She's done some good work, but she's also completely amoral about keeping her access. I think she still mostly knows they're all crooks and awful on some level, but her access depends on placating them and defending their stories. She will push any PR line, like this claim that Hicks always meant to leave (after five months) to keep her conduit to the WH and then, like all key staff at the Times, Haberman will passive-aggressively attack any critics. She also was very upset about Wolff because let's face it - he scooped her and her upcoming book on Trump. IMO her relationship with Trump and his administration is now partly Stockholm Syndrome - she has gone partially native. She sympathizes with too many of them.
She still gets roasted during her passionate defenses over her stories, so that's good. IIRC her father is old school NY journalism and she used to work for one of the gossip rags, she got grandfathered in. Because of her family I think she is entirely too close to the city's society set and therefore Trump to have enough objectivity and awareness of how glib she really comes off.