Dear Mr. Goldberg, give us one name

September 10, 2020 By Silvio Canto, Jr.

 The Atlantic story took another turn yesterday.  Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor, said this to someone at MSNBC: 

After saying the sources were allowed to remain anonymous because they feared “angry tweets and all the rest,” Goldberg elaborated and suggested criticism regarding the sourcing is fair.

Despite the comments, Goldberg also backed up his decision on anonymous sourcing for the article as well as the contents of the story.

“These are people just like other people, and they have this anxiety,” Goldberg said. “It is a reasonable question to ask why people who have had direct exposure to Donald Trump, who know what Donald Trump has said, who know what Donald Trump has done, won’t simply come out and say it.”  “And I share that view that it’s not good enough,” he continued. “But, you know, like other reporters, I’m always balancing out the moral ambiguities and complications of anonymous sourcing with a public’s right to know.”

Okay, so the "sources" in the Atlantic story are anonymous because they fear "tweet hate."  Wow -- sensitive aren't they?  Give us their tweet names so we can see if they’ve tweeted anything hateful about Trump.........To Read More....

No, Trump couldn’t have driven to the Aisne-Marne Cemetery

September 8, 2020 By Andrea Widburg

Two things happened, practically within minutes of Jeffrey Goldberg’s article in The Atlantic, the one that relied on anonymous sources to accuse President Trump of disrespecting America’s troops. First, people willing to put their names on the record, including people who don’t like Trump, leaped to his defense. Second, the Democrat party rolled out opposition material so quickly that it was either a miracle or the article was part of a carefully contrived set-up.

However, those supporting Trump ran into an obstacle when Jennifer Griffin, a Fox News National Security correspondent, tweeted out two more anonymous sources who claimed that Trump had disparaged the war dead and, significantly, that he could easily have made it to the Aisne-Marne Cemetery, even if his helicopter ride was canceled because of bad weather.

First, regarding those “former senior Trump administration officials” upon whom Griffin relies, as if they remain anonymous, there’s absolutely no reason to believe their claims about Trump saying mean things about the troops. There are a lot of “former senior Trump administration officials” who’ve proved themselves to be part of the Deep State and who willingly say or do anything to undermine Trump’s reelection chances. Their loyalty has proven to be to their careers, not to America or her Constitution.

John Bolton, to his credit, even though he dislikes the president, has come out firmly on Trump’s side regarding The Atlantic’s accusations:........To Read More....

Pollak: The Atlantic Hit Piece Is a Hint of Democrats’ Orwellian Future

Joel B. Pollak 6 Sep 2020

The Atlantic hit piece on President Donald Trump last week used four anonymous sources to allege that he had disparaged dead World War I soldiers two years ago. Fox News reporter Jennifer Griffin then claimed to have “confirmed” parts of the story — though not its main allegation — based on two anonymous sources. The entire story failed to meet basic journalistic standards. But it is a sign of things to come — particularly if Democrats win in November, which is the Atlantic‘s goal.  Two, or even four, anonymous sources can be used to claim absolutely anything. The Atlantic described them as “four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day.”

Notably, we are not told that they personally heard Trump say what the Atlantic alleges he said — they just have “knowledge of the discussion.” Someone who has “knowledge” of a discussion is a second-hand source, or worse. The point is there is no way to know if the sources are credible, or if the story is just made up. It turns out that we do actually have some very good historical sources that dispute the Atlantic story. These include the 11 eyewitnesses who have gone on the record to deny the president said what the Atlantic alleged, but they also include other sources..............

In 1942, George Orwell wrote:

Early in life I have noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a newspaper, but in Spain, for the first time, I saw newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie. I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed. I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as the heroes of imaginary victories; and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had never happened. I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of what ought to have happened according to various ‘party lines’.

Orwell would later develop this insight in his novel 1984, where the ruling party rewrote history as needed for its interests. “Who controls the past controls the future,” he wrote..............More @ Breitbart News

The nefarious purpose behind The Atlantic's 'Trump and the military' hoax

September 5, 2020 By Andrea Widburg

On Thursday, The Atlantic published an article that used anonymous sources to claim that President Trump repeatedly disparaged American troops, both living and dead. By Friday morning, Democrats were weaponizing the article to cover for Biden's serious problems with the military: his support for the Iraq War, and the way the Obama administration weakened the military. Trump, however, revitalized the military and fought for the troops.

The article's primary allegations are that Trump refused to visit a WWI cemetery because of his hair, said the Marines who died taking Belleau Wood were "suckers" and "losers," and drew back in revulsion from troops who lost limbs. Every assertion is false. People with firsthand information who were willing to go on the record exposed how terribly The Atlantic lied about Trump.
John Bolton, a Trump foe, was clear. "I was there," he said, about the decision to cancel the Belleau Wood trip, and "I didn't hear that." Contemporaneous documents support Bolton, but The Atlantic ignored them:..............To Read More.........