Posted on 09/11/2018 2:15:19 PM PDT by yesthatjallen
Veteran journalist Bob Woodward said a “key” official in the Trump administration privately told him that the details in his books are “1000 percent true,” but later publicly defamed him.
Woodward was interviewed on The New York Time’s podcast, “The Daily,” on Tuesday — the day his book “Fear: Trump in the White House” was officially released.
Woodward told reporter Michael Schmidt that after excerpts of his book began circulating last week, someone working for the administration called him to praise the accuracy of his book.
“After the information in ‘Fear’ started breaking last week, one key person who’s in office called and said ‘Everyone knows what you said here is true. It’s 1,000-percent correct,’” Woodward said. “And then this person has said some public things that contradict that.”
Woodward declined to name the official and said he wasn’t pleased with the official’s public statement.
“And I’m not happy but I have a smile on face because the truth in all of this is going to emerge,” Woodward said. “There’s too much evidence, too many witnesses.”
President Trump and White House aides have rushed to condemn the book and undermine Woodward’s credibility in recent days.
Defense Secretary James Mattis, Chief of Staff John Kelly, ex-White House press secretary Rob Porter and former top economic adviser Gary Cohn all released statements criticizing the book.
Woodward has stood by his reporting despite the White House's response, saying on Sunday that Kelly and Mattis are "not telling the truth" in their denials.
White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders dismissed the book as “reckless” during Monday’s press briefing.
“I think I would certainly rather take the actual on-record account from people who are here — who have been working in this building, who have interacted with the president day-in, day-out, like General Mattis, like General Kelly, like myself — and not disgruntled former employees that refuse to put their name on things when they come out to attack the president," Sanders said.
Woodward, who worked with reporter Carl Bernstein to break the news of the Nixon-era Watergate scandal, said the use of anonymous sources is necessary when covering presidential administrations.
He said The Washington Post reporting duo started using unnamed sources “because you can’t get the truth, you won’t get the straight story from someone if you do it on the record.”
Woodward, however, said that he did not agree with the phrase “anonymous sources.”
“Sources are not anonymous to me, I know exactly who they are,” Woodward said on the podcast. “So I think it’s — in a sense — the wrong phrase. They are deep-background or background sources.”
He said he understands the “skepticism” around unnamed sources but added that it would be nearly impossible for reporters to get certain documents and testimony on the record.
Now we have a report that a "key official" says that Woodward's book is "1,000% correct".
C'mon Bob...you can do better than that.How about three dozen key sources saying that it's 100,000,000% correct?
Oh, well. If his unnamed source who won’t go on the record says it’s jake, who are we to argue?
Seems to be 1000% hearsay.
Woodward Deep Throat was untrue.
1000% correct.
It’s the OFFAL, not the official.
One can not be 1000 % True—100% is as high as you can go. If its such a great source—why not Name him (or Her)?
1000% correct - must be an “economic advisor” too.
Seriously though. It may be accurate, but I still say it’s all exaggeration. If a POTUS does not have advisers who disagree with him, then he does not need the advisers! I would expect the POTUS to have people with a variety of strongly held opinions.
To portray that as some kind of “disarray” or “loyal steady state opposition” is nonsensical, an exaggeration of the reality of every POTUS. Well almost every POTUS. I imagine some recent POTUS’ purged themselves of dissenting voices because they were on a different kind of mission.
But the 2018 and 2020 elections should be an easy campaign. Obama said “these jobs are never coming back” and 2 years after he left, Trump is bringing those jobs back. The difference in vision, in determination and will, is easy to contrast. Or as I heard the other day - previous governments viewed themselves as “managing the decline” of the USA but Trump has a whole different vision, of reversing the decline and changing attitudes of those who think we are (and thus, put us into decline by the default).
It may be chaotic, especially when you have a bunch of seditious hold-overs from previous administrations. But that’s a good thing. Woodward could be 1000% correct, and still be 2000% wrong.
William Casey told him from beyond the grave everything was accurate.
Woodward played with a lot of imaginary friends as a child. They still visit with him now in his dotage.
Depends on where the decimal point is. It might have been 1.000% true.
Anonymous JOHN BOLTON
How come these seasoned Journalists can never get these people on audio saying this stuff?
Sure, Kaisch would do that.
Maybe the ghost if Bill Casey is talking to him...
Right or left:
Real names or it’s bullsh!t.
I have zero use for anyone anonymous.
Put your name on it or STFU.
That woodwind sure hears some interesting stuff.
Barney Fife and Andy Taylor would never have let it get this far.
Note: strangers from out of town, out of Mayberry, were almost always the criminal unmasked. Now the strangers are from WAY outside (Nicaragua,Somalia,Mexico,Bangladesh,Iran,etc.) but the aliens are still the criminals.
The White House spy, I dunno. Maybe the butler did it. Like the Chinese driver for Diane Feinstein. See if the butler talks into his shirt cuffs a lot.
He read that somewhere. He wrote it down and then he read it.
Caption:
Traitorous, Treasonous, Lying,Delusional Commie Woodward.
Can you say that? I knew you could.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.