I would be much more inclined to believe Goldberg’s piece if he’d included the FOIA docs or the Bolton account of the trip in his lede or bridge. He didn’t. He’s the EIC of the Atlantic. Excluding that info was probably not a mistake.
For those wondering, Goldberg opened by calling the bad weather Belleau Wood trip cancellation a lie, then saying Trump was concerned about the rain fucking up his hair.
There’s FOIA docs showing the Navy cancelled the trip due to weather, and Bolton’s account backs that up.
There’s FOIA docs showing the Navy cancelled the trip due to weather, and Bolton’s account backs that up.
Neither mean that Goldberg and his sources are lying. But excluding that info means that he probably didn’t want the water he was peddling to be muddied w any conflicting info.
It shows he was probably only concerned w telling what he thought was a truth, versus the whole truth.
Here’s the FOIA docs. Again, not saying Goldberg or his sources are lying. But he started off by flatly asserting it wasn’t “true” the flight was cancelled due to rain. It is, in fact, true.
imo, starting off a massively explosive story by omitting evidence to the contrary and then getting a publicly known fact totally wrong ... not the best first step if you want to be believed.
For the EIC of the Atlantic, hard for me to believe these mistakes lacked forethought.
For the EIC of the Atlantic, hard for me to believe these mistakes lacked forethought.
Toss in that the majority owner of the Atlantic is a Biden “megadonor” — giving his election effort $500k+ this cycle — and that she is keeps in close contact with Goldberg ... and the whole thing starts to stink a bit. amp.dailycaller.com/2020/09/04/lau…
Last thing as far as stink goes: An ad was cut by a liberal group and placed on a liberal network in ~15 hours AND that Biden had a big presser prepared for the next day to highlight the story (where an Atlantic reporter got the first Q) ... reeks of coordination/embargo.
