On page 9 it literally says: "Many of the accounts of what has happened in the Trump White House are in conflict with one another; many, in Trumpian fashion, are baldly untrue. Those conflicts, and that looseness with the truth, if not with reality itself, are an elemental thread of the book. Sometimes I have let the players offer their versions, in turn allowing the reader to judge them. In other instances I have, through a consistency in accounts and through sources I have come to trust, settled on a version of events I believe to be true."
TL;DR it says what is written in the book might not be true.
Furthermore, people have already come out to say what is written in the book is absolute bullshit.
Laura Ingraham for instance already stated that what was written about her in the book, is false (pic related).
Kevin Ortiz
Fucking commas everywhere holy shit.
Carter Walker
Even CIA Director Mike Pompeo and former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski both defended President Trump on Sunday against accusations in the book, which Pompeo calls "pure fantasy" and a "complete fabrication."
“I'm with him almost every day,” Pompeo told “Fox News Sunday.” “We talk about some of the most serious matters facing America and the rest of the world, complex issues.
"The president is engaged. He understands the complexity, asks really difficult questions from our team at CIA. I've watched him do that.”
He added: "The statements are just pure fantasy, absurd.”
Why would anyone take this book seriously knowing that it is full of shit, and that the author himself says what is written might not be true? Are people really suffering from Trump derangement syndrome so badly that they deny reality just so they can believe Trump is bad?
Dylan Gomez
because if only a hundredth of what it says is true the people should know it - because if only a hundredth is true then Trump is an incompetent lying thief and should be removed from the office for which he is so unqualified, and so unsuited.
if half of it is true the man and the whole top tier of the republican party should be hanged as traitors.
Zachary Bailey
Even Bannon says trump is a child and unfit,
Trump is the Emperor with No Clothes, and all his underlings are covering for his dementia
it is a National Security issue, Wolff is right
You have all been had so the billionaires can get yet another tax cut and get even more rich while the bottom 50% get poorer
Nathaniel Collins
>I made shit up!
Charles Flores
>already tons of people named in the book have come out and said things didn't happen >the author is known to make shit up in his other books >author was even sued before for making shit up
Grayson Lopez
>Author was sued before for making shit up Source? I need it for social media porpoises
Angel Rogers
But you can't know what is true and what is not. If you actually have stuff on Trump that can take him down, why would you not just come out with that, instead of writing a book full of lies, thereby making people think your true claim is actually false? It's idiotic.
>amerimutts have literally 0 reading comprehension
color me surprised
all he's saying is the book is composed of stuff people in the white house told him. Some of these stories were probably bullshit but whenever he has a chance to settle on a corroborated course of events, he does.
It doesn't mean he made it up you fucktards
Christian Cruz
Nooo stop muh Trump is making murrrrroca gret again!!!!!!!!??
Carson Gray
No wonder Hitler wanted you gassed
Josiah James
I also can't seem to find any info on this.
>Some of these stories were probably bullshit >"many, in Trumpian fashion, are baldly untrue" - Michael Wolff I'm not saying HE made it up, I'm just saying the book is unreliable. You can't know what is true and what is not. And because the author admit this and because he is an anti-Trump retard, I'm more inclined to think it's just all bullshit rather than just 'some' of the things said are bullshit. If he has proof to support (some of) the claims made in the book, then he should provide it. Then I will believe those things he has evidence for.
Easton Clark
>Source? I need it for social media porpoises
google? wikipedia? fucking anywher, the guy isnt a secret agent, hes a clickbait tabloid writer people have been shitting on for decades
Jackson Sanchez
>loud, obnoxious baboon brags about always being a perfectly correct genius when he's obviously not Sounds like a reasonable man, I'd believe anything he said! >objective researcher is transparent about possible problems with his methodology and data FUCK THIS GUY! Everything he says must be absolute GARBAGE.
James Bailey
>the book is composed of stuff people in the white house told him. Some of these stories were probably bullshit but whenever he has a chance to settle on a corroborated course of events, he does. ...and when he has the chance of extrapolating (a fancy word for making shit up) a pro-liberal conclusion that will sell more books, he does! Funny ain't it?
