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

so we even have the author admitting parts aren't verified, lies, and contradictions
but we have the liberal media including our Trump hating liberal forum members reporting on it as verified facts
Journalism is dead in America

 

"settled on a version of events I believe to be true."


/facepalm

 

Let me know when Steve Bannon denies the statements attributed to him.

 

So nothing can be taken with any credibility, the book is trash.

 

So he has to prove the accusation false instead of the accuser proving it to be true? Lawyer??

 

So I guess this new best seller needs to be moved to the fiction section.....

 

Quite probable, only in theory....

 

Bannon, the lefts new hero. Does this make you a racist?

 

he believed to be true meaning unverified just his belief and his track record proves what he believes is full of crap

 

From what I've recently been hearing this Wolff guy has a reputation for making up his own facts. Even with that disclaimer stating his book isn't entirely factual the left will be quoting passages from it for the next 7 years just as they did with their claim that Palin can see Russia from her house.

 

Good lord. Well this book can now be ignored in it's entirety. It will be fun to watch CNN and the rest of the MSM ignore this admission and talk about it for months to come as if it's factual.

 

Issuing a denial does not prove the accusation false...layman

 

So nothing would satisfy you.. Thanks for your admission although its like pulling teeth.

 

I don't like Bannon, but go ahead and troll post away.

 

What? A denial of the validity of the statements attributed to these individuals would prompt the author to prove the validity of his claims, i.e. release of the audio or notes.

If you can't even bring yourself to deny the validity of the statements, then I am going to assume the statements are properly sourced.

 

And guess what ABC was running for the 15 mins I had it on in the background. All about the book non stop, quoting what Trump SUPPOSEDLY said according to this guy. WTF...nothing like honest reporting huh=)

I can't believe a ****ing thing most of the media claims now when it starts with "coming out of the WH according to our sources." This simply did NOT happen with Obama or even Bush. We're turning into a Banana republic. All these news organizations need to be held responsible for corrupting opinion. And they're bitching about What Russia supposedly did with Facebook?? How about what YOU guys are doing 24/7? Its far worse.

 

This would be a perfect way to promote the book. Act as if you don’t know if all the quotes are true, have it published, and it ends up all being true. The people wanting to know if it’s true or not will pick up more copies.

 

Source the authors own words?

Lets sum it up for you.

He admits some people lied to him.. He published it anyways.

You claim Bannon has not denied it and then in the next post claim denial is not proof the accusation is false.. Showing no matter what you will believe the accusation even with the author saying people lied to him.

This documents your state of mind on the issue its clear as day..

 

Nice attempt at a spin.... Did you even make a full circle out of it?

 

That’s not a spin, it’s Promotion 101. Create controversy, create buzz to get your product to sell more.

 

Sounds like Hillary's shifting claims on her clandestine email server, or the Benghazi Terror Attack that they initially pretended was a spontaneous outworking of a protest over an internet video.

 

"Several of his sources, he says, were definitely lying to him, while some offered accounts that flatly contradicted those of others."

Shocker!! That's part of the point of the book. BTW....

 

It's HIS responsibility to check his sources for the credibility of what they tell him. This book just lost all credibility. How about giving us a two column list one side titled "The True Stuff" the other "The Made Up Stuff"?

 

The author of this book is ****ed six ways to Sunday.

 

Well, you're misinterpreting what he is saying. He's saying he wrote what he was told. Some people contradicted others and some seemed to be lying. He couldn't prove truth either way. So he just reported what he was told. It's actually to his credit that he gave that warning. Readers can decide for themselves. The real point is that he was there, personally observing what was going on and talking to all of those people: an inside view no one else had.