That source isn't even able to directly lay out the claim, it spends 5 paragraphs IMPLYING Krugman changed his position for hand-wavy political reasons.
But lacks any direct evidence that he actually did so. It misquotes things and really grasps at straws to make a point, holy moly.
But lacks any direct evidence that he actually did so. It misquotes things and really grasps at straws to make a point, holy moly.
It's so disingenuous lmao.