I am seriously considering banning links to The Atlantic

The Hill: Bolton refutes anonymous Atlantic quotes

It’s something I would normally consider, but this time it’s beyond the pale. 

Of course, we have all read of the alleged comments attributed to President Trump disparaging fallen troops in France, based on anonymous sources. But those ‘quotes’ are disputed by several sources who were present and will stand by their statements in public, including John Bolton, who is hardly a Trump fan. Yet the MSM continues to pursue the story as ‘confirmed’ by, of course, anonymous sources.

But that is just routine fake news. But what is unforgivable is that the Biden campaign had TV ads based on the story ready to run the day the article came out, showing obvious coordination between the campaign and the magazine’s editor, which has not reported the article as an ‘in kind’ campaign contribution.

So, persuade me that the Atlantic should be given any more credence than Qanon

47 thoughts on “I am seriously considering banning links to The Atlantic

    1. Did you read what she actually said?

      She did not confirm the comments alleged to have been made in France, which is the gist of the article.

      She said that Trump said the Vietnam War was stupid and those who willingly went were suckers. While I would not put it the same way myself, do you care to dispute Trump’s evaluation of the Vietnam War?

      Like

      1. Prior bad acts, Don. Prior bad acts. Bolton may not have been a witness of the event.

        A few years back, okay a lot of few years back, Chuck Robb was accused of attending a party where cocaine was being used openly. The press went wild!

        Now, I was there. Cocaine was indeed being used, out by the swimming pool, by a lot of people that I knew, still know them. But, while I was there, I met Chuck and his wife. They were in the dining room. I can honestly say that while I was there, the Robbs were totally unaware that illegal drugs were present because they remained in the house.

        Same with Bolton.

        BTW, the party out by the pool was a hellava party. The food was better inside.

        Liked by 2 people

          1. I read that.

            My first thought is that the man might have a point. I think it was one of only four trips Trump made to honor fallen troops. So it was put out on MSM, but not enough for some I suppose. And honestly, the way that story was written, it sounded like a political operative wrote it.

            Now, about the article.

            Bolton also said that some of the statements attributed to Trump could certainly be true. He just didn’t personally hear them.

            Trump insulted McCain, the Kahn’s, General Mattis and a slew of others. FOX has lied from day one for Trump. He lied about helping vets. It was Obama’s bill. He cheated vets out of a fund raiser until caught. He did not go to the cemetery when all the other leaders somehow managed.

            When you spend a lifetime,( plus 3 3/4 years screwing up, and screwing, our country) of lying, cheating, extorting and conning you don’t get leeway.

            And recall that he told Stahl that he wants to confuse Americans so they don’t know what to believe.

            I have no doubt the story is accurate. Other media have corroborated most of the allegations, including FOX.

            All that being said, ban whatever you want.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. As ‘grabby’ as the guy has admitted to be regarding females, one would at least think the Oval Office squatter would have something good to say about females in the military. Just sayin’ with a smile.

            But, seriously. I tend to look in the accused person’s history. And, when you think about past comments that we have heard from this guy, there is not a snowball’s chance in hell that’ I’d believe for even one second that ‘djt’ didn’t make those comments attributed to him. He’s a trash-mouth and he doesn’t give a flying hoot about anyone without the last name ‘TRUMP’. From what I’ve read and seen about his verbal disdain for military people, sounds exactly like ‘djt’, to me.

            He’s being beyond ridiculous to think he can change his colors now and expect anyone with half a brain to believe he’s doing anything other than trying to clean up his mess before Now. 3.

            Liked by 1 person

      2. Just to change the subject for a moment, sir, regarding your response to something I wrote below in this thread about Trump and his ‘grabbiness’. Something I might add, that Trump, himself, confirmed for us.

        I get it that you don’t agree with what I say about Trump; since you are armed with absolutely NOTHING to defend him with, but, why would you post the link that you did? Anyone with just a 10th of grey-matter knows that no one is going to do what the clip suggests with cameras aimed directly at them.

