Published by Front Page Mag
By Daniel Greenfield
Reading excerpts from the Michael Wolff book that’s driving the news cycle this nanosecond, I’m reminded of Ed Klein’s books. A well written political thriller that reads like fiction and incorporates impossible perspectives to tell the audience exactly what they want to hear.
And serious questions are already being raised about Wolff’s “Fire and Fury” which claims to reveal the hidden truths about Trump’s White House. Right down to reading the minds of key staffers so that Wolff can actually discuss what they’re thinking.
But here are two fact-based objections.
Barrack said he spoke to Wolffe once, says he never said the quote attributed to him to Wolffe or anyone. "Totally false," Barrack said by phone just now.
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 3, 2018
Tom Barrack adds, "It's clear to anyone who knows me that those aren't my words and inconsistent with anything I've ever said." He says Wolffe never ran that quote by him to ask if it was accurate.
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 3, 2018
Maggie is as far from a Trump partisan as it gets.
Now, Wolff doesn’t claim to be quoting Barrack, but a friend of his, which is very convenient. And Fire and Fury heavily relies on these “anonymous friend” or “friend of a friend” accounts.
But Barrack pretty clearly denies it. And the more damning accusation is that Wolff never ran the quote by him. That would have been easy to do. And I think we’re going to see a lot of those complaints about Fire and Fury. Failing to do that does look like bad faith. And it’s much harder for Wolff to overcome than just Barrack’s denial. It smacks of Rolling Stone UVA journalism in which you run third party quotes without checking them.
And then there’s this from Don Jr.
More lies, go back and look, Boehner and #potus spent time together well before the election. Just another pathetic attempt to smear @realDonaldTrump #fakenews https://t.co/xxuhdiQU8f
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) January 3, 2018
Wolff is trying to sell the idea that Trump is completely clueless. But the claim is implausible. Trump had been very interested in politics even before he officially jumped into the race. He was quite familiar with Pelosi. Does Wolff really expect us to believe he didn’t know who the House Speaker was?
But Wolff’s book panders to progressive prejudices. And all that matters is that media types whose contempt for Trump has no rational limit find it plausible.
January 4, 2018
Want more BFT? Leave us a voicemail on our page or follow us on Twitter @BFT_Podcast and Facebook @BluntForceTruthPodcast. We want to hear from you! There’s no better place to get the #BluntForceTruth.
