Maggie Haberman Book Has Scathing Trump January 6 Revelations – Which Reveal Nothing, but Raise Other Questions

CNN and others sure seem impressed by Maggie’s intel but the reality is far from impressive.

Next month, Maggie Haberman has a new book release, Confidence Man: The Making of Donald Trump and the Breaking of America. It is an exhaustive look into the full life of Donald Trump, and it is no surprise that Haberman would produce such a tome. She has been a badger of sorts covering Trump over the years, clearly doing so with some inside contacts. 


Her few true breaking stories on the man have been eclipsed by her bitterness and her bias, something for which she has become renowned over his tenure. One prime example of her being blinded by her partisanship was last summer when Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville went on social media to implore his citizens to get vaccinated. Maggie slammed Trump over wanting credit for the vaccines but declining to take the step of urging people to get vaccinated.

It had to be pointed out to the reporter that Trump not only gets credit for three vaccines coming to market but that he had encouraged people to get the shots over the course of numerous interviews — including in her own paper. In the attempt to recover dignity, Haberman retorted that she meant Trump should be releasing vaccine PSAs on Twitter, like Tuberville. She finally gave up when she had to be reminded the former President was actually banned from doing just that.

So this is the journalist with a Trump book release on the horizon, but we are able to get a taste of that trademark Haberman content already. CNN has obtained some of the gallows of her book, and the excitement is palpable. Jeremy Herb, writing for the outlet, details a supposedly explosive detail revealed in the volume. Get ready for this: Donald Trump said some things!


 Former President Donald Trump repeatedly told aides in the days following his 2020 election loss that he would remain in the White House rather than let incoming President Joe Biden take over, according to reporting provided to CNN from a forthcoming book by New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman.

If this feels like something familiar or recycled, that is for good reason. Recall, back in the fall of 2020, the media was flush with reports that promised the then-President would refuse to vacate the White House should he lose the election. Of course, this “revelation” that Trump gave voice to that very concern is more than slightly neutered by one detail – he actually did leave the White House without force. But CNN is still deeply impressed by this non-story.

Donald Trump
AP Photo/Alex Brandon

I’m just not going to leave,” Trump told one aide, according to Haberman. “We’re never leaving,” Trump told another. “How can you leave when you won an election?” Trump’s insistence that he would not be leaving the White House, which has not been previously reported, adds new detail to the chaotic post-election period.

Does it though, really? Two unattributed quotes from a point in time not designated amount to very little. And again, the fact that Trump actually did leave means these quotes amount to absolutely nothing. But the reporter Herb and his network want to lead us to believe there is something tangible in this insignificance. It, in fact, feels like just another piece of stillborn evidence of nefarious actions that have been insisted upon, and this brings up another question.


There is something of a self-set trap that journalists become ensnared in with these kinds of book releases. Recall when Bob Woodward delivered his Trump book Rage just ahead of the election, it was said that the explosive quotes he had from Trump on the pandemic were spoken the previous February and should have been reported. Woodward lamely said he had no idea if the details were true at the time. Trump had spoken those very words to Woodward. Nothing had changed for over half a year, and ultimately the quotes became of little consequence. 

For Haberman to deliver her surprise piece of evidence (all charitable labeling acknowledged) it too carries that same paradox. If her details are supposedly so explosive, then how is it she concealed these from the public in order to lend quality to her book? It is a familiar pattern, where the publisher has to inflate the importance of details but setting them aside for publication illustrates a lack of import in the actual facts.

One other question then looms that manages to ultimately undercut these details. If Haberman is in possession of such inside information, how is it that she has evaded a subpoena from the January 6 Commission? These are the very types of inside specifics the J6-C craves. Recall the way Cassidy Hutchinson was rushed before the cameras on the barest of witness testimony. It would then stand to reason the committee would be salivating to call her in if Haberman is actually sitting on illuminating details.


Or, it means she is in possession of low-wattage rumors, and it only serves to further the feeling that the search for incriminating intel on Trump is yielding little more than easily dismissed accusations.


Editor’s Note: This article has been edited to reflect that Tommy Tuberville is a senator from Alabama rather than the governor. 


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos