the video already posted has Goldberg responding to Bolton quotes (watch from 2m15s to 3m45s). however, Goldberg ends by repeating Trump said the “hair” quote, so he was not admitting that was false.
it was false, though, because David Frum invented the mocking “hair” story on Twitter nearly 2 years ago:
Tweet: David Frum
10 Nov 2018: Some perspective on President Trump canceling his projected visit to the (spectacular, not-to-be-missed) Aisne-Marne memorial and cemetery:
It’s not even 60 miles from central Paris to the monument. If the weather is too wet & windy for helicopters, a presidential motorcade could drive the distance in an hour.
On site, presidential advance could easily erect a tent to protect the dignitaries ***(and the the presidential hair-do) from inclement weather...
https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1061249878293168128
8 Sept: The Political Insider: Atlantic Editor Admits Story About Trump Disparaging Fallen Soldiers Could Be Wrong
By Rusty Weiss
The Atlantic column starts off with a claim that the President did not want to visit the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris in 2018, because “his hair would become disheveled in the rain” and that “he did not believe it important to honor American war dead.”
Remember – this is the lede to the piece and sets up every other argument throughout...
Goldberg admits that his four, off-the-record, anonymous sources may not have been correct and that the visit was indeed called off due to weather.
When presented with an excerpt from former national security adviser John Bolton’s book which details how the weather was the cause for cancellation of the visit to the cemetery, not a decision by POTUS over his hair, Goldberg conceded, “I’m sure all of those things are true.”
Tweet: Jonathan Turley:
I just watched Goldberg’s interview on CNN and was struck by his response to evidence that the flight to the cemetery was canceled for weather. Both Bolton and Pentagon sources have confirmed that reason, and Goldberg says that that all may be true…
6 Sept 2020
Not only did Bolton inadvertently provide evidence that Goldberg’s ‘Swift Boat’ attempt of the President was factually incorrect in at least this one aspect, but he followed up in a subsequent interview with Fox News to reiterate the story was false...
“According to what that article said, the president made disparaging remarks about soldiers and people buried in the cemetery in connection with the decision for him not to go to the ceremony that was planned that afternoon,” Bolton stated, “and that was simply false.”
He continued, “I don’t know who told the author that, but that was false.”...
The entire premise of the story is certifiably fake news, and the American people are supposed to believe the other things your anonymous sources said? That’s not how this works.
Still, Goldberg is standing by the bulk of the story...
Goldberg can stand by those sources all he wants, but it says something about his journalistic integrity that he is willing to run a story based on accounts from four anonymous sources instead of actually researching their claims.
Claims that, by now, have been denied by 21 people overall, and over a dozen who had first-hand knowledge of events that took place during the trip in question.
The Atlantic has four nameless sources, while the President has the following backing him up:
LIST - DETAILS
At least fourteen of the aforementioned people were on the trip in which these anonymous sources claim the President disparaged veterans...
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/atlantic-editor-admits-main-point-of-trump-hit-piece-could-be-wrong-21-officials-go-on-the-record-to-refute-story/
If a helicopter can’t fly in dense fog, how in hell’s bells is a motorcade supposed to drive in the exact same dense fog?
It's the same today - the Atlantic prides themselves on accuracy when writing about white liberal elites and things white elites are interested in... When reporting on us they lie, make it up and don't give a damn.
They lied about Sarah Palin - they lie about Trump - they would lie about any of us...
It was ugly journalism then, it's ugly journalism now.