The New York Times ran a story this week about Nikki Haley having $52,000 curtains in her official residence at the United Nations:
In the article they say…
The State Department spent $52,701 last year buying customized and mechanized curtains for the picture windows in Nikki R. Haley’s official residence as ambassador to the United Nations, just as the department was undergoing deep budget cuts and had frozen hiring.
The residence, in a new building on First Avenue, has spectacular views, and Ms. Haley is the first ambassador to live in it. For decades, her predecessors lived in the Waldorf Astoria hotel. But after the hotel was purchased by a Chinese insurance company with a murky ownership structure, the State Department decided in 2016 to find a new home for its top New York diplomat because of security concerns.
The government leased the apartment, just blocks from the delegation’s offices, with an option to buy, according to Patrick Kennedy, the top management official at the State Department during the Obama administration. The full-floor penthouse, with handsome hardwood floors covering large open spaces stretching nearly 6,000 square feet, was listed at $58,000 a month.
While ambassadors around the world are given residences, there are only two such residences in the United States — one for Ms. Haley and the other for her deputy.
It sounds insane, right? I mean who spends $52k on curtains?
Well the NY Times finally tells us…and it’s NOT Nikki Haley or the Trump administration:
A spokesman for Ms. Haley said plans to buy the curtains were made in 2016, during the Obama administration. Ms. Haley had no say in the purchase, he said.
As Fox News points out…
But the paper didn’t mention until the sixth paragraph that Haley’s spokesman said the Trump administration had no input in the purchase decision.
You can see how the NY Times titled the article and then waited until the sixth paragraph to mention that Nikki Haley nor Trump had anything to do with the purchase. It’s like they wanted to mislead readers who they know only read the first few paragraphs.
And of course, critics went nuts:
Some online critics apparently missed that detail.
“How can you, on the one hand, tell diplomats that basic needs cannot be met and, on the other hand, spend more than $50,000 on a customized curtain system for the ambassador to the U.N.?” Brett Bruen, a White House official in the Obama administration, told the Times.
“When @nikkihaley’s not busy rejecting the idea of universal human rights, she’s busy spending $52,701 of US tax payer money on curtains for her residence. Milk the people, screw the world. Fine priorities you got there,” Andrew Stroehlein, Human Rights Watch’s European Media Director, wrote in a tweet.
Oh that’s rich coming from an Obama White House official.
Even David Hoggface got in on the criticism, calling for Haley to resign IMMEDIATELY:
There’s plenty more where that came from.
But many are now pointing the finger at the NY Times for engineering this outrage, including Marco Rubio, who ripped the paper a few minutes ago:
Want an example of subtle ways media pushes their bias? See this completely false & misleading headline about @nikkihaley. They are not “her curtains” & buried deep in story is the fact that this purchase was made under Obama administration. https://t.co/fus7Ds6pEc— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) September 14, 2018
Yep. Headlines are important and the biased NY Times did this one intentionally.
And they wonder why Americans no longer trust the media. This is a prime example.
Other news outlets are running with what the NY Times started:
This headline isn’t even misleading. It’s an outright lie: