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

a reply to: matafuchs

Yeah




No.
He was on tv making a statement just this morning. In his own words...out of his own mouth. Not some print that claims he said so and so.

originally posted by: matafuchs
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...

Several of his sources, he says, were definitely lying to him...

Bottom line is that ALL of the threads that were created using 'info' to prove Trump turmoil should really be in a Hoax bin...

No # eh? ATS is getting flooded with FAKE NEWS....

Every time I see a Trump thread it is so negative and no credible sources are EVER researched and given the credit they deserve! Why??? Because this site is so full of left wing snowflakes that drool at every opportunity to gain BS stars and flags without actually doing real ATS sleuthing it makes me sick. That is why I refrain from commenting or flagging Fake News threads unless a real bomb is dropped on someone.

Clinton is going to jail btw...that will be real news and sigh of relief for ATS.

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Perfectenemy

originally posted by: underwerks
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 stories they eat up with a spoon?

Yeah its not like the Hillary brigade tries to derail every HRC thread that has actual and official sources all the time. Hypocrite.

Actual and official sources?

Regardless of what they told you over at /pol, anonymous sources aren't actual and official. I know that can be hard for 4chan normies to understand, so no hard feelings.

Yeah Devin Nunes and Nunes Statement on DOJ Document Request are not official sources. Thanks for playing.

a reply to: matafuchs

I'd have to say, with all the drama surrounding the book, the only things you can believe are the numbers at the bottom of each page.

And in this day and age, I'd be wary of that.

a reply to: matafuchs

He claimed to have spent a total of "about 3 hours" over the course of his time prior to, and after, the election.

And wrote a book based on it.

He stated to the Today Show that he "said what he needed to say to get the story".

His credibility hovers right around the FBI level. Maybe a bit lower.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: matafuchs

I'd have to say, with all the drama surrounding the book, the only things you can believe are the numbers at the bottom of each page.

And in this day and age, I'd be wary of that.

Or the numbers that happen to land in Wolff's bank account...RIGHT?!?!?!?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

And it’s also based on his some 200 interviews and observations while in the White House.

Trump lied when he said Wolff had no access

originally posted by: Perfectenemy

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Perfectenemy

originally posted by: underwerks
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 stories they eat up with a spoon?

Yeah its not like the Hillary brigade tries to derail every HRC thread that has actual and official sources all the time. Hypocrite.

Actual and official sources?

Regardless of what they told you over at /pol, anonymous sources aren't actual and official. I know that can be hard for 4chan normies to understand, so no hard feelings.

Yeah Devin Nunes and Nunes Statement on DOJ Document Request are not official sources. Thanks for playing.

Official sources in a not-anything story.

Who cares what happens to Hillary? Lock her up for all I care. You seem to be under the mistaken assumption that an investigation into Hillary is going to validate Trump somehow.

And you'd probably say I'm crazy if I said that is by design..

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: matafuchs

Yeah




No.
He was on tv making a statement just this morning. In his own words...out of his own mouth. Not some print that claims he said so and so.

I watched that interview. He was dubious at best. He claimed to have spent "maybe 3 hours" with Trump. Even that was something he had to sit there and try to make up a quantification on, as if he really doesn't know how much time he spent with the guy.

Then he completed the interview explaining he gained access by saying whatever it took to gain access so he could write the story. Using the phrase "the story" kinda furthers my view that he came across as dishonest, and selling a work of fiction (that has a touch of truth sprinkled in).

a reply to: Perfectenemy

He gets no private. Not anymore. He's a public servant. There is zero expectation of privacy. He's under a microscope 24/7 as it should be.
Hey he wanted the job..
Or did he..the book kind of claims he never intended to win. (Which I said back then btw). He was setting up a new enterprise for after the election. Everybody in his circle had new jobs already lined up. There's some crime in there I'm sure. Fraud at the very least. He never wanted to be your president he was taking advantage of an opportunity. His actions sometimes still suggest he is looking to be fired.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

And it’s also based on his some 200 interviews and observations while in the White House.

Trump lied when he said Wolff had no access

What he claims are "200 interviews".

When asked if he interviewed Trump: "I mean, he may not have known i was interviewing him, but we talked"

Everything he said came across as pretty wishy washy, like he was trying to sell a used car with a bad motor.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Oh my god I said the same thing when I saw him this morning!!! Dr Evil from Austin Powers.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Perfectenemy

He gets no private. Not anymore. He's a public servant. There is zero expectation of privacy. He's under a microscope 24/7 as it should be.
Hey he wanted the job..
Or did he..the book kind of claims he never intended to win. (Which I said back then btw). He was setting up a new enterprise for after the election. Everybody in his circle had new jobs already lined up. There's some crime in there I'm sure. Fraud at the very least. He never wanted to be your president he was taking advantage of an opportunity. His actions sometimes still suggest he is looking to be fired.

That is odd because the MSM didn't report on everything Obama did. Can you please point me to a article where it states he had 2 scoops of ice cream or he drank too much diet coke? I'll wait.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: matafuchs

I'd have to say, with all the drama surrounding the book, the only things you can believe are the numbers at the bottom of each page.

And in this day and age, I'd be wary of that.

....I heard Augutus Masonicus has the fix in on the page numbers.

a reply to: Sillyolme
Can't say he doesn't know how to communicate via twitter now can ya?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Trump lied when he said Wolff had no access

False...Trump didn't lie. He simply didn't give Wolff access to confidential intel. That is not lying...or am I missing something?

a reply to: elementalgrove

You have it backwards. Clinton is the distraction not this book.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

And it’s also based on his some 200 interviews and observations while in the White House.

Trump lied when he said Wolff had no access

What he claims are "200 interviews".

When asked if he interviewed Trump: "I mean, he may not have known i was interviewing him, but we talked"

Everything he said came across as pretty wishy washy, like he was trying to sell a used car with a bad motor.

Well it worked because a lot of gullible people bought that drivel right away. Of course they will never admit they got conned though.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

And it’s also based on his some 200 interviews and observations while in the White House.

Trump lied when he said Wolff had no access

What he claims are "200 interviews".

When asked if he interviewed Trump: "I mean, he may not have known i was interviewing him, but we talked"

Everything he said came across as pretty wishy washy, like he was trying to sell a used car with a bad motor.

Interviews with left over swamp people doesn't count.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Hey now, don't let objectivity get in the way of their orgasmic circle-jerk of confirmation bias.