In a Cuomo/CNN interview Rudy Giuliani says Woodward's claim that Pres. Trump said:
"“Rudy, you're a baby. I’ve never seen a worse defense of me in my life. They took your diaper off right there. You're like a little baby that needed to be changed. When are you going to be a man?""
... is made-up, it didn't happen. Claims he has 8 folks that were there when this supposedly happened, that would testify it didn't happen. He questioned why Woodward wouldn't interview the prime subject of the claim - him. Says Woodward never asked him if it was true.
He also said Jay Sekulow, Pres. Trump's lawyer, denies the "orange jumpsuit" quote and he too was never approached by Woodward for an interview.
The obvious first thought is; Of course Giuliani is going to say that. The second thought is would Giuliani tell such a possibly 'catchable' lie on TV? Welllll ....
Stack-up the credibility challenge - Woodward vs. Giuliani, and you have a choice to make.
Is this enough for a seed of doubt?
Seed of doubt about what? Can you clarify?
A seed of doubt concerning Woodward's perceived credibility, regarding the book.
If, (and I am not saying it is), this claim concerning Giuliani is not truthful, what about the credibility of his other claims?
Well, I am always willing to at least consider the possibility that a man with an impeccable reputation could decide to "cash in" by publishing a book with lies and exaggerations, I would need some real evidence of such a thing to believe it. As it stands now, Woodward is far more credible than Giuliani.
No, because Giuliani knows that Woodward won't release his tapes and reveal his sources to prove the quote. He will only do so in a court of law if he is sued for libel and forced by a judge to reveal them.
Regardless, it is highly unlikely that Woodward will get sued because he has tapes, multiple sources and fact checking by editors and lawyers. Even if he is, the 1st Amendment will protect him. Even far right judges don't go that far.
At least the courts still protect the truth in this country.
Hi promisem, so it appears you believe Giuliani is lying?
I think that would be the expected response from non-Trump supporters, and, as a Woodward fan it was my first thought also.
However, I am not so confident that it would take a court case to compel Woodward to elaborate. If he has supporting evidence - which I would think he does - for such a claim, I can see him showing enough of it, (without exposing sources that don't want to be exposed), to put the lie to Giuliani's statement.
That's why I described Giuliani's statement as such a potentially "catchable" lie - if it is one.
Yes, he is lying. There is no downside for him in doing so.
Trump has nothing to do with a beef about a Guiliani quote. It is about law, credibility and journalism standards. (Too may people think newspapers and TV news are the same. They are not.)
Woodward has no history of releasing tapes to the public just to satisfy the claim of a single politician, especially over such a minor quote.
If you can find any case where he did so, I withdraw my comment. I couldn't find a single example in his entire career.
If he did release tapes, his sources would dry up overnight.
I didn't mean to imply I thought Woodward would release any of his interview tapes promisem. Or, that he would reveal any of his interview sources. My only point was that I think Woodward does have the material needed to catch Giuliani in a lie, and may find a way to prove it.
Just another false comparison: Everyone understands there is NO comparison between a stand up man like Bob Woodward who has an impeccable long standing reputation for accuracy and truth, and an incoherent babbling nut case like 'batty' Rudy Giuliani:
Just to spice things up, if I bet that the number of times Woodward has be factually incorrect over his entire professional career, is fewer than the number of times Giuliani has been factually incorrect in the last 12 months, would you take that bet?
Sure I would take that bet Don - on your side.
Don't mistake my OP to be more than just the question it is. I am a strong Woodward supporter, and on this particular issue, I still have faith in Woodard.
But ... even so, the issue caused me to wonder about it enough to post this topic.
Accepting that Trump supporters will obviously side with Giuliani, my thought was about the neutrals - folks that are familiar with Woodward, but not particularly knowledgeable about his work.
Woodward cashed in at the right time for the maximum political impact as well as $$$ profit.
I took ten minutes out of my life today to flip between Hannity and Maddow, nothing has changed in the past two years it seems.
Hannity is still claiming how it all proves conspiracy and collusion against Trump and the American people. And Maddow is still claiming how it all proves Trump is a Russian puppet.
Amazing stuff really, how they can continue to take the same 'facts' and 'events' and weave the tale of how they mean such completely opposite things.
Wonderful world we live in, in the 'Current Year', where everyone can choose which reality they want to believe in... facts are subjective
Woodrow fits right in there with all the rest, if you want to believe it, you can. If you want to think its BS, you can. His reputation is just as suspect as anyone else. his agendas and goals just as biased or based on cashing in for the max-profit as anyone else.
For what its worth, I find him to be less credible in his tales than Omarosa, at least she was part of the Administration and was actually in meetings with Trump... she isn't getting her 'tell all' book information 2nd or 3rd hand like Woodward is.
Our politics today, and the media which covers it, has devolved to the point where the only way I can truly describe how it appears to me, is as an insane asylum where the inmates have taken control of the facilities.
