The author of the explosive new Trump book says he can't be sure if parts of it are true

Wolff's candy seems to be simply irresistible to some sugar fiends.

 

Here's what we know:

So he's coming up with his own narrative using sources that are lying but he's not ENTIRELY sure which ones. Also, how exactly does one detail how someone was thinking?

He really is at Lena Dunham levels of trustworthiness here. Bob Woodward he ain't.

 

and those same people are the ones that would buy ocean side property in Colorado off the internet

 

How did Maddow torpedo her stance with Trump's tax return? And read the book before you come to conclusions. People will believe
what they perceive to be true and you have credibility on that score due to Trump's inept handling of the Presidency and his choice of advisors (generals excepted).

 

Um....I think I would be more upset about the amount of lies that surround me

 

MSM ACTUALLY said that?!?

I dunno where you work, but if I had a colleague who lied 80% of the time, he'd likely be avoided like the plague and then fired by the end of the year.

What bothers me is that being accurate only 20% of the time may very well be the new standard of quality for the Legacy Media.

 

Is that a fact.....I think your post is fake news.

 

I don't know if he is either, that's why I used the "if" qualifier. It's a moot point either way as the anti-Trumpers are rallying behind this book as if he was one of them. *shrugs*

 

I think what you should do is watch the clip instead of cherry picking and actually get the context. I know it's hard, but 2-3 clicks will get you there.

 

Good to see that the Republican snakes are beginning to bite themselves.

 

You know, rather than pounding this drum about what's credible/ not credible you should read the book to find out.

 

What does this comment have to do with this book? Read it first, but this statement has been out there for a long time a

This book is not a bowl of candy. Silly. Every book of this type that has ever been written has flaws, obviously.

 

Long story short: She was skewered for spending 20-ish minutes hyping the big reveal only to end up with a couple pages from years ago that ultimately proved Trump paid more in taxes than Sanders. A lot of people thought that Trump secretly set her up to look like a fool, and I can't blame people for thinking that. She essentially made a mockery of the Trump Taxes story with her ineptitude.

 

Who cares?

 

so you tell me if I do read the book how in the hell would I know what is the true parts of the book and which are the lies? like that bowl of candy which ones are the poisonous ones and which ones aren't
so best not take the chance and believe none of it like not eating any of the candy

 

That was a sarcastic remark by MSN during a discussion of the book. We already know what a mess the Whitehouse is based upon
the losers that come and go and the "fake" leaks that keep seeping out--you know the ones that Trump says are "fake" and then
has a sht fit over them as if they have merit. I am looking forward to reading this book as I am sure you are.

 

The content is based on interviews with people who work at the Whitehouse. This was a general statement and resulted in much laughter. Try not to judge before you read it.

 

very few authors if any would purposely write lies in a book other then this one why he shouldn't be considered one bit credible
but he wrote a damaging book about Trump so you would believe the lies anyways

 

Dude, you are totally wasting your time trying to reason with this other guy... he simply refuses to believe Trump and his administration are anything other than geniuses.... Not sure what it will take to change his mind, but it's his right...

 

"settled on a version of events I believe to be true." - The point is some guys got together and wrote a bunch of stories and people think that they come right from the mouth of a magical person that exists and is all knowing, all powerful that people all over the world devote their lives and money to. I don't think this book has that appeal......yet.
You're an agnostic? Who cares? What does that have to do with anything.

 

And it is a waste of time debating a liberal so eat up with Trump derangement syndrome that they will still believe a book as credible even after the author admitting writing lies in the book

 

Pls re-read post #25 and post up when you finally understand it. Tks.

 

I would be a no. I'll wait for the movie.

 

isn't it against forum rules to continue to spam the same post over and over again?

 

Not worth my money to tell me what I already know .........