‘That’s Not What I Said’: Maggie Haberman and Ex-Prosecutor Daniel Goldman Have Frosty Exchange Over Trump Probe Reporting
New York Times correspondent Maggie Haberman, Thursday, took umbrage with an ex-federal prosecutor whom she felt was pushing her to go too far out on a limb.
In a tense exchange on CNN’s New Day, Haberman and former prosecutor Daniel Goldman mixed it up following the Times corespondent’s assertion that it’s currently unknown whether the Justice Department has a specific investigation into former President Donald Trump.
“I think we make too much of a big deal about whether there is an investigation into Donald Trump or not,” said Goldman — who is running for Congress in New York’s 10th district. “When you have a witness come in as a prosecutor, you’re going to ask them everything they know about the whole scheme, whoever that involves. And maybe that’s Trump, maybe that’s [former White House Chief of Staff Mark] Meadows, maybe that’s somebody else.
“But you are not going to sit there and say, ‘Okay, I’m just going to ask you about Mark Meadows, but I’m not going to ask you about Donald Trump.’ We know from [former White House Counsel Pat] Cipollone’s testimony that he has a lot of information about Donald Trump. Now, there may be privilege issues that they’re going to have to wade through, it might not happen next week. But this myth that it’s not an investigation into Donald Trump because they haven’t declared it to be into Donald Trump…”
Haberman accused Goldman of twisting her words.
“That’s not what I said,” Haberman replied. Goldman tried to interject, but the Times correspondent said, “No, I want to cut you off for a second — because this is actually something that happens with journalists a lot, where we get pulled to say something more than we know.”
The Times correspondent cited, as an example, a report by her colleagues Wednesday which said that Rudy Giuliani is not going to be indicted by the Southern District of New York.
“We were told for months and months and months an investigation was leading toward him,” Haberman said. “And now that’s not happening. So this is why we say that.”
“You’re absolutely right as a journalist to say you don’t have evidence,” Goldman said, clarifying. “That’s not my point. I’m saying as a former prosecutor if I have Pat Cipollone come in, I’m going to ask him about Donald Trump.”
Haberman was satisfied by the clarification.
“Oh, sure,” Haberman replied. “There’s no question. And a lot of the questions were about Trump. … You are absolutely right. I do just want to make clear to people watching that this is why we make clear what we know and
what we don’t know.”
Watch above, via CNN.
