Micheal Wolff, author of new Trump book, says it is mostly untrue

So, if we see the splash page of ATS we see real news and fake news in real time. Check this out...




Here we see 3 thread trying to discredit Trump and in most of them people are using information from a book that is author is saying is really part fiction. The other 2 threads are real news. Investigations into real issue and there will be a real outcome unlike the Mueller tail chase.

Link

In his words...

The author of the explosive new book about Donald Trump's presidency acknowledged in the book that he wasn't certain all of its content was true. Michael Wolff, the author of "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House," included a note at the start that casts significant doubt on the reliability of the specifics contained in the rest of its pages.

this is even better....he is saying again it is up to the reader???

Here is the relevant part of the note, from the 10th page of the book's prologue: "Many of the accounts of what has happened in the Trump White House are in conflict with one another; many, in Trumpian fashion, are baldly untrue. These conflicts, and that looseness with the truth, if not with reality itself, are an elemental thread of the book. "Sometimes I have let the players offer their versions, in turn allowing the reader to judge them. In other instances I have, through a consistency in the accounts and through sources I have come to trust, settled on a version of events I believe to be true."

and even better...was he trolled by the staff?

Several of his sources, he says, were definitely lying to him, while some offered accounts that flatly contradicted those of others. But some were nonetheless included in the vivid account of the West Wing's workings, in a process Wolff describes as "allowing the reader to judge" whether the sources' claims are true.

Bottom line is that ALL of the threads that were created using 'info' to prove Trump turmoil should really be in a Hoax bin since the author himself is saying that there is little truth to any of it.

He also NEVER talked to Trump. Not once. He was never in the oval office. He never had any real official access.

Also, since most of you think Blair is the devil, how about the longtime editor of Vogue and her comment....

Anna Wintour, the longtime Vogue editor, also dismissed the claim that she lobbied Trump to be his ambassador to the UK as "laughably preposterous."

and from Trump himself...

I authorized Zero access to White House (actually turned him down many times) for author of phony book! I never spoke to him for book. Full of lies, misrepresentations and sources that don’t exist. Look at this guy’s past and watch what happens to him and Sloppy Steve!

We also have a new name for Bannon...Sloppy Steve!

sounds more like a disclaimer you'd have to have when you interview a bunch of BS artists, imo.

a reply to: matafuchs

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Pol had some snippets and wow Wolff has a really good imagination i give him that. All the suckers who bought this book got conned.

Well this is him speaking in his own words.



He is pretty adiment that his account is a true as it can be.

Also the author is not saying he made it up he is saying that he believes at times those he was interviewing didn’t tell him the truth and it’s for the reader to decide what to believe of their claims.

To me reading the article and the OP it’s sounds like a attempt to twist things to try to discredit this book. Actually this entire OP is very misleading, even reading through the arrival it does not say that Wolff has admitted that it’s mostly untrue. So I’d say if anything belongs in the Hoax bin it’s probably this

More of the right grasping at straws to run to the Defense of trum and actually I am almost starting to pity them.

To be clear: it is factually incorrect to claim that Wolff has said that the contents of this book are “mostly untrue”.

Sure individuals might want to believe the the contents of the book are untrue but it is factually incorrect to claim that Wolff has said that this book is “mostly untrue”as the OP has said....it is “fake news”

a reply to: matafuchs

Most of it very well could be untrue. Which also leaves the possibility that some of it is true.

I think I'll wait and see what can be proven to be true/false until I go much further on this issue.

Can anyone share distinct instances where Wolff is saying he himself Wolff lied?!

Barack Obama and Tony Blair have both said Wolfe made up the stuff in the books about them. Of course the libs are conveniently ignoring that Obama has called their hero-of-the-moment a liar.

I do like "Sloppy Steve." Sorry, but to me Bannon always looks like he's recovering from a night of heavy drinking.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Of course the libs are conveniently ignoring that Obama has called their hero-of-the-moment a liar.

Do you have a source for that claim?

I don't think I've seen anyone call him a hero.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: matafuchs

Most of it very well could be untrue. Which also leaves the possibility that some of it is true.

I think I'll wait and see what can be proven to be true/false until I go much further on this issue.

Where you already that nosy when Obama was in office or did you just not care? The obsession with Trump and what he does in private is getting ridicilous.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

A Hillary donor fails to bring down Trump. What a surprise. Not.

a reply to: Perfectenemy

Where you already that nosy when Obama was in office or did you just not care?

My willingness to be patient and wait to see what can be corroborated is being nosy?

The obsession with Trump and what he does in private is getting ridicilous.

Where have I said I was concerned about anything he was doing in private?

Are you just making # up for the sake of argument?

a reply to: Perfectenemy

The obsession with Trump and what he does in private is getting ridicilous.

They've gone above and beyond Gollum.

My precious. My precious Trump.

a reply to: matafuchs

I do not find the timing of this to be a coincidence .

The exact same time that the Clinton Foundation and her emails are being investigated again, we have this book that sounds like fan fiction.

There are levels of corruption that being exposed In a way many of of never thought we would see, there is no stopping the real story.

a reply to: introvert

Are you serious? The whole fabricated book is about Trump and and his privacy.

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
a reply to: introvert

Are you serious? The whole fabricated book is about Trump and and his privacy.

OK. And I said I'd wait to see what comes of it to make any judgments.

So how does your perceived "obsession" have anything to do with me?

The headline of the link was "The author of the explosive new Trump book says he can't be sure if parts of it are true''

The headline of your thread is '' author of new Trump book, says it is mostly untrue''

Then from your quote from the prologue ..''The author of the explosive new book about Donald Trump's presidency acknowledged in the book that he wasn't certain all of its content was true''

So how did you get from ''can't be sure if parts of it are true'' and and ''wasn't certain all of it's content was true'' to mostly untrue. That seems to be spin to me. Turning factual statements into their opposites.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

To me reading the article and the OP it’s sounds like a attempt to twist things to try to discredit this book.

It's been a two day job for the OP so far.



Come on, at least give them a chance. You ever notice how angry the right wingers here become when the top spot isn't occupied by whatever recent Qanon, Hillary, DNC, fake story they eat up with a spoon?

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

You realize that is not the author right? That is the Publisher?