New York Times journalist Maggie Haberman declined to apologize Saturday after her reporting prompted President Donald Trump to launch what an MS NOW anchor described as "horrible attacks."

Appearing on MS NOW, Haberman addressed Trump's hostile response to her reporting that the New York City-born president had decided to skip the upcoming 9/11 memorial at Ground Zero.

"That's objectively news," Haberman said. "It wasn't going to stay secret."

Her measured response stood in stark contrast to Trump's reaction, as he erupted with anger on Truth Social Friday night.

"Maggot Hagerman, the Fake Reporter from The Failing New York Times, an unattractive person both inside and out," Trump wrote. "She's a stalker, and should be forced to turn over any and all money that she's made through her fake reporting on me."

Trump accused Haberman of falsely reporting that he planned to attend a Pentagon ceremony rather than the World Trade Center site because he would not be permitted to speak at Ground Zero.

"It will all be revealed in the lawsuit against them," Trump wrote. "If she were ever forced to reveal her 'sources,' you will find out they either don't exist, or didn't say what she reported."

A senior White House official later told MS NOW that Trump would attend the Pentagon ceremony because Vice President J.D. Vance would be attending the 9/11 ceremony, and that security measures require the two men not to appear together in public.

The dispute carries particular weight given the long history between the two. Haberman has covered Trump since his years as a New York real estate figure and tabloid fixture, first at the New York Post and later at The New York Times, and her 2022 book "Confidence Man" drew on decades of reporting on him. Trump has repeatedly singled her out by name over the years, even as he has at times given her access and called on her at press events.

The episode also reflects the broader tension between Trump and the press over source-based reporting, as his threat to expose Haberman's sources in a lawsuit runs against the longstanding legal tradition of reporter's privilege, which news organizations have invoked for decades to protect confidential sources — a principle most famously anchored in the Supreme Court's Branzburg v. Hayes decision and subsequent lower-court precedents that news outlets argue shield journalists from forced source disclosure.

Asked to respond, Haberman noted that the New York Times stood by her report, which had relied on multiple sources.

"We were quite transparent with them about what we were reporting, including the part about that part of the reason why he was not going to New York," Haberman said. "Then 24 hours later, the president started attacking the piece."

Source: Raw Story