Bob Woodward Says He 'Wouldn't Have Used' Anonymous Op-Ed

This image was removed due to legal reasons.

Since the bombshell anonymous New York Times op-ed released last week that detailed an alleged plot to “resist” Donald Trump from inside the White House has often been compared to and conflated with journalist Bob Woodward’s forthcoming book, Fear: Trump in the White House. Woodward’s book was already in the news last week as the op-ed was published, and its anonymous author seemed to back up some of the journalists claims, albeit without names or direct quotations.


But Woodward says he doesn’t approve of the Times decision to publish the piece. He explained his position in an interview on CBS News:

“I have no idea who it is. It’s very important, who it is. It’s very important whether this is somebody who witnessed and participated. And quite frankly, if there was a person in the White House or the administration who wanted to tell me what’s in that op-ed piece, I would say, ‘Okay, name me who was there. What is the specific incident?’ As you know, from having read my book, the dates and times and participants [are documented].”

He said that without that detail on the op-ed author’s story, “I wouldn’t have used it.”

“Too vague?” asked Martin.

“Well, too vague, and does not meet the standards of trying to describe specific incidents. Specific incidents are the building blocks of journalism, as you well know.”

Looks like the famed Watergate journalist still has some chutzpah left! And he’s got a good point: by printing the op-ed, the Times let this official, whoever their are, have a platform that will ultimately benefit them, without necessarily telling the public anything concrete. It’s been reported that publishers could offer a seven figure deal to put out a book by the anonymous source. Seems like it’s pretty good #resisting Trump from within.