Politico and Bloomberg Opinion have just been exposed engaging in grotesque journalistic malfeasance just to suck up to the Biden-Harris White House.
The Functional Government Initiative (FGI) unveiled another trove of documents of damning communications from 2022 through open records requests, giving MRC Business exclusive access. The documents reveal the extent to which the Biden-Harris Treasury Department had editorial influence over Politico and Bloomberg Opinion.
A Politico reporter forwarded his pay-walled Politico Pro piece slapping down worries of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) hiring 87,000 new employees to a Biden-Harris Treasury official who then edited some of the language used for the free version of Politico published a day later. Furthermore, Treasury officials managed to get a hold of interview questions sent in advance for a softball 2022 transcribed-Q&A session with a Bloomberg Opinion columnist and then-Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy Lily Batchelder that took place the following day.
Politico senior tax reporter Brian Faler went to bat for the Biden-Harris administration following the backlash to the IRS’s move to use $80 billion in funding it received through the Inflation Reduction Act to employ 87,000 new employees. One estimate noted that 57.3 percent of the new hires — fewer than 50,000 — “would be assigned to tax enforcement.” Faler’s article, “The $80 billion question: What will the IRS do with all its new money?” was initially published as a Politico Pro item on Aug. 15. He sent his pay-walled item to Treasury Public Affairs Senior Spokesperson Julia Krieger via email and wrote, “Flagging.” Krieger responded with edits to the article, which appear to have been incorporated into the free version of Faler’s piece published the following day on Aug. 16:
“Hi Brian-thanks for this! For the first sentence in the first listicle, can you clarify that this figure is the gross, not the net/so it's clear that we're not talking about 87k ‘new’ employees as it currently reads? I know you have it further down that Natasha expects 50k attrition, but would be good [sic] clarify at the outset since there's been so much misinformation on this exact issue of ‘new’ hires.”
The original sentence in question read as follows: “The Biden administration wants to use the money to hire 87,000 new people, a hiring spree that has Republicans warning of a gathering army of tax collectors.” But following the edits from the Biden-Harris Treasury, the word “new” was eliminated from the free version of the piece. Politico effectively gave the Biden-Harris Treasury Department editorial power over its reporting.
In comments to MRC Business, Faler pushed back, claiming “I didn’t ‘clear’ anything with anyone outside Politico, and never would. The Treasury Department spokeswoman was complaining about a published story – it had already gone out to the world. She didn’t see any version or draft of the story before it was posted.” Faler further obfuscated, “What I had flagged for her was the story that had been sent to our subscribers earlier that morning, which is a courtesy we extend to anyone we quote or interview for a story.” What Faler didn’t initially address was the fact that the Politico Pro story published Aug. 15 was specifically edited to remove the word “new” per Krieger’s requests in the Aug. 16 free version published the following day.
When pressed further on why the framing of the free version of his article was edited per Treasury’s direction, Faler threw Politico’s editors under the bus by passing off responsibility to them, saying it was “far above” his “pay grade:”
Here’s what happens when someone complains that something I wrote was wrong or misleading: I take it to my editor, because it’s a conflict of interest for me to decide if the complainer is correct. I explain the situation to my editor, and he (and possibly others) decides how to proceed. I presume here the editor(s) agreed with Treasury that that sentence could have been said better. I don’t really know for sure because conversations about stories that go on our main site are far above my pay grade, [emphasis added].
Faler effectively alluded that it was his supervisors’ decision to let Treasury give editorial direction on the Politico piece.
But Politico isn’t the only one that has engaged in this open journalistic collaboration with the Biden-Harris Treasury.
Another email dated Jan. 25, 2022 from then-senior spokesperson for Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen — Alexandra LaManna — was sent to other Treasury department staff boasting that “we have the questions in advance” for a transcribed Q&A interview between Bloomberg Opinion columnist Alexis Leondis and Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy Lily Batchelder set to take place the next day. The documents obtained by FGI showed the specific questions that were forwarded to Treasury officials, with a good portion of them appearing in the published interview three days after the email was sent, “How Messy Will This Tax Season Get?”
One question that was forwarded in advance dealt directly with an IRS mistake, meaning that Treasury was given ample opportunity to get Batchelder’s propagandized answers in order first before the interview.
“Erroneous child tax credit information was sent out recently by the IRS that didn’t match what taxpayers actually received. What should taxpayers do if they’re in this situation?” Batchelder responded by playing the victim in the published interview, arguing that this was part of a broader issue of “chronic under-funding” for the IRS. In fact, the email chain between the Treasury officials showed apparent collaboration on the various questions. Yellen counselor Natasha Sarin appeared to respond in the chain with edits on possible answers to a few of Leondis’s questions, “Hi team, In my lane. A few edits in caps below.” Batchelder responded with apparent glee, “Thanks so much for all the work that went into this! Attached is a revised version.”
MRC Business also reached out to Leondis for comment but received no response as of the publication of this report.
The Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics forbids journalists from engaging in any “political and other outside activities that may compromise integrity or impartiality, or may damage credibility,” which seeking approval on content on a story from a government entity would clearly constitute. In addition, SPJ instructs journalists to “resist internal and external pressure to influence coverage.” It appears neither Politico, nor Bloomberg got the memo.
This isn’t even the first time MRC Business has caught leftist media publications committing journalistic offenses to favor the Biden-Harris administration. FGI recently shared documents to MRC exposing CNN congressional reporter Clare Foran seeking pre-approval from Department of Energy officials on three pre-published paragraphs pertaining to Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Jennifer Granholm. Following DOE approval, Foran’s three paragraphs would end up being published 99 percent verbatim in her article targeting Republicans for pushing to prohibit Granholm from implementing any rule that would “limit consumer access to gas kitchen ranges and ovens.”
Also, in June 2023, FGI gave MRC Business the goods exposing another email exchange revealing Bloomberg News acting as the Treasury Department’s personal PR firm in an apparent attempt to get special privileges. An email chain showed Bloomberg Senior Washington Correspondent Saleha Mohsin appearing to be fired up over Treasury officials censoring Yellen quotes obtained by Bloomberg News despite the outlet’s “commitment” to her. “Bloomberg reporters show enough commitment to Yellen that we travel far and wide to cover her,” Mohsin wrote, “only to have you [sic] quotes killed. Yellen made the same comments live to the networks and its no big deal.”
Conservatives are under attack. Contact Politico at 703-647-7999 and Bloomberg Opinion at letters@bloomberg.net and hold them to account for violating journalistic ethics.
