NYT Editorial Board Tries To Take Down Pete, Gets Read For Filth By Readers

In an odd Timesian twist, they ran an Editorial calling on Pete to talk about what he did at McKinsey, while at the same time running an article that basically confirmed "not a whole lot" since he was a junior employee. The article (vs the editorial) also talked about how there is a strict NDA in place since many of McK's clients don't want anyone (e.g., investors and clients) to know they are using consultants.

Commenters are pretty furious, claiming (correctly, I might add, since I am very familiar with that world) that as a right out of college junior employee, all Pete likely did was make spreadsheets and PowerPoints which then got passed on to higher ups who decided policy and what to do with them, and that calling him into account for his three years at McKinsey was similar to calling someone into account for an after school job at Walmart in high school.

Also a lot accusing the Times, which seems to run a lot of negative pieces about Pete, of doing a "Hillary" on him.

[NB: It seems that McKinsey made some stupid calls around immigration, a full decade after Pete worked there, and that Team Woke is very upset about that. But there's a strong NDA in place that Pete has asked to get out of, but I'd be shocked if there was anything to what he did there other than crunch numbers and issue reports that said "X is trending upwards for Q1 and Q2 this year which correlates with Y trending downwards those same quarters."