Jeffrey Goldberg Says There's More To Come

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  john-russell  •  3 weeks ago  •  29 comments

Jeffrey Goldberg Says There's More To Come
"We have a responsibility and we're going to do it regardless of what he says."

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Jeffrey Goldberg Says There's More To Come



September surprise turns into September/October surprise? I did not know that Steve Jobs' widow owns the Atlantic

“Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, said his magazine's story about Trump calling Americans who died in battle "losers" and "suckers," was just the tip of the iceberg.

"I would fully expect more reporting to come out about this and more confirmation and new pieces of information in the coming days and weeks," Goldberg told CNN's Chief Media Correspondent Brian Stelter on "Reliable Sources" Sunday. "We have a responsibility and we're going to do it regardless of what he says."

The magazine received backlash -- from Trump and many others -- for attributing the information to four anonymous sources. CNN has confirmed several aspects of The Atlantic's reporting, also with sources who chose to remain anonymous.

But Goldberg said that's how the media is able to do its job of uncovering stories that take place behind closed doors.”




Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  seeder  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

EhQf_sWXsAYP8JF?format=jpg&name=small

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
1.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @1    3 weeks ago

Scot Baio I can understand but Dean Cain....nooooooooooooooooooo!

 
 
 
Ender
1.1.1  Ender  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1    3 weeks ago

I didn't believe that one at first, then I looked at his twitter.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1    3 weeks ago

Sorry Paula, your hunk is a Trumpster. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
1.1.3  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.2    3 weeks ago

Next you will telling me is that there is no Santa or Easter Bunny.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.4  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1.3    3 weeks ago

There isn't ? 

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
1.1.5  Thrawn 31  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1.3    3 weeks ago

Don't worry Paula, I am Santa AND the Easter Bunny. 

Yeah, I have a pretty fucked up look.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.2  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

John,

Eastwood was supporting Bloomberg, so I am not sure that credit is quite accurate. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.2    2 weeks ago

whoever made the meme assumes eastwood is a trump because he generally supports republicans for president

now that bloomberg is out it would be interesting to know who he supports

i would assume it is not trump but who knows? 

at the age of 90 he's probably losing interest. 

 
 
 
Gsquared
2  Gsquared    3 weeks ago

Looking forward to it.

 
 
 
TᵢG
3  TᵢG    3 weeks ago
"We have a responsibility and we're going to do it regardless of what he says."

What is he waiting for?

"I would fully expect more reporting to come out about this and more confirmation and new pieces of information in the coming days and weeks,"

This reads to me as though Goldberg has faith that the media, not he , will find a way to corroborate his allegations.

If this story ends with nothing more than hearsay, this will be swallowed up by Trump's fake news mantra.    And if that happens, it strengthens his position.   jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @3    3 weeks ago

I'm pretty sure he is saying there will be additional stories, including about additional topics. 

And this story will never help Trump.  For example, would you change your vote from Biden to Trump because Goldberg never got someone to name themselves on record as his source?   People know this rings true to Trump's character and behavior. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3.1.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    3 weeks ago

Goldberg already knows who they are.

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.1.2  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    3 weeks ago
For example, would you change your vote from Biden to Trump because Goldberg never got someone to name themselves on record as his source? 

If you are speaking of people who consider the whole picture and factor this in among dozens of other factors then your chose the wrong demographic as your example.   Clearly that demographic would not change.   Look instead at people who decide based on 'feelings'.   All those last minute voters.   This story is a big deal now.   If it fizzles out as hearsay then it supports Trump's mantra to ignore the media ... that the media is biased against him and will lie at every turn.

The simplistic idea that one can dismiss all media negatives of Trump (and then just believe what Trump says) seems to be dominant in too many in the electorate.   It explains in part, by the way, how Trump won in the first place.

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.1.3  TᵢG  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.1.1    3 weeks ago

No doubt.   But he is not saying and that is not helpful.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.4  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.2    3 weeks ago

You too often act as if there is a legitimate case to be made for Trump, based on proving his critics wrong about something or other.  You (generic)  could prove all his critics wrong about some aspect of their attacks on him and there would still be no case for Trump. Please understand that. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.1.5  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.4    3 weeks ago

You continue to make these kinds of ridiculous allegations that having nothing whatsoever to do with what I write.   Just read what I write and do not preempt my written statements with notions from your imagination.   If my words are vague to you then ask a question and I will clarify.

My prior comment was about how some in the electorate think.   One cannot bury one's head in the sand and pretend these people do not exist.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.6  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.5    3 weeks ago

I stand by my comment. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.1.7  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.6    3 weeks ago

Then you choose to be wrong.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
3.2  Thrawn 31  replied to  TᵢG @3    3 weeks ago

They need to come out with more, but I am sure they are pacing themselves over the next few weeks so that they keep releasing shit about Trump right around when he thinks he did something not completely retarded. 

If this story ends with nothing more than hearsay, this will be swallowed up by Trump's fake news mantra.  

That happens regardless, if there is one thing fat fuck is good at it is being such a constant shit show that you forget about the last idiotic/asshole thing he did. 

And if that happens, it strengthens his position.

I disagree, I think 98% of the populace has already made up their minds and nothing is going to change it. The only question is how many turn out to vote.

 
 
 
bugsy
4  bugsy    3 weeks ago

Oh, gee..;look

A fake, debunked Russia dozier part two.

No one would ever think the left would try and come out with something like this less than two months before a presidential election s/

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  bugsy @4    3 weeks ago

What's a dozier ? 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
4.1.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1    3 weeks ago

A small tractor?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  bugsy @4    3 weeks ago

Yep, one wonders what Fake information they received from Russians this time.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
4.2.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.2    3 weeks ago
And if that happens, it strengthens his position.

Ask Trump, the FSB gives him regular briefings. 

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
5  Thrawn 31    3 weeks ago

Trump's problem when it comes to trying to deny all this (we all know he said it) is that he has said shit like this before, publicly, and on multiple occasions. Is it really that hard to believe he would say the same shit and worse behind closed doors? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1  TᵢG  replied to  Thrawn 31 @5    3 weeks ago
Is it really that hard to believe he would say the same shit and worse behind closed doors? 

Exactly.   Given his other comments (especially regarding McCain) he has made it easy to believe he would privately make such comments.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
5.1.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  TᵢG @5.1    2 weeks ago

I was never a fan of McCain, IMO he was a shitty pilot who turned that into a long and profitable political career advancing initiatives that I rarely agreed with. 

But after enduring limited torture training myself, I have always given him MAD PROPS for enduring what he endured under the Viet Cong for 6 years. The dude had balls, pure and simple and deserves accolades for that as all POW do.

Thing is, I volunteered to go to war and offer my life as a sacrifice, so I have the right to be critical of other service members. A coward ass, draft dodger, and all around pussy like Trump does have any grounds to EVER denigrate the military or military personnel.

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.2  TᵢG  replied to  Thrawn 31 @5.1.1    2 weeks ago
A coward ass, draft dodger, and all around pussy like Trump does have any grounds to EVER denigrate the military or military personnel.

Spot on.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online



Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Tacos!


64 visitors