Woodward Has Hundreds Of Hours Of Tapes That Support His Book's Allegations About Trump

Bob Woodward reportedly has hundreds of hours of tapes ...

"Trump's lawyers told Mueller that an interview by the prosecutors with Trump would reveal him to be an "idiot" and when word of it got out it would damage the US'  image overseas, with allies and adversaries."

I'm pretty sure all our allies and adversaries are aware that The Donald is an "idiot" and is not qualified to sit as President of the U.S.

The first person in that line is Vladimir Putin, who hopes to take full advantage of the position before the Americans wake up and replace Trump.

Everyone should pay attention as to what is going on, because we are, right now, living in what will be an important part American history.

Everyone should pay attention as to what is going on, because we are, right now, living in what will be an important part American history.

And a very dangerous one at that.

Several people have already came out and said his sources were wrong and they never said those things.  While he may have some stuff right when you obviously have so much wrong it cast doubt on everything you wrote.  

lol. People agreed to have their interviews used as part of the book but the names were kept secret on request. Because people have been able to put 2 and 2 together and figure out who the individuals are , and so the person now denies it, does not mean it didnt happen. That IS the point of Woodward saying he has tapes. If push comes to shove he will produce the tapes. 

It's amazing the lengths people will go to in order to defend trump, who is actually obviously indefensible. The man lies at the drop of a hat, yet his lemmings believe his every word. 

It's disturbing, and a major issue, in and of itself, facing this country - the utter gullibility of trump supporters. 

If push comes to shove he will produce the tapes. 

I disagree. Woodward was allowed to tape his interviews with a PROMISE that they were only to be used as 'deep background'. I do not believe that Woodward would divulge the identity of a 'deep background' source. The FACT that so many people trusted him to tape them seems to bolster that posit. Woodward's credibility is on the line and I think he'd go to jail before releasing a tape without the subjects permission. 

I agree that it shouldn't be hard to connect the dots and figure out WHO the sources are. I for one wonder if Trump knew that Kellyanne had lunch with Woodward and talked to him for so long. Now that HER part in it is out, perhaps her tapes CAN be released. 

I think that the FACT that so many of them DID talk to Woodward on the record, illustrates just how stupid all too many of them really are...

I disagree. Woodward was allowed to tape his interviews with a PROMISE that they were only to be used as 'deep background'. I do not believe that Woodward would divulge the identity of a 'deep background' source.

Possibly, but you're making the assumption that they ALL had that agreement.  That also doesn't mean he wouldn't screen some of the tapes to the press, with the understanding that it is for confirmation only, and they are not allowed to publish the name of the person on the tape.

who is actually obviously indefensible

There has never been a clearer case of "The Emperor's New Clothes" syndrome. Even when faced with the disgusting bare naked truth they continue to pretend by complimenting the silky texture, the plush feel, the stunning color palate of non-existent royal finery Trump keeps telling them he is draped in. Since taking over their party, Republicans have had to convince themselves they aren't being led by a giant, divisive, naked man-baby, for if they do it all crumbles into nothing like the footing under a cartoon character who just realized they're standing in thin air.

If Mattis, for example continues to deny that he said Trump has the understanding of a 5th or 6th grader, as he is quoted in the book as saying, at some point Woodward could say "I have tapes to prove all my points" assuming he has one of Mattis. 

In all likelihood Woodward would not embarrass Mattis by revealing the tape, even if Mattis continues to deny he said it, but certainly Woodward could reveal such a tape if it became a serious enough , or a legal issue. 

Possibly, but you're making the assumption that they ALL had that agreement.  That also doesn't mean he wouldn't screen some of the tapes to the press, with the understanding that it is for confirmation only, and they are not allowed to publish the name of the person on the tape.

Actually, I'm assuming that Woodward will NAME NAMES when no agreement exists. There may actually be some people that WANT to go on record. 

I'm sure that there ARE Journalists that Woodward would trust to honor the 'deep background' agreement though the MORE of them that know the identity of a source, the more likely it will 'leak', so great care must be taken on whom he confides in. That of course assumes that the agreements that he made allow ANY disclosure at all. 

