As we told you earlier this afternoon, John Bolton and his publisher put out a statement about the New York Times story quoting sources who say they’ve seen the former Trump national security adviser’s book manuscript. They also managed to get in a little plug for the book:
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) January 27, 2020
NEW: Statement from Ambassador John Bolton, Simon and Schuster and Javelin Literary: pic.twitter.com/WpYV44bEWQ
— Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) January 27, 2020
Mollie Hemingway and Sean Davis of The Federalist took note more of what isn’t in the statement as opposed to what is:
Oddly phrased, oddly limited statement. Were people ever suggesting the NYT *colluded with these groups for the purpose of helping launch pre-sales*? Seemed folks were simply noticing the carefully orchestrated leak went live a few hours before launch of pre-sales. https://t.co/74KArhRLSQ
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) January 27, 2020
Per the text of the statement, they didn't deny coordination with NYT on the book leak at all. The only thing they specifically denied in that statement was working with NYT to put up the Amazon pre-sale page yesterday, a charge nobody ever made. https://t.co/F9Wh3saqY7
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) January 27, 2020
Weird how those things weren’t addressed, right?
I believe the scientific term is "coinkydink"
— Peter DeGiglio (@PeterDeGiglio) January 27, 2020
Paraphrased for clarity: We did not knowingly or willingly engaged directly with the NY Times specifically to coordinate the exact timing of the leak they happened to post in the middle of the impeachment trial on the day we opened pre-sales of the book. Total coincidence, y'all!
— JD Rucker (@JDRucker) January 27, 2020
The word of the day is “coincidence”!
Key word, Pre-Sale.
— Deplorable George (@The_Proteus7) January 27, 2020
Which brings it all back to square one.