Maggie Haberman has trended every day since the "she's friendly to us" line in the 1/6 report.

Reporters who defend her will slough it off, offer rationalizations, claim the Trumpers *think* she's friendly while she's playing 3-D chess. But their blind spot is more evident.

Haberman is protected by colleagues, some of whom fear her, b/c even if they don't agree w/the criticisms there's a story here:

She's in Hutchinson's testimony as "friendly to us." She blocked Rachel Vindman tonight. Adam Davidson of New Yorker tweeted she tried get him fired.

Yet they are ignoring the story -- again, they're not supposed to have an opinion on it, just report the story -- because she's a member of the pack, and one who can harm them if they expose her.
Bottom line: At the very least, it's unethical for Maggie Haberman to be covering Cassidy Hutchinson and stories surrounding her now that we know Trump lawyer call MH "friendly" & told CH not to worry about bad coverage from her.
@msignorile so tired of her journalistic values.
@msignorile I think the bottom line is she should not be covering Hutchinson, Trump, politics, or a local dog show.

@msignorile you might recall Clarence Thomas refusing to recuse from cases in which he and the wifey are directly involved? for decades, btw, tracing back to Bush v Gore

pretend like it doesn’t exist and everyone will forget

@willpollock @msignorile
Our society is built on lies. It's time truth broke out.