If Mattis, for example continues to deny that he said Trump has the understanding of a 5th or 6th grader, as he is quoted in the book as saying, at some point Woodward could say "I have tapes to prove all my points" assuming he has one of Mattis. 

Agreed, if Woodward truly did make up some of his quotes, that person should be more than willing to publicly deny it (done in some cases), but also publicly challenge Woodward to produce any such recording, and in doing so allow him to air those recordings.  So far there have been a number of "did not's" claimed to the press, but no "prove it's".

Kelly, for example, needs to go on a talk show to claim his innocence and demand that Woodward provide the audio clip as evidence of the quote.

Actually, I'm assuming that Woodward will NAME NAMES when no agreement exists.

I'm sure he will, but not right away.  If he gives everything away on talk shows, people lose the desire to buy his book.  As sales start to flag, he will probably start releasing some tidbits to rekindle interest.

I haven't seen the book yet but I mean that I presume that he will name names within. 

I do not believe that Woodward would divulge the identity of a 'deep background' source. The FACT that so many people trusted him to tape them seems to bolster that posit. Woodward's credibility is on the line and I think he'd go to jail before releasing a tape without the subjects permission. 

I agree.   Woodward has never violated that trust.

Kelly, for example, needs to go on a talk show to claim his innocence and demand that Woodward provide the audio clip as evidence of the quote.

The thing is, Kelly may not be the source of the 'quote'. If three people independently tell you about a meeting and all three of them say "Then Kelly said' and they match up, that is corroboration that Kelly said it. 

The thing is, Kelly may not be the source of the 'quote'.

You are correct, that is always a possibility.  Odds are though, that even if it was from other sources, he probably broached the subject with Kelly, just to be thorough.

Woodward could reveal such a tape if it became a serious enough , or a legal issue. 

I don't think so. Look how long it was before we found who "Deep throat" was. And still it was Deep throat that came forward before he died..

people have already came out and said his sources were wrong and they never said those things.

Woodward has tapes to back up what he reported in his book. That is the whole point of this article, if you read it...

Woodward has tapes to back up what he reported in his book.

And his editors have heard the tapes and confirmed their veracity.    There's a reason the dude has won 2 Pulitzers.

I'm sure he does have tapes of someone saying thy heard something.  That doesn't make it true.  There were sources that said obama and Michelle fought every night.  Does that make it true?  There is a book by a guy claiming to be Obamas gay lover in college.  Who do you believe?  The guy makin the claim or obama denying it?  Anyone can make a claim.  

I'm sure he does have tapes of someone saying thy heard something.  That doesn't make it true.  There were sources that said obama and Michelle fought every night.  Does that make it true?  There is a book by a guy claiming to be Obamas gay lover in college.  Who do you believe?  The guy makin the claim or obama denying it?  Anyone can make a claim.  

Seriously, don't y'all EVER get tired of posting obtuse false equivalencies? 

We're not talking about a book by some moron. We are talking about a book by the 2 x Pulitzer Prize winning Journalist, reporter and writer, Bob Woodward, published by Simon & Schuster.

The right has nothing but false equivalencies and attempts to bamboozle.  No one should feel compelled to pay attention to anything they say. 

"It doesn't fit my bias so it's a false equivalence!!"

look how upset you get when your world view is challenged.  Someone saying anonymous sources (again) doesn't make it true gets you all worked up. It's a simple universal truth and you would rather get mad about it?

regardless of what his credentials are he still makes mistakes, can still get duped, and can still have bias that clouds his judgement as a human. 

After 2 years of anonymous source stories that went nowhere i figured even a hard lesson to learn would eventually be learned.  How many anonymous inside stories said bannon was flipping and kelly and etc etc?  Mattie himself said the story was BS about him and you would rather.... excuse me.. I mean WANT to believe an unverified 2nd hand story instead of the man himself saying it wasn't true.  Sorry verification is so controversial to you

"It doesn't fit my bias so it's a false equivalence!!" look how upset you get when your world view is challenged.  

First of all, please refrain from attempting to put words in my mouth.

Secondly, I'm not upset at all. 

Oh and don't delude yourself that your post '''challenged' my world view. 

Someone saying anonymous sources (again) doesn't make it true gets you all worked up. It's a simple universal truth and you would rather get mad about it?