        You may not like Joe Biden and you might say anything in an attempt to drag him down to the sewer where Trump abides, but would you like any of your own young female loved ones being put in the position of having old guys panting over what the audio in those clips is saying?

        Maybe this clip and the others should remain in your private collection.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I think he did exactly what the clip shows.

          Biden has a long history of inappropriate fondling and hair sniffing of little girls, and he just thought he could slip a little tweak by.

          Like

  1. RE: “So, persuade me that the Atlantic should be given any more credence than Qanon”

    It shouldn’t, but I wouldn’t disrespect Qanon by the comparison. In the Q ecosystem, anonymity (of contributors) serves free speech ideals and identification of information sources is highly valued. For MSM outlets like the Atlantic, neither free speech nor source credibility matter much.

    Like

    1. “ In the Q ecosystem, anonymity (of contributors) serves free speech ideals and identification of information sources is highly valued.”

      Anonymity and identification of sources? Which is it?

      Q-Anon is the worst kind of scum there is. A mysterious, unidentified operator spreading disgusting rumors than dummies pass on, including Trump.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. RE: “Anonymity and identification of sources? Which is it?”

        It is both, as I said.

        People who post to the discussion group where Qanon messages appear (contributors, as I called them) do so anonymously. Anonymity is strictly enforced by the community for a number of reasons, but mainly to ensure that ideas (instead of personalities) get the attention they deserve.

        The purpose of the discussion group is to reasearch and share information of relevance to issues Qanon has raised. For example, if you want to promote the theory that JFK was shot by an assassin located on the overpass in front of the motorcade, the community would expect you to provide evidence in the form of links to documents in the public record.

        RE: “Q-Anon is the worst kind of scum there is.”

        You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about, which makes it remarkable that you would even express an opinion.

        Like

        1. What’s truly remarkable and disturbing is that we are discussing Q-Anon as a worthy source rather than a age old version of “blood libel” conspiracies.

          I think my assessment of the character regarding Q-Anon is spot on.

          Liked by 1 person

  2. If you believe The Atlantic and Q-Anon are on the same plane, then there is no more to discuss.

    Welcome to the world Trump has been trying so very hard to get us to. Conspiracies, suspicion, corrupt DOJ, corrupted USPS, retweeting racist crap, …oh yeah, you are being taken big time.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. Coordination?

        Possible.

        Trump has shown us how to coordinate with the media for years going back to his “John Baron” days. Of course he has progressed with having conservative media stars on his campaign stage as well as hiring them.

        Your outrage is sorely misplaced, in my opinion. There is enough corroborated evidence along with a history by Trump himself to give great credence to the Atlantic article.

        Liked by 2 people

    1. “I can tell you that my sources are unimpeachable,” Fox News’ national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin said on-air (in the video above). “I feel very confident with what we have reported at Fox.”

      She didn’t confirm “every line” of the report, but did confirm “most of the descriptions and the quotes in that Atlantic article … so I feel very confident in my reporting,” Griffin said. She also discovered as part of her reporting that Trump had once said that including “wounded guys” would not be a “good look” at a Fourth of July parade honoring the military, according to a source.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. The reason I question the value of links to the Atlantic are because the story is based on anonymous sources, who thus can’t be challenged, and because of the obvious co-ordination with the Biden campaign.

      Like

      1. I’d suggest not banning links to The Atlantic.

        Doing so would not be Libertarian – it’d be censoring “The Atlantic” because its Editor-in-Chief wrote a summation of President Trump’s priors…and out of pure spite included the purported statement that the dead of Belleau Woods buried in the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery were losers.

        Goldberg’s article falls flat in the first paragraph. His attempt to qualify/quantify and substantiate the most damning statement that President Trump described them as losers will never be achieved.
        Had President Trump said such a thing? There should be no doubt that We the People would’ve learned all about it rather quickly…back in November, 2018.

