Cute! New York Times Helps Elizabeth Holmes Launder Her Reputation Before Prison

Just as she's set to serve 11 years behind bars for a horrific grift that endangered people's lives, the paper wants you to know she's also a "devoted mother."

Cute! New York Times Helps Elizabeth Holmes Launder Her Reputation Before Prison
Photo:Getty (Getty Images)

In a new article published on Sunday titled “Liz Holmes Wants You to Forget About Elizabeth,” New York Times writer Amy Chozick details a few romantic days spent with the convicted fraudster, her husband Billy, and their two babies and dog as Holmes awaits the start of her 11-year prison sentence for corporate fraud. They all strolled around the San Diego Zoo together; they “ordered in Mexican at their quaint rental home near the Pacific;” Holmes breastfed her baby, Invicta, in front of Chozick while charmingly singing along to Ace of Base’s “All That She Wants;” they ate croissants and berries and Billy made coffee and they walked Holmes’ big dog, Teddy, together on the beach; Holmes even chased Chozick down at one point to wipe a mixture of dog slobber and sand off her shoe!!

You see? Holmes dropped the deep voice, had a couple babies, can’t stomach R-rated movies, and is a very normal tradwife called “Liz” now. That whole thing where she conned people out of billions pretending she could do medical tests for all kinds of things with just a single drop of blood when she wasn’t remotely close to being able to do that was just a youthful phase. Since then, she’s actually been volunteering for a rape crisis hotline, because the first voice someone wants to hear after they’ve been violently sexually assaulted and don’t know where to turn is definitely that of the the world’s most infamous liars and frauds. And the reason we know all of these things about “Liz” Holmes now is because a New York Times writer fell deeply in love with her over tacos, or something.

This is my favorite paragraph of the piece:

I was admittedly swept up in Liz as an authentic and sympathetic person. She’s gentle and charismatic, in a quiet way. My editor laughed at me when I shared these impressions, telling me (and I quote), “Amy Chozick, you got rolled!” I vigorously disagreed! You don’t know her like I do! But then, something very strange happened. I worked my way through a list of Ms. Holmes’s friends, family and longtime supporters, whom she and Mr. Evans suggested I speak to. One of these friends said Ms. Holmes had genuine intentions at Theranos and didn’t deserve a lengthy prison sentence. Then, this person requested anonymity to caution me not to believe everything Ms. Holmes says.

In short: Chozick got rolled. Her editor told her she got rolled. And then the paper published the whole glowing piece anyway for some reason, clearly helping to rehabilitate this white collar (and white) criminal’s reputation ahead of her prison sentence—right at the time that Holmes still trying to get out of having to serve that sentence, or at least hoping to be let out early due to having small children.

Do you know how many women in jail who did far less than what Holmes did would like to be let out due to being new mothers? Do you know how many of them get New York Times profiles? If Holmes were anything but a young white woman (with “piercing blue eyes,” as the piece notes), do you think she would be walking around the San Diego Zoo “in a bucket hat and sunglasses, her newborn strapped to her chest and swathed in a Baby Yoda nursing blanket” with a Times reporter and getting photographed in soft, flattering light on the beach with her family for a profile right before heading to prison?

Those are just some questions I have.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Share Tweet Submit Pin