Again, I'm not 'all worked up' or 'mad about' anything. 

regardless of what his credentials are he still makes mistakes, can still get duped, and can still have bias that clouds his judgement as a human. 

WOW, a cogent relevant comment. Good for you...

After 2 years of anonymous source stories that went nowhere i figured even a hard lesson to learn would eventually be learned.  

Many of those 'anonymous' sources have been vehicles of Trump. He cites them all the time, he hides behind them all the time and he benefits from them all the time. 

How many anonymous inside stories said bannon was flipping and kelly and etc etc?

Well since Bannon was a major source for the Fire and Fury book, it sure as hell looks like he did flip on Trump. Trump has said quite a few 'choice' words about Bannon. 

As for Kellyanne, it seems that she WAS a source for Woodward and that Trump didn't know about her 'long talks' with Woodward. At least Trump pretends that he didn't know. 

Mattie himself said the story was BS about him and you would rather.... excuse me..

I presume you mean Mattis. Judging from his other public statements, Mattis has no love for Trump's military policies. Whether what is quoted in the book is supported or not is another question. We will see. 

As for Kelly's denial, he is a LIAR and has NO credibility. PERIOD, full stop. 

I mean WANT to believe an unverified 2nd hand story instead of the man himself saying it wasn't true.  

Again, while I would withhold judgement on Mattis, Kelly is a liar and yes I believe Woodward over him. 

Sorry verification is so controversial to you

I find it ironic that y'all call for verification of a story all of a sudden. Y'all have accepted 'some people say' for far too long to go there...

For someone who says they weren't upset ... I'd hate to see how you responded when you were then lol.  

The anonymous source on bannon said he was testifying against trump on Russian stuff.. there's two years worth of anonymous source stuff that is better suited to the national enquirer.  Right up there with such journalism as two scoops of ice cream and ketchup on steak.  But then again it was never about being accurate... it was about a constant barrage of anti trump news for the media.  It's not working but it's all they know how to do.  

As far as "y'all and anonymous stories"...  I've personally never trusted anonymous stories.  It's usually hogwash click bait.  At least nowadays.  The journalism of the earlier decades is gone.  

For someone who says they weren't upset ... I'd hate to see how you responded when you were then lol.  

Good. 

The anonymous source on bannon said he was testifying against trump on Russian stuff..

Bannon sat for a voluntary interview with Mueller...so ya. 

there's two years worth of anonymous source stuff that is better suited to the national enquirer.

Did Trump pay for those stories too?  

Right up there with such journalism as two scoops of ice cream and ketchup on steak.  

Two words: tan suit. 

But then again it was never about being accurate... it was about a constant barrage of anti trump news for the media.  

The most effective anti-Trump reporting comes from Trump's tweets. 

It's not working but it's all they know how to do.

Sure?  

As far as "y'all and anonymous stories"...  I've personally never trusted anonymous stories.  It's usually hogwash click bait. At least nowadays.

Great, I await you calling them out here in the future, no matter who seeds them...

  The journalism of the earlier decades is gone.

Trump better hope so because from what Woodward said, he has the goods on Trump... 

Several people have already came out and said his sources were wrong and they never said those things.

I am really shocked that people are denying their comments./s

Woodward tapes all his interviews, so we'll see what happens when the smoke clears. 

Woodward tapes all his interviews, so we'll see what happens when the smoke clears

From the seed..

This is the president of the United States that is being talked about , by his own close aides, as if he is an idiot, or mentally ill, and unable to tell the truth or understand the issues that face the country.

Most likely true that behind closed doors individuals within the White House express their feelings and opinions about the current president … yet the article below tells one what makes Woodward's book damning truth...

The real reason Bob Woodward's book is so damaging for Trump

But how could all -- and I mean all -- of the reporting on this White House reach a striking similar conclusion? The portraits of Trump drawn by Wolff, Omarosa and Woodward are all eerily similar to one another -- a man hopelessly out of his depth in the job, but entirely incapable of understanding how desperately out of depth he actually is. A man motivated almost entirely by personal grievance. A man willing to humiliate people who work for him, to play staffers against one another, to scapegoat underlings to keep blame off of himself. Someone who has so much self-belief that he rarely adequately prepares for situations involving international diplomacy and national security. Top aides who view that their jobs are primarily keeping Trump from causing serious harm, and grousing every step of the way about the man.

