coincidence that Haberman knew Bright was hiring Katz almost immediately. The likely explanation is that this entire story came from Katz in the first place and Haberman either got worked over or willingly chose to be her mouthpiece.
There’s a reason the Hillary campaign described Maggie Haberman as a reporter they can count on. She and the Times continue to put out half-baked, false stories knowing they can hide behind the idea that they were simply reporting what they were told. Apparently, verifying information isn’t within their purview.
Take this deflection of responsibility for example.
The NYT story about Bright was not structured as a story, it was more like a gossip item, forthrightly saying the whole item was “he claims.” Ppl still read it as something other than it was, which is not NYT fault. What was it exactly? It should’ve been obvious:
— Seth Mandel (@SethAMandel) April 23, 2020
It’s not the Times’ fault for making such a serious charge in the form of a gossip item, failing to check even the most basic facts? Yeah, I’m gonna have to disagree on that one. This is absolutely the Times’ fault and they continue to show themselves to be a totally worthless rag.