        Like

        1. “ Had President Trump said such a thing? There should be no doubt that We the People would’ve learned all about it rather quickly…back in November, 2018.”

          We learned in 2016 that Trump had no use for POW’S but he still squeaked an electoral win.

          He could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and his fans would still bow to the “chosen one”. So calling fallen soldiers “losers” won’t make a dent in the faithful.

          As an aside, the hatred of Clinton after decades of conservative attacks was instrumental in getting Trump the win in three key states.

          Clinton is not on the ticket now.

          Reagan asked “are you better off today than 4 years ago?”. That is the question to keep in mind when considering the value of the incumbent.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. As the lead character on “Dragnet” (Jack Webb) was known to ask – “The facts, sir. Just the facts.”

            Please stop dancing around the other key points of Jeffrey Goldberg’s article.

            Did or did not President Trump say the dead buried in Aisne-Marne are a bunch of losers?

            I say he did not. Had he-this wouldn’t be new news.

            Like

          2. Considering his history with insults and disrespect for McCain, the Kahn’s, and trash talking “my generals” I have no doubt he said what the article alleged.

            As far as “new” news, there have been lots of well research articles, and now books, that have not be refuted but concern egregious behavior from years ago. Trump family tax evasion for example.

            If he looks like, walks like and quacks like a duck…well, you know the rest.

            Liked by 2 people

          3. In your opinion, since you despise the Democrats (your words) the handful of progressives make a party.

            Which is why the Trump campaign is panicked since Biden was selected.

            Hillary was hated because she was a Clinton that no amount of investigation farces could pin down over a period of 2 1/2 decades.

            Liked by 2 people

  3. President Trump never said that the dead in Aisne-Marne are a bunch of losers.

    Had he…is there any doubt in your minds that USMC Generals (retired) Kelly and Mattis would not have immediately resigned in November 2018 rather than in January 2019?

    Their respective resignations would’ve been followed by the majority of active duty Admirals and Generals in the Department of Defense (to include the Joint Chiefs) as well as large number of the senior enlisted members in each service branch…submitting their retirement papers.

    Don’t stop there! Do you think the House wouldn’t have found a way to include that statement in their articles of impeachment and the Senate voted differently?

    Like

    1. “I wouldn’t go to war with you people,” the book quotes Trump as saying to the military officials. “You’re a bunch of dopes and babies.”

      https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/01/17/trump-blasted-top-military-generals-as-a-bunch-of-dopes-and-babies-according-to-new-book/

      I don’t think this caused a massive retirement or condemnation. Top generals are pretty closed mouth about political issues.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. Len?
    You’re literally beating a dead horse.

    Please, sir. Remain and stay on the topic (regarding Aisne-Marne) and don’t take tangential arguments.

    Did President Trump say what Jeffrey Goldberg reported or not?
    It’s a simple yes or no question.

    Like

  5. I believe I have said yes several times. And included the “why”.

    If the sources used by Goldberg are currently anonymous, I still believe him. Trump’s history helps confirm.

    “ I have no doubt he said what the article alleged.”. I said that a post or two ago. Also added a “why”.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. I think we will seen further corroboration in the near future. Bolton said he did hear those words at that time, but he also said earlier it would not be out of character.

        Plus all the other heads of state managed to get to the cemetery.

        When a person lies, insults and trash talks literally every single day of his life, it is hard to give him a pass just because the witnesses in this one case are not named. Yet.

        Liked by 2 people

  6. Considering the sheer stupidity of those that buy into the Atlantic charade, yes, you know who I am talking about, I am so glad I went out wine tasting instead of wasting my time arguing over complete unadulterated nonsense with left wing extremist ninnies hell bent on the destruction of our nation.

    Like

    1. That is because your ability to argue is limited to attacks and not facts.

      Hope the wine was good, though.

      And the only one around these days hell bent on the destruction of the US is Putin and his useful idiot, Trump.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Here is my “fact” for you. You liberals are full of conspiracy nonsence perpetuated by media using unverifiable sources. Your conspiracy did not happen so you are a bunch of babbling liars as usual. FACT!!

