extremely uneasy about this Bannon book thing

[0rganism]

i remember when the RWers took the very real story of W not showing up for his ANG duties and discredited it thoroughly by circulating a supposed "copy" of some dictated notes from the ANG commander which turned out to be fakes.

these assholes are, or used to be, masters of media manipulation. am i supposed to believe their apparatus has completely fallen apart?

what BannonBook looks like to me is a gambit play, where they rope a large segment of the media into reporting and doubling down on some particular thing that has at least a grain of truth, and then discredit everyone who reported on it by discrediting the source document itself. now all Bannon has to do is say "oh i was lying in the book" or "i was joking and you all took it out of context" while presenting material evidence in contradiction and blammo! since he's the nominal author, he has a declarative, perhaps final, say in the veracity of the document. i would not put it past him to publish a book to discredit his political opponents.

are you willing to put your faith in the unproven testimony of a sworn enemy?

[Roland99]

1. It is NOT Bannons book. It is Wolffs book. Bannon is one person in it.

As to its veracity:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210058325

[Ninga]

2. And then there are hours of audio recordings and first hand account

by others.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. You do know, don't you, that Bannon didn't write the book?

He is extensively quoted in it, along with many other White House personnel, but he didn't write it. The author, Michael Wolff, is a journalist who was given permission by Trump to hang out in the West Wing and interview people. And he has tapes of the interviews.

[anneboleyn]

4. Its not a claim about any one incident. Its a collection of interviews from many sources over an

extended period of time — not written by Bannon. All of them would have to say they were lying, and they would look ridiculous if they did so. This isn’t a claim about one fact that can be disproven as in Bush’s case.

[yardwork]

5. Nah. Trump and his people really are this incompetent.

[GusBob]

6. WTF is it with people calling this Bannons book?

Even Thom Hartmann on the radio

Americas intellectual capability seems to be in decline

[Clarity2]

7. While it wasnt a book

put out by bannon, it still was a book containing info from white house insiders, so I get what Organism is saying.

Questions: why would the WH think the book would be positive? They know what the author is about and the type of expose’s hes done. For instance a Murdoch expose’. I remember at the beginning of this admin when it was revealed they were leaking fake info to try to discredit the media. The book contains statements that they were completely taken by surprise that Trump won. That sort of frames a narrative that they werent conspiring with the russians to win, and didnt get any help. It has entered my mind that info may have been planted to spin russiagate.

When bannon left he said he would still be working for the benefit of trump. So whats missing is what has changed since then?

Rebecka Mercer said she disassociated from bannon, but these people are all liars.