vox--2020-09-04--The NBA strike is a big moment for athlete activism — and the labor movement in America

The sports world erupted in protest last week in response to the police shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha , Wisconsin .
On August 26 , Milwaukee Bucks players announced just prior to game time that they would not participate in their first-round playoff game against the Orlando Magic .
The rest of the NBA playoff teams soon joined in this wildcat strike .
Their actions reverberated .
Tennis star Naomi Osaka voluntarily forfeited her semifinal match before the next day ’ s games in the Western & Southern Open the following day , and officials suspended play as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NFL , MLB , and WNBA teams also followed suit , with the New York Mets and the Miami Marlins , among others , leaving the field after a silent protest while placing a Black Lives Matter T-shirt over home plate .
The NBA strike came to an end and playoffs resumed a couple days later after the league secured some concessions , including the use of several basketball arenas as voting locations and the formation of a league-wide social justice coalition .
In an era marked by historic levels of economic inequality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lives Matter and the actions of the Trump administration , we ought not to be surprised by this latest burst of activism .
Today ’ s professional players join a long lineage of athletes , from Muhammad Ali to Billie Jean King , who used their careers as a way to protest social injustice .
But something different also happened last week .
The NBA players went on strike , shutting down their industry ( at least temporarily ) and demanding concessions from their employers before returning to the court .
This act @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in athlete protests .
Beyond raising awareness or starting conversations , striking has the potential to bring about change by grinding an industry ’ s gears to a halt .
The act of striking has been dramatically on the rise during the Trump administration .
The number of union-led workplace stoppages — including those involving 1,000 or more people — has exploded in the last few years .
Many have focused more narrowly on the wages and conditions at the worker ’ s job site , such as the teacher ’ s strikes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2018 and 2019 , which won the support of the public and — perhaps just as important — a notable increase in pay and benefits .
But increasingly , they are also being used to promote causes beyond improving workplace conditions .
New York taxi drivers struck in 2017 to protest the Trump administration ’ s so-called Muslim ban .
In the last few months , longshore workers on both US coasts struck for Black Lives Matter ( not surprising , given the group ’ s longer history of striking to protest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights ) .
That these actions are being carried out by unionized workers isn ’ t a coincidence .
Nonunionized workers are frequently classified as “ at will , ” meaning that they can be terminated for just about any reason , and certainly for political protest .
Constitutional rights do not automatically extend to the workplace , and indeed , the rights of the employer can be more accurately understood as authoritarian .
Meanwhile , unionized workers are protected by national labor laws against unjust termination , and strikes and work stoppages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under the law .
National labor law requires a “ direct nexus ” between the work stoppage and the conditions of the workplace , but the National Labor Relations Board has often interpreted this nexus in broad strokes .
In 2017 , the NLRB protected the rights of workers to strike on behalf of the rights of immigrants , arguing that there was both a connection to the striking workers ’ employment conditions and that employers had the potential to help respond effectively by leveraging their power with the federal government .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ era ’ s protests also gets at labor ’ s potential to drive fundamental change .
Unionized workers are part of organizations that are designed to promote solidarity , mobilize collectively , and protect their workers from employer threats of coercion .
Recent research has shown how unions mobilize workers to vote , learn about politics , and even reduce their feelings of racial resentment .
The close linkages between these unionized athletes , political protest , and the growing social movement around Black Lives Matter remind us of the importance that labor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ future growth of the Democratic Party .
Of course , unions are not a panacea by themselves .
Indeed , the labor movement has a long and quite complicated relationship to civil rights and the events that have led to Black Lives Matter .
Even in the current era , in which many unions have emphatically embraced diversity and civil rights in their workplaces and in politics , national unions have wrestled with the presence of law and immigration enforcement and other correction officer unions within their ranks .
( Police unions , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protecting members who have records of violent interactions with citizens . )
Moreover , not every unionized worker has the power and leverage of often well-known and extremely well-paid professional athletes .
Taxi drivers taking a stand against racism do so within an industry under economic threat , and many unionized and would-be unionized workers — from those in slaughterhouses to graduate teaching assistants to gig economy workers — face severe threats of termination from employers facing labor laws with only limited weapons .
But that does not take away from both the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the path they pave for future action .
Movement mobilization and union organization have and can reinforce and benefit from each other , providing and sustaining a potentially transformative political moment .
Paul Frymer is a professor of politics at Princeton University .
He writes about American labor and racial politics .
Jacob M. Grumbach is an assistant professor of political science at the University of Washington .
He researches the political economy of the United States with a focus on race and public policy and teaches courses in statistical methodology .
Help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Vox each month to understand what ’ s happening in the news , from the coronavirus crisis to a racial reckoning to what is , quite possibly , the most consequential presidential election of our lifetimes .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
But our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Even when the economy and the news advertising market recovers , your support will be a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and helping everyone make sense of an increasingly chaotic world .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

