I don’t get it. First you expend an entire post on excoriating James Gilmore. That’s he is not an authoritative source, that he is a spy who uses “fake names”, blah blah blah......And here in this recent post you completely rely on Gilmore and quote him ad infinitum. Like he is your new best friend. Of course you are using him, as it suits your own purpose, to bash Lincoln and his “plausible deniability”.
You get it perfectly, and your clumsy effort to make believe you fail to do so is noted.
Indeed, you get it rather like the Editor of The Atlantic who wrote of Lincoln's successful effort to use the (former) reputation of the magazine to further his own political ends.
Editor’s Note
A Half a Dozen Battles
Journalism in America is in perilous shape, and independence is more important than ever.
By Jeffrey Goldberg
November 2017 Issue
In the summer of 1864, Abraham Lincoln blessed a quixotic attempt by a Methodist minister named Colonel James F. Jaquess and a journalist named James R. Gilmore to broach with the Confederacy the possibility of a negotiated settlement of the Civil War. Jaquess and Gilmore crossed Union lines under the white flag of truce and called on Jefferson Davis, the rebel president, and Judah Benjamin, his secretary of state, in Richmond. The meeting was entirely unsuccessful.Upon his return to Washington, Gilmore presented Lincoln with a report of Davis’s recalcitrance. The news did not displease the president; he saw political advantage in publicizing the obstinacy of his enemies. Lincoln asked Gilmore, “What do you propose to do with this?”
Gilmore answered: “Put a beginning and an end to it, sir … and hand it to the Tribune,” Horace Greeley’s New York newspaper.
Lincoln responded: “Can’t you get it into The Atlantic Monthly? It would have less of a partisan look there.”
Gilmore answered: “No doubt I can, sir, but there would be some delay.”
Lincoln suggested that the delay would be worthwhile, because the article “could be worth as much to us as a half a dozen battles” in the war.
Gilmore sent a short dispatch to a Boston newspaper, and then a longer—and definitive—account to The Atlantic.
We who are lucky enough to work at The Atlantic, and to celebrate, this month, its 160th birthday, are naturally captivated by the magazine’s history. Jefferson Davis episode is one of the more fascinating stories from our past, for at least three reasons. Not least of them is the evident esteem in which America’s greatest president held this magazine. Presidents have written for The Atlantic with regularity. And we have tried, since the time Nathaniel Hawthorne served as our Civil War correspondent, to cover the presidency carefully, deeply, and critically.
Davis episode also interests me because the wily Lincoln sought to exploit The Atlantic’s reputation for fairness and detachment—our founding manifesto promised readers that the magazine would be “of no party or clique”—for political advantage. And he succeeded. The lesson here is obvious: We must always—but particularly in moments of high political passion—guard our independence.
The Atlantic was used by Lincoln for political propaganda purposes.
Your attempt to deny embarrassment is duly noted.
[woodpusher] Your source documented that Lincoln held a meeting to establish plausible deniability and that Lincoln issued their passes, acknowledged they would be acting as spies, decided the story should be published in The Atlantic, directed that he be given the copy before publication for editing, edited the story prior to publication in The Atlantic, and orchestrated the whole affair for political election purposes.”[HandyDandy] “My own source?” What are you smoking? My source was the Atlantic article of 1862. No mention of spies, plausible deniability etc.etc. You are getting all mixed-up, dude.
Your source was James R. Gilmore using the pseudonym of Edmund Kirke to publish propaganda in The Atlantic.
Your source, James R. Gilmore, also published that Lincoln advised that they would be acting as spies, the Lincoln orchestrated the affair,
Do you want to know what I think?
I can hardly wait. I will alert the media.
I think you stole the whole idea of Gilmore exposing Lincoln’s “plausible deniability” from:[Quote from Amazon re an e-book]
https://www.amazon.com/Personal-Recollections-Abraham-Expanded-Annotated-ebook/dp/B00I8DEQ2E
You think I stole the whole idea of Gilmore exposing Lincoln from a book by Gilmore which clearly indicates what Lincoln did. And Gilmore was your source, that being the real name behind the pseudonym Edmund Kirke.
And you think I used an Amazon preview. Nope. That's the way you perform research, with a Google search to a free preview from Amazon. I just get the whole book, 1898 edition. I made no use of Amazon whatever regarding James R. Gilmore (Edmund Kirke).
Your Amazon folly is attributed to BIG BYTE BOOKS in 2014. My citation was to Personal Recollections of Abraham Lincoln and The Civil War, Boston, L.C. Page and Company, Inc., 1898. I quoted from pages 240, 242-244, and 287-290. And you think all that was in the Amazon preview that you looked at. I scanned pages from an 1898 edition by L.C. Page and Company, and have never before heard of your BIG BYTE BOOKS.
From the positive point of view, The Atlantic did apologize to the public for letting themselves be fooled into publishing propaganda for Lincoln's political purposes. They said they learned their lesson.
What I get is that you have flip-flopped. What other conclusion can there be?
WD: “Indeed, you get it rather like the Editor of The Atlantic who wrote of Lincoln's successful effort to use the (former) reputation of the magazine to further his own political ends.”
Brilliant segue! Simply brilliant! Do you mean the editor who was boasting of the Magazines history on its 160 yr birthday? I think the salient point is when he said, “Not least of them is the evident esteem in which America’s greatest president held this magazine.“
WD:“You think I stole the whole idea of Gilmore exposing Lincoln from a book by Gilmore which clearly indicates what Lincoln did.”
Dude, you are squirming. You know that I think you stole the notion of “plausible deniability” from the preview of the book at Amazon. Don’t try to change that. You can deny it all you want but you used the terms four(4] times in your previous post. I know that you know that when you search “Personal Recollections of Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War by James R. Gilmore”, on line, that near the top of the list is the Amazon publication with the preview stating, “plausible deniability”. Coincidence? I think not.
As for the rest?
WD: “And you think I used an Amazon preview. Nope. That's the way you perform research, with a Google search to a free preview from Amazon. I just get the whole book, 1898 edition. I made no use of Amazon whatever regarding James R. Gilmore (Edmund Kirke).
WD:Your Amazon folly is attributed to BIG BYTE BOOKS in 2014. My citation was to Personal Recollections of Abraham Lincoln and The Civil War, Boston, L.C. Page and Company, Inc., 1898. I quoted from pages 240, 242-244, and 287-290. And you think all that was in the Amazon preview that you looked at. I scanned pages from an 1898 edition by L.C. Page and Company, and have never before heard of your BIG BYTE BOOKS.
WD: “From the positive point of view, The Atlantic did apologize to the public for letting themselves be fooled into publishing propaganda for Lincoln's political purposes. They said they learned their lesson.”
Well, that all sounds like a whole bunch of plausible deniability on your part. Like I said earlier, “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh*t”. Sounds like you are in stage two. You have lost all credibility with me. From your giving different sources for the same quote, to paraphrasing quotes without attribution, to evading questions, to breaking DiogenesLamp’s heart. .....the more you talk, the less credible you appear.