        Like

        1. One word in reply – Qanon. And there aren’t any backers of that bullshit running for Congress….or the White House.

          “Your conspiracy did not happen so you are a bunch of babbling liars as usual.”

          And MY fact stands: You bring nothing to these discussions but attacks and vitriol. Not facts, just whiny BS.

          Liked by 1 person

        2. Actually, the folks who think as you do put an inept, unfit, empty-suit in the WH house; and now, after nearly 4 years of his daily lies and acting like a total fool, his supporters have nothing whatsoever to counter his continuing ignorance with.

          Well, boo hoo for you. You want continued lies, absolute chaos and nothing but babble-de-babble frothing from the WH and Trump’s lips? Go ahead and vote ‘little donald.’ I’m sure that will make your macho ‘feel good all under,’ (as the old ad used to say.) ha.

          But, know that snickers, chuckles & smiles is all you get from intelligent Americans each time ‘little d’ opens his mouth.

          Like

    2. My hand’s UP HIGH! I surely HOPE you’re talking about me.

      Why do you see the Atlantic article as a charade? Do you suspect that Bob Woodward held donald down and made him admit that he lied over and over and over again about the pandemic. We have the donald’s own voice saying every word with his own little round mouth. And, now, he is feigning shock (shock, I tell you) that anyone thinks he is not responsible for millions of deaths, due to his lies and chaotic actions re: Covid-19 for well over 6 months.

      This guy should be jailed for causing the deaths of so very many people when it was his job to protect Americans, not kill us.

      Like

      1. Correction – the statement below is how it should read, sans the word,’NOT’.

        “And, now, he is feigning shock (shock, I tell you) that anyone thinks he is responsible for millions of deaths, due to his lies and chaotic actions re: Covid-19 for well over 6 months.”

        Like

      2. First, there have not been millions of deaths by COVID, still under 200K.

        But more importantly, talking down the threat more likely saved lives.

        The pattern is as old as contagion has been recognized. The cities get infected first and those with the means flee the cities for the countryside, carrying the disease with them.

        By mid March, the Port of Entry cities were already infected, and a full scale panic would have carried the infection to the smaller cities and towns much faster than the response could be ramped up.

        To some extent, that happened anyway. COVID was brought to Chesapeake by a woman fleeing NYC who did not quarantine when she got here.

        So, delaying the evacuation of the cities by avoiding panic was a good policy.

        Like

        1. “First, there have not been millions of deaths by COVID, still under 200K.”.

          Yeah, but he’s hoping to put Americans in the ‘millions’ category and he’s been pushing hard for that. We see that every time he has one of those ‘NO SOCIAL DISTANCING, NO-MASKS!’ rallies.

          You are wrong, and none of that BS about “Port of Entry cities”, and “Fleeing the countryside” makes ‘djt’s’ actions regarding Covid-19 even remotely helpful with this pandemic.

          As for “COVID was brought to Chesapeake by a woman fleeing NYC who did not quarantine when she got here,” you have to know that any number of other people showing no symptoms could have contributed to the pandemic reaching Chesapeake.

          He can’t get away from the fact that he is the #1 cause of so many (thousands} of Americans getting this virus, due to him causing such large numbers of his own supporters feel stupid if they put on masks or attempted to social distance. Of course his supporters at his rallies who refused to wear masks (because of his mocking) didn’t show any more common sense than he did. It’s true – you really can’t fix stupid.

          Like

          1. Regarding masks, even though Trump was technically correct that he didn’t need to wear one(having been tested along with everyone he came in contact with) it would have been better for him to set the better example anyway.

            But don’t forget that early on, Fauci and the CDC were discouraging wearing masks for fear that the PPE supply would be further depleted.

            And I agree that COVID would have found its way here sooner or later, but nonetheless, the first case was the NYC woman who fled here, and that pattern of people fleeing cities carrying plague with them goes back to the Roman Empire.

            Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s