Mad Dog General Mattis Torches Bob Woodward For 'Fiction' Anti-Trump Book

a reply to: Xcalibur254

So... Whataboutism then?

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

Were you as enthralled by the book by Hillary’s secret service agent saying how horrible of a person she was?

I wasn’t, I thought that was gossip as well

A single disgruntled Sec Service agent that had limited access to Hillary Clinton who was the Sec of State at the time?

No, I didn't care much. Never liked Hillary, but she was never accused of being dangerously incompetent, crazy and stupid and she wasn't the President.

Compare that to the President of the United States and the "Best People" he personally chose and appointed to work closely with him.

Chief of Staff: "He's an idiot" “off the rails,” “we’re in Crazytown.”
Secretary of State: "He's a effen moron"
Secretary of Defense: He has the foreign policy understanding of “a fifth- or sixth-grader.”
Trump's own Defense Attorney in the Russia Investigation" "He's a effen liar!"

having a hard time finding the comparison.

a reply to: vinifalou

How so? I'm simply pointing out that Woodward has done similar books for past presidents. As far as I'm aware none of those administrations called out Woodward for being a liar.

So why would he just all of a sudden start making things up now with this administration?

originally posted by: vinifalou
a reply to: soberbacchus

So "unnamed trusted sources" says you said something, without providing anything to back this up other than someone else's word,

And the fault's on YOU for NOT denying?

I know you guys have a problem using logical thinking... But common, this is getting ugly to watch.

Logic tells me you meant C'mon.

It also tells me that if they didn't say it they would vehemently and precisely deny it in an official statement rather than let Trump tweet sad mock-ups of official statements.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Why would the Secretary of Defense and Whitehouse Chief of Staff not issue official, direct statements FROM THEMSELVES if they have been allegedly misquoted or lied about?

You have provided sources that say they didn't? I have provided sources that say multiple people from the administration had made statements, or did you not read the articles I posted?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Maybe he drank the Kool aid and thinks Trump has to be stopped.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: vinifalou

How so? I'm simply pointing out that Woodward has done similar books for past presidents. As far as I'm aware none of those administrations called out Woodward for being a liar.

Just because you're not aware it doesn't mean they haven't, important to remember.

So why would he just all of a sudden start making things up now with this administration?

Money? Political bias? He might have something against Trump?

There's plenty of reasons for anyone to make things up against a political opponent.

This is politics 101.

a reply to: soberbacchus

According to unnamed sources.

The people involved say it's lies.

a reply to: vinifalou

Woodward has an almost 50 year career that is pretty much spotless. What reason do you have to believe that he is suddenly making things up out of vindictiveness?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

You have to ask in todays politics? Other respected journalists have been caught.

The people involved vehemently deny it. People of integrity. Yet you call them a list.

Even Kelly Ann Conway say's Woodward's "Fear" is credible and damaging, she should know.

www.rawstory.com...

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I'll tell you again, his successful career doesn't mean anything neither does add credibility to his claims. Especially when those people involved, not the "unnamed sources" already came forward and discredited him.

What reason do you have to believe that they're the ones lying?

a reply to: burntheships

Love me some National Enquired. Aren't they the ones with a vault full of dirt on trump?

a reply to: vinifalou

What reason do you have to believe that they're the ones lying?

trump and the WH have been caught in so many lies it's almost comedy.

a reply to: Grambler

Who says he won't? This story is less than 24 hours old and you're giving the man a history of not cooperating? Did I miss something?

a reply to: olaru12

Would you mind quoting me one of them?

Shouldn't be hard by that many...

a reply to: ErrorErrorError

🌟

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

No I don’t find their name calling and judgements about the presidents intelligence to be a big journalistic story at all

I find the policies that are coming out of trumps admin to be more important than what an anonymous person said they heard people in trumps team say about him

How about we assume, for the sake of argument that everything Bob Woodward reported on is actually exactly as it happened. Of course Mattis or Kelly is not going to come out and say that their boss is an effin idiot and we need to keep him in check, that would likely be more scandalous than to later find out Mattis and Kelly were lying about ever having said those things.

But back to the assumption of it being accurate, and let's go further to assume that they actually believe those things about Trump....what POSSIBLE policies could you consider important coming from an assumed moron? I mean, aren't policies only as good as those qualified to make policy? If you agree with this much, then what time-tested officials believe to be true about someones efficacy and intellect should damn well be a huge story.

a reply to: Sillyolme


trump thought the national enquirer should get the Pulitzer and they should be respected. lol

a reply to: vinifalou

You mean all this time we've been arguing and the man never made the claim that it was not true?
Oh I have got to stop being lazy.