There are moments when the professional narrative engineers go so far with falsehoods even their ideological co-horts have to admit they’ve gone to far. Such is the case today with a New York Times article written to criticize U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley:

(Via New York Times) 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. (read more)



Except there’s a problem here. This was all done by President Obama, Secretary John Kerry and U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power. Nikki Haley had nothing to do with it.

It was decided, well before the election in 2016, that the US Ambassador’s residence would move from the Waldorf to its new location. The new location was unfurnished/unfinished.

In June of 2016 it was decided that the State Department’s Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations would outfit the new residence (this is standard operating procedure for Ambassadors’ residences across the globe). Bottom line: “Ambassador. Haley had no choice in the location of the residence or what curtains were picked out that summer.”

Which led to the following New York Times correction:

(Link to re-re-re-revised article)

In order words, Fake News!