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.
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.“
No, and I am not responsible for your mental disease.
The salient point was when The Atlantic acknowledged they were conned into publishing political propaganda by Lincoln to further his election prospects.
Editor's Note, The Atlantic, November 2017
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.