And now Bob Woodward -- without question the preeminent political reporter and chronicler of the White House in the last four decades -- has written a book that confirms every bit of the portrayals we've seen about who Trump is, who he surrounds himself and how he conducts his business.

The consistency in those storylines is virtually impossible to explain in any other way than this: It's true. To believe otherwise, you have to convince yourself that not only the entire daily media but also the likes of Wolff and Woodward all got together and agreed on how to portray Trump across tweets, stories and books. Which is, of course, beyond ridiculous.

msn

Crack me up ….  I am not defending Trump .. not at all - I am just laughing at what makes the storyline true  .. the narrative on the campaign trail and from day one of the Trump White House has been one of chaos .. personnel turnover .. infighting and Trump's incompetence [media and authors did not have to get together and compare notes]    - so anyone of us could write a book describing some form of chaos in the White House and it would be  believable based on consistency in storyline portraying Trump? 

so anyone of us could write a book describing some form of chaos in the White House and it would be believable based on consistency in storyline portraying Trump? 

this comment of yours makes little sense. Tell us who in your opinion has INVENTED this "story line".

Many of the elements of this story line come from Trump's own mouth, and many of them have not been denied by the people involved. The usual defense for trump's insanity is that he "has his own way of doing things" which is an inadvertent euphemism for "he can't tell the truth". 

Never said it was an "INVENTED" storyline - I am saying that the idea that 3 individuals have similar consistencies in their books does not make a storyline true.. but you knew that I am sure..

Have it deleted John .. I already had my giggle - carry on John .. have a nice day...

Ok, I'm game to refresh your memory about exactly what you said. It only takes a second.

anyone of us could write a book describing some form of chaos in the White House and it would be believable based on consistency in storyline portraying Trump? 

You claim that "anyone" could write a book based on a "storyline". One can fairly presume you are describing invention. But whatever. 

Trump's insanity is among the most well documented in presidential history. 

Never said it was an "INVENTED" storyline - I am saying that the idea that 3 individuals have similar consistencies in their books does not make a storyline true.. but you knew that I am sure..

Actually what it does is substantially bolster the claims made by Omarosa and Wolff.

The real question is:

What is Woodward wainting for?  Release the tapes!  Instead he wrote a book with accusations.  I am sure it is not for personal gain./s    Go Figure!

What is Woodward wainting for?  Release the tapes! 

So you think THAT'S the REAL question? Wow. 

Instead he wrote a book with accusations. 

In FACT he TOLD everyone who would listen that he was writing a BOOK, that he was interviewing them for deep background on a BOOK and that Bob Woodward write BOOKS, might have been the REASON he wrote a BOOK. 

Are some of the sources 'confidential'? Why yes, yes they are. That doesn't mean that the content of the book isn't factual. 

I am sure it is not for personal gain./s    Go Figure!

Ya, SHOCKER, Woodward writes BOOKS and articles for a living. Who knew right? 

"What the hell are we waiting for?"

Trumpists to come to their senses.  Don't hold your breath.

All anyone has to do is view the many videos of Trump displaying his unfitness for office. He has wandered off the plane not seeing the car directly in front of him wandering off until one of his detail had to physically guide him back to the car. 

The confusion in Israel when he was so confused Netanyahu had to take him by the arm and guide him, during this trip he even forgot that Israel is in the Middle East. That trip showed a lot of signs and symptoms of his confusion.

He rambles on in speeches, in meetings and in his tweets that amount to a combination of incoherence or paranoia.

Trump was entering the early stages of dementia and his family knows it but they do nothing for fear of losing their inheritance.

The cabinet knows it, his aides know it, the Republican party knows it, and anyone with an ounce of common sense who has watched this unfold knows it. I think Trump's own supporters know it but no one has the real actual courage to speak out or start demanding that Trump be removed for medical reasons alone.

It is inhumane and heartless to let a man who is most definitely suffering from paranoia, delusions of grandeur, early signs of dementia to go on doing this to himself and to the office he currently holds.

Just because Trump voters wanted him, just because they believe in his policies does not meant they should allow or support a man who is not well and should be removed.