Hunter Reyes
>extrapolating (a fancy word for making shit up) mfw trumplets unironically don't understand that you can compare and contrast data to reach a more objective conclusion
Nolan Stewart
People care because the book aligns with their views on Trump, it doesn't matter if it'd true or not as long as it paints Trump as a complete nut job. It was never going to sell well if it had of been reasonable and accurate, I wouldn't be surprised if this was Trump's way of rewarding Bannon desu he's bound to be getting part of the money from this
Gavin Torres
no one takes it seriously. its a bunch of jewish lies and fantasy for """le resistance XD XD we're the real resistance fuck drumpf XD XD""". the only person i know who already ordered this book is an absolute DELUSIONAL leftist. like hes gone off the deep end since trump won and its only gotten worse. last time i saw him he was talking about ordering this book and how hes on the right side of history all while piss drunk, looking disheveled as shit, rambling like a mad man. trump derangement syndrome is real and im beginning to think its inducing psychosis/schizophrenia in some people. this dude claiming hes on the right side of history with a shit job, being a drunk/drug abusing loser, obsessed with trump, just wants the world to burn. meanwhile im sitting there sober as a bird, clean cut, good job/money in the bank, don't worry at all about whats going on with trump, not stressed out etc. i just found it hilarious as he slurred his words and said he was on the right side of history. top lel
Nicholas Parker
You seem to have trouble with understanding that when the "objective researcher" as you call him (which he is clearly not), says that "many of the accounts of what has happened in the Trump White House are in conflict with one another; many, in Trumpian fashion, are baldly untrue" that means that what is written is probably untrue.
Also, I never said I believe anything Trump says. I'm just saying the book is unreliable and therefore should not be trusted.
Well said user.
>mfw trumplets unironically don't understand that you can compare and contrast data to reach a more objective conclusion That is not the point. The point is many people think everything in this book is absolutely 100% true, which it is not. If they would actually 'compare and contrast data to reach a more objective conclusion' as you say, they would have to come to the natural conclusion that the book is full of bullshit.
Jacob Taylor
If you compare and contrast lies, what have you accomplished user
Xavier Long
a media cycle?
Justin Williams
Why am I getting richer right now then?
Luis Butler
>that means that what is written is probably untrue. No, it fucking doesn't. It means what it means, that's why he used those fucking words instead of the words you used. You know that different words mean different things, right?
>The point is many people think everything in this book is absolutely 100% true, which it is not. Who thinks this? The author specifically says that forward that you pasted word for word, obviously anyone that reads it knows the take the book with a grain of salt. Grain of salt does not mean dismiss the entire thing though.
Mason Mitchell
There's a lot of people quoted who have first hand experience in this book, especially walsh and bannon.
Clearly not all of it is fabrication.
Hunter Cox
...
Alexander Lewis
Falsehoods are not data you imbecile.
Matthew Rivera
>I use the word untrue >Wolff used the word untrue >hurr durr you know that different words mean different things, right
Are you retarded?
Jose Hill
The purpose of this book was so the media could attack Trump with outright falsehoods without having to actually make them up themselves. The only people who believe anything written in there are CNN drones.
Tyler Jackson
>Who thinks this? Turn on your TV. Google 'Fire and Fury'. You'll see.
Colton Morgan
>you used one of the same words, therefore you don't have to pay attention to any of the other words he said I don't know what to tell you. I don't think you really have a grasp on logic or reasoning in general.
Easton Murphy
It doesn't matter if the book is truthful, what does matter is the media can establish it as the truth and is trying desperately. It's like they ran out of straws to draw so they pulled out a nose hair instead.
Asher Perez
>only accounts that I believe are correct. Anything that I decide isn't true is not true. k
Xavier Harris
There are definitely parts of the book that ate true there's no doubt of that but I really wouldn't underestimate the stupidity of people, just look at the gorilla channel thing. The problem is not being conned by untruths it can happen to anyone the issue is people won't own up to it they just use the excuse 'well it looked like it could have been true' as if that makes it okay to spread misinformation and it's why any time I read anything I have to check multiple sources before I believe it and even then I still have my doubts
Nolan Walker
Can't really argue against that, but I will say that the dems are not the ones that started playing the whole "untruth" game.
Daniel Morales
Wow why are you guys still in denial that you elected a fuckup? Isnt this what you wanted? collapse and reform, order from chaos. Are you still all just mind tools to whatever seems easiest?
John Sanders
>you used one of the same words I described the book using the EXACT SAME word as Wolff, you retard.
I don't know what to tell you. I don't think you really have a grasp on logic or reasoning in general.
Very true.
Nolan Wood
in 70 years they are gonna use this as proof how trump gassed all the illegals and niggers
