Why Are We Not Discussing the Serious Questions Raised By Woodward’s New Book?

Bob Woodward is well known for his know-all and tell-all books. Starting with his first book, All the President’s Men from the Nixon era all the way to Fear for the Trump era, his books have had some unanswered questions about what did he know and how did he know it. This article points out several difficulties with his writings. If they were questionable then, they should be questionable now. Please read on.

As Written and Reported By Byron York for the Washington Examiner:

Bob Woodward’s new book Fear: Trump in the White House, is filled with extended accounts of behind-the-scenes conversations between major players in the Trump campaign and administration. There’s no need to give examples; almost every page has dialogue that is presented, in quotation marks, with the implicit assurance that the author knows precisely what was said.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Jim Acosta have gotten his press pass back?

  • Should Jim Acosta have gotten his press pass back?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Great American Republic updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Former Federal Prosecutor Says ‘Rosenstein Deeply Involved in Effort to Try to Remove Trump From Office’ (Video)

Of course, Woodward did not hear every word uttered by every character in the book. So any reader would ask: How does he know exactly what they said? Woodward anticipated such questions in a note to readers, explaining that, “When I have attributed exact quotations, thoughts or conclusions to the participants, that information comes from the person, a colleague with direct knowledge, or from meeting notes, personal diaries, files and government or personal documents.”

Woodward’s note raises an obvious question. If Participant A, for example — whether it was Kellyanne Conway, or Steve Bannon, or Gary Cohn, or someone else — told Woodward what he or she said in a particular conversation that occurred months earlier, how could Woodward be confident that they recalled just what was said? So even if Woodward accurately recounted what Participant A said she said, how could he, or anyone else, be certain that that is what was actually said? Shouldn’t Woodward have written that this is what Participant A recalled about a conversation, rather than this is the…..

KEEP READING THERE IS WAY MORE AT THE LINK BELOW:

Byron York: Same old story: New Woodward book raises old questions about methods

 

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.