>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
Despite the sensational headlines, the answer is murky. The article’s author, Jeffrey Goldberg, has faced backlash for his reporting, particularly his use of unattributed sources. In this case, Goldberg relied on two unnamed individuals who claimed to have heard Trump make this comment. However, their word appears to be in dispute, and as it stands, no solid evidence has emerged to back the claim.
Adding fuel to the fire, Goldberg’s piece drew criticism for its questionable timing and for exploiting the tragic death of a U.S. soldier. The article referenced the 2020 murder of Army Private Vanessa Guillén, weaving a narrative that connected Trump’s alleged disdain for the military to her death—a stretch that many found distasteful.
In one striking passage, Goldberg wrote, “The personal qualities displayed by Trump in his reaction to the cost of the Guillén funeral — contempt, rage, parsimony, racism — hardly surprised his inner circle. Trump has frequently voiced his disdain for those who serve in the military and for their devotion to duty, honor, and sacrifice. Former generals who have worked for Trump say that the sole military virtue he prizes is obedience.”
The leap from Guillén’s murder to Trump’s alleged admiration for Hitler’s generals has left many scratching their heads. The quote in question attributed to Trump was, “I need the kind of generals that Hitler had,” according to Goldberg’s unnamed sources. Trump allegedly followed this with, “People who were totally loyal to him, that follow orders.”
However, several individuals close to Trump have come forward to dispute Goldberg’s claims. Among them is attorney Natalie Khawam, who was quoted in the article but quickly condemned Goldberg’s portrayal. “After having dealt with hundreds of reporters in my legal career, this is unfortunately the first time I have to go on record and call out Jeffrey Goldberg [of the Atlantic]: not only did he misrepresent our conversation but he outright LIED in HIS sensational story,” Khawam said in a public statement.
Khawam didn’t stop there. She went on to lambast Goldberg for exploiting her clients and Vanessa Guillén’s murder for political gain. She added, “I would like to also point out that the timing of this ‘story’ is quite suspicious, as this supposed conversation that Trump had would have occurred over 4 years ago! Why a story about it now?”
This skepticism was echoed by Vanessa Guillén’s own family. Her sister, Mayra Guillén, took to social media to call out Goldberg for what she viewed as an offensive politicization of her sister’s death. “I don’t appreciate how you are exploiting my sister’s death for politics—hurtful & disrespectful to the important changes she made for service members. President Donald Trump did nothing but show respect to my family & Vanessa. In fact, I voted for President Trump today.”
TRUMP LOVES IT: Get the Presidential Blanket FREE Today! Supplies Running Out – Grab Yours NOW! 🕒👇
It’s not just Trump’s supporters who are raising red flags about Goldberg’s piece. Former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows’ representative, Ben Williamson, also weighed in, dismissing the Hitler quote as “dishonest.” Williamson’s remarks contrasted sharply with the weaker denials presented by The Atlantic, underscoring just how far the publication may have gone in its attempt to smear Trump.
With the timing of this story being so close to the upcoming election, many are questioning why now, and why rely on such flimsy evidence? This is a pattern often seen in election cycles: dig up old accusations, attribute them to anonymous sources, and release the story right before voting begins.
As this latest “October Surprise” unravels, it serves as a reminder of the lengths some will go to influence public opinion. Whether this latest smear will stick or not, one thing is clear: it’s a tactic that has been used time and time again. But with numerous people disputing the claims, it seems this surprise is falling apart faster than it was thrown together.