We have the ex-President coming out, claiming he is responsible for the economic turn around and then stating Benghazi was a conspiracy.
Like I said, we are truly living in a choose your reality, choose your facts, moment in history like we have never seen... I can only imagine we are on the precipice of heading into revolutionary times, because such diverse facts and realities cannot co-exist in the same country indefinitely.
Actually, Bob Woodward probably released his book when it was finished and just because he 'cashed in' doesn't mean it's not true and there is absolutely ZERO comparison between a stand up man like Woodward who has a documented history of revealing the previously undisclosed truth which includes the disgrace surrounding watergate, and an orange Bozo Clown who has a press documented history of being one of the greatest liars and crazy conspiracy peddlers in political history if not the greatest: And believe it or NOT, to our knowledge, he still has the keys to our oval office !! : UNREAL:
Who do you believe, Woodward or this?
"President Trump has made 4,229 false or misleading claims in 558 days"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fac … 24e9770df9
That is the truth, Ken. But what else is the truth is the truth will win out in the end, revolution or not.
You were on a roll Ken - right down to where you said you believed Omarosa has more credibility than Woodward, and, that today's reality is that we can choose our own facts to believe.
From there on I think you are off-base.
But, of course you can believe those opinions are facts. If that is your reality.
Naturally Woodward wants to cash-in on his book, but that doesn't mean his book is untruthful.
From what little I have read, Omarosa is known for being primarily self-serving. As such, few seem to question her motives, but because of that, many question her credibility. Yet, even that doesn't mean her claims are untrue, but with past credibility as the only support fir either's claims - I am going to favor Woodward.
You may choose what facts to believe, but you can't choose what facts are actually facts.
But that is the problem, isn't it GA?
How can we be certain of what the facts really are?
Bob Woodward has worked for The Washington Post since 1971.
I have an idea where his politics lie, I have an idea where Bezos' politics lie, the 1970s and Nixon were a long time ago, the changes to the world and the changes to the man can be almost incomprehensible and subject to doubt.
But don't mistake my counter position in this debate, I am not supporting Giuliani over Woodward. I am saying that I feel no one is above the fray, no one is beyond manipulation, nor being motivated by greed or politics.
Perhaps you are right, perhaps facts are facts, maybe it is the fact that a great many people can no longer tell fact from fiction, or worse yet, there are a great many people out there reporting fiction as fact.
You'll find Bob Woodards books right next to the do-it -yourself section in the back of the clearance shelves at Walmart between the old style light bulbs and outdated cereal .
Just got mine.
Lol, Well one thing is for sure, you wont be finding Woodward shopping in Walmart anytime soon, or ever. Hard to escape that bubble he lives in.
But actually here in the REAL world, not Bozo Trump's make believe land of detachment from reality, even before its release, the publisher is trying mightily to keep up with extraordinary demand for Bob Woodward's new book "Fear" which seems to depict a frightening, exceedingly dangerous oval office of mega-dysfunction:
"1 million copies of Bob Woodward's 'Fear' printed to meet 'extraordinary demand' after topping best seller lists"
https://www.businessinsider.com/bob-woo … old-2018-9
Bob Woodward: Let The Silence Suck Out The Truth
Bob Woodward Responds To Denials From Mattis, Kelly
Then, watch any interview with Giuliani.
Thank you for sharing those. I missed that episode of Colbert.
Great links islandBites.
Particularly interesting was his description of the depth of his interview efforts.
This is the last clip.
by IslandBites 4 years ago
"We're in crazytown!"Bob Woodward: Trump's aides stole his papers 'to protect the country'"He's an idiot. It's pointless to try to convince him of anything. He's gone off the rails. We're in crazytown," John Kelly is quoted as saying at a staff meeting in his office. "I...
by Jack Lee 3 years ago
Could not have happened to a more deserving crowd...I hope all of them are held accountable for all that they have done in harming our Republic...
by Scott Belford 2 years ago
It is clear the kids and Trump have committed several federal crimes - otherwise Trump wouldn't feel a need to pardon them "preemptively", yet they are not under any federal investigation at the moment. So why pardon them if they have done nothing wrong.I just found out today that...
by G. Diane Nelson Trotter 3 years ago
Should the president have a meeting with Rouhani? Should a "deal" be made? The wrong response might provoke some radical reaction in the US. Is the president walking back on his position? Who should be advising the preisdent on Iran?
by JOC 2 years ago
Woodward has released audio of Trump in February going over how dangerous Covid-19 was at the time. Trump continues to confirm he was downplaying that danger to the American public, almost boasting about it.Should there be criminality for this since many Americans have failed to take the...
by Don W 3 years ago
"A lawyer for an indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani tells CNN that his client is willing to tell Congress about meetings the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee had in Vienna last year with a former Ukrainian prosecutor to discuss digging up dirt on Joe Biden...'Mr. Parnas...
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2023 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|