Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
mjperry51

Atlantic Editor Concedes Central Claim Of Trump Hit Could Be Wrong

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

mjperry51

Atlantic Editor Concedes Central Claim Of Trump Hit Could Be Wrong

September 7, 2020 By Jordan Davidson
thefederalist.com

On Sunday, Atlantic Editor in Chief Jeffrey Goldberg admitted the White House’s account that President Trump’s trip to a cemetery of fallen World War I soldiers in France in 2018 was modified due to bad weather is probably accurate.

“I’m sure all of those things are true,” Goldberg told CNN in an interview on Friday when asked to respond to evidence a story he published saying otherwise is false.

In the story published in The Atlantic on Thursday, Goldberg asserted that multiple senior White House staffers heard President Trump express a desire to cancel his visit to the cemetery because “It’s filled with losers.”

“When President Donald Trump canceled a visit to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris in 2018, he blamed the rain for the last-minute decision, saying ‘the helicopter couldn’t fly’ and that the Secret Service wouldn’t drive him there. Neither claim was true. Trump rejected the idea of the visit because he feared his hair would become disheveled in the rain, and because he did not believe it important to honor American war dead,” Goldberg wrote, citing only anonymous sources.

Despite conceding that the cancellation due to weather might be true, Goldberg stood by his story about President Trump’s trip to the cemetery, claiming that “the public’s interest in meeting this information outweigh the ambiguities or the difficulties of anonymous sourcing” and that he will “be continuing to make that effort to move this material directly onto the record.”

<snip>

Former National Security Advisor John Bolton’s book, released earlier in the year to criticize Trump, corroborated the White House account that the trip to the cemetery was canceled for the president’s safety over bad weather and response time if the need to leave France unexpectedly arose.

“Marine One’s crew was saying that bad visibility could make it imprudent to chopper to the cemetery. The ceiling was not too low for Marines to fly in combat, but flying POTUS was obviously something very different. If a motorcade was necessary, it could take between ninety and a hundred and twenty minutes each way, along roads that were not exactly freeways, posing an unacceptable risk that we could not get the President out of France quickly enough in case of an emergency,” Bolton wrote.

“It was a straightforward decision to cancel the visit but very hard for a Marine like Kelly to recommend, having originally been the one to suggest Belleau Wood… Trump agreed, and it was decided that others would drive to the cemetery instead.”

Despite claims by CNN that the alleged conversation about the cancellation could’ve occurred after Bolton left, Bolton confirmed the account from his book in an interview with Bloomberg on Friday, saying he had never heard President Trump disparage fallen soldiers.

“I didn’t hear that,” Bolton told The New York Times. “I’m not saying he didn’t say them later in the day or another time, but I was there for that discussion.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shaky McSelfie

“Probably accurate?”

 

What BS!  If you can that part wrong with unnamed sources, then the rest of the price is compromised.  
 

Did these asshats not think that those who were there would not speak out?  Idiots, the lot of them. 

  • Disagree (-1) 1
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Martin

In journo theory, you are no longer obliged to keep a source secret if it turns out they lied to you.  In this case, though, I cannot imagine Goldberg identifying his sources even if he discovers they lied to him.  First, it is safer for him to stick with the original story.  Second, revealing the lying sources would discourage other swamp creatures from leaking information to him.  He will stand by his claim no matter how many people dispute it.  To this day, Dan Rather insists that his smear against President Bush was accurate even though he based it on a clearly forged memo.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tikk
54 minutes ago, Martin said:

In journo theory, you are no longer obliged to keep a source secret if it turns out they lied to you.  In this case, though, I cannot imagine Goldberg identifying his sources even if he discovers they lied to him.  First, it is safer for him to stick with the original story.  Second, revealing the lying sources would discourage other swamp creatures from leaking information to him.  He will stand by his claim no matter how many people dispute it.  To this day, Dan Rather insists that his smear against President Bush was accurate even though he based it on a clearly forged memo.  

Fake but accurate was my first thought as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oki

Truth be damned, ANYTHING to make a narrative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LongKnife

The aim for now is to just throw lies out until the election. They can retract and/or “apologize” later if they get caught at them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joe the Pagan

Atlantic Editor Defends Using Anonymous Sources For Trump Hit Piece. Back In 2016, He Blasted Using Anonymous Sources Targeting Him.

On Sunday, appearing on CNN’s “Reliable Sources” with host Brian Stelter, Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor of The Atlantic, which has been slammed for running a hit piece on President Trump based on anonymous sources, blamed Trump, claiming, “We all have to use anonymous sources, especially in a climate in which the President of the United States tries to actively intimidate journalism organizations and people who provide information to journalism organizations.”

<snip>

Ironically, after the publication of the well-known May 2016 article in The New York Times Magazine in which former Obama administration Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes essentially admitted he had manipulated the media regarding the Iran nuclear deal, Goldberg attacked David Samuels, the freelancer who had written the article, for writing, “For those in need of more traditional-seeming forms of validation, handpicked Beltway insiders like Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic and Laura Rozen of Al-Monitor helped retail the administration’s narrative.”

Goldberg wrote, “I did not find this mention of my name amusing at all, because Samuels is making a serious, unsourced, and unsubstantiated allegation against me in an otherwise highly credible publication (one for which I happened to work, in fact).”

 

link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gravelrash

This ties loosely to what PRESIDENT Donald J. Trump said about John McCain during the 2016 campaign. And? McCain was the final vote that saved 0bama-fraud. I am not alone in hopes that John McCain has his own thumb shoved up in his grave and in hell. Even Fox News is pushing the story. To what end? That a bunch of pissed off retards might tune into their channel some day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL

This is all made up, purely fabricated, BS.  

Kelly and Mattis wanted him to go Aisne-Marne, which butts up to Belleau Wood, because they are Marines.  There was never a "ceremony" planned.  This was going to be a private visit with a wreath laying.  The President was already scheduled to do the formal "ceremony" at Suresnes American Cemetery, outside of Paris, the next day.  If my impressions of conversations and discussions on the cemetery planning side are correct, he didn't really want to go Aisne-Marne at all because of his tight schedule, but was going to do it because he had to top Marines in top positions.  That is why he was going to fly, in the first place.  He was never going to drive.  In the end, I think only Kelly and a couple of other staffers went.  

That being said, I knew the minute I heard he wasn't going that this would be spun like a top.  Never expected it to come back, though, 2 years later.  I guess that is those crazy, lying Dems and their pet media for you.

Sorry, ETA:  The supposed statements he made disparaging those buried there are so out of character as to be laughable.  He has gone out of his way for the military.  Using his remarks about that tool McCain to say this is likely is moronic.  I am a retired Naval Officer and I have said plenty of things about McCain, Kerry, Powell, and several others and that does not mean I disrespect or disparage the military.  It means I have issues with or do not respect certain individuals.

Edited by JerryL
  • Disagree (-1) 1
  • Agree (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown

Well, that's big of him!

He and his rag should be sued into extinction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LongKnife
13 hours ago, oki said:

Truth be damned, ANYTHING to make a narrative.

Actually, they tend to choose truth over facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oki
9 minutes ago, LongKnife said:

Actually, they tend to choose truth over facts.

Come know, in this day and age a person can be what ever they want to.  So I guess the same applies to truth and facts.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Italian Biker
14 hours ago, LongKnife said:

The aim for now is to just throw lies out until the election. They can retract and/or “apologize” later if they get caught at them.

The leftist media can retract anytime before the election so they can claim a lack of bias.  They know that the sheep always believe, and continue to believe the original lie, because while they do a retraction, it is purposely under publicised, on network news, it's usually just a ticker in the bottom.  In a news paper, it's a tiny little article in the middle of one of the rarely read pages.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tabla_Man

It's clear these "sources" are jaded former members of the administration.  It's laughable listening to Goldberg's "credibility" of his sources.  Goldberg has a long history of mixing his political bias with his reporting.  And then for Fox news to try and back this up just because of their own reporter is laughable.  Luckily Tucker Carlson and probably a few others over there aren't buying it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...