The sports world erupted in protest last week in response to the police shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin. On August 26, Milwaukee Bucks players announced just prior to game time that they would not participate in their first-round playoff game against the Orlando Magic. The rest of the NBA playoff teams soon joined in this wildcat strike.
Their actions reverberated. Tennis star Naomi Osaka voluntarily forfeited her semifinal match before the next day’s games in the Western & Southern Open the following day, and officials suspended play as a result. Some MLS, NHL, NFL, MLB, and WNBA teams also followed suit, with the New York Mets and the Miami Marlins, among others, leaving the field after a silent protest while placing a Black Lives Matter T-shirt over home plate. The NBA strike came to an end and playoffs resumed a couple days later after the league secured some concessions, including the use of several basketball arenas as voting locations and the formation of a league-wide social justice coalition.
In an era marked by historic levels of economic inequality and mass mobilization in response to Black Lives Matter and the actions of the Trump administration, we ought not to be surprised by this latest burst of activism. Today’s professional players join a long lineage of athletes, from Muhammad Ali to Billie Jean King, who used their careers as a way to protest social injustice.
But something different also happened last week. The NBA players went on strike, shutting down their industry (at least temporarily) and demanding concessions from their employers before returning to the court. This act of workplace stoppage represents the next step in athlete protests. Beyond raising awareness or starting conversations, striking has the potential to bring about change by grinding an industry’s gears to a halt.
The act of striking has been dramatically on the rise during the Trump administration. The number of union-led workplace stoppages — including those involving 1,000 or more people — has exploded in the last few years. Many have focused more narrowly on the wages and conditions at the worker’s job site, such as the teacher’s strikes throughout a number of traditionally conservative states in 2018 and 2019, which won the support of the public and — perhaps just as important — a notable increase in pay and benefits.
But increasingly, they are also being used to promote causes beyond improving workplace conditions. New York taxi drivers struck in 2017 to protest the Trump administration’s so-called Muslim ban. In the last few months, longshore workers on both US coasts struck for Black Lives Matter (not surprising, given the group’s longer history of striking to protest police violence, war, and civil rights).
That these actions are being carried out by unionized workers isn’t a coincidence. Nonunionized workers are frequently classified as “at will,” meaning that they can be terminated for just about any reason, and certainly for political protest. Constitutional rights do not automatically extend to the workplace, and indeed, the rights of the employer can be more accurately understood as authoritarian.
Meanwhile, unionized workers are protected by national labor laws against unjust termination, and strikes and work stoppages are importantly, if conditionally, protected under the law. National labor law requires a “direct nexus” between the work stoppage and the conditions of the workplace, but the National Labor Relations Board has often interpreted this nexus in broad strokes. In 2017, the NLRB protected the rights of workers to strike on behalf of the rights of immigrants, arguing that there was both a connection to the striking workers’ employment conditions and that employers had the potential to help respond effectively by leveraging their power with the federal government.
The leading role of unionized workers in this era’s protests also gets at labor’s potential to drive fundamental change. Unionized workers are part of organizations that are designed to promote solidarity, mobilize collectively, and protect their workers from employer threats of coercion. Recent research has shown how unions mobilize workers to vote, learn about politics, and even reduce their feelings of racial resentment. The close linkages between these unionized athletes, political protest, and the growing social movement around Black Lives Matter remind us of the importance that labor unions offer for progressive politics and the future growth of the Democratic Party.
Of course, unions are not a panacea by themselves. Indeed, the labor movement has a long and quite complicated relationship to civil rights and the events that have led to Black Lives Matter. Even in the current era, in which many unions have emphatically embraced diversity and civil rights in their workplaces and in politics, national unions have wrestled with the presence of law and immigration enforcement and other correction officer unions within their ranks. (Police unions, for example, are known for strongly protecting members who have records of violent interactions with citizens.)
Moreover, not every unionized worker has the power and leverage of often well-known and extremely well-paid professional athletes. Taxi drivers taking a stand against racism do so within an industry under economic threat, and many unionized and would-be unionized workers — from those in slaughterhouses to graduate teaching assistants to gig economy workers — face severe threats of termination from employers facing labor laws with only limited weapons.
But that does not take away from both the historic events of the past week and the path they pave for future action. Movement mobilization and union organization have and can reinforce and benefit from each other, providing and sustaining a potentially transformative political moment.
Paul Frymer is a professor of politics at Princeton University. He writes about American labor and racial politics.
Jacob M. Grumbach is an assistant professor of political science at the University of Washington. He researches the political economy of the United States with a focus on race and public policy and teaches courses in statistical methodology.
ntribute today from as little as $3.


vox--2020-09-04--Charlie Kaufman’s new Netflix film is brilliant. Here’s a guide to a truly innovative filmmaker.

Charlie Kaufman might be the reason I became a film critic , so of course I was excited for I ’ m Thinking of Ending Things , his latest movie .
( It dropped on Netflix September 4 . )
Whether he ’ s writing screenplays for someone else or directing them himself , Kaufman has distinctive stylistic tics and thematic obsessions .
He often plays with the form of the movies themselves , self-consciously flipping our expectations about truth and fantasy on their heads , which taught me , as a budding critic , how to look at a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
( He also published his first novel this year , a 720-page doorstopper titled Antkind , about a failed film critic .
I ’ m still working up the courage to read it , for obvious reasons . )
Since he first broke through in the 1990s , his style and themes have become so identified with him that it ’ s possible to call something “ Kaufman-esque , ” the way you might say something is “ Kafka-esque.
” In fact , Kaufman and Kafka aren ’ t entirely dissimilar .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and twisty ; they prefer you feel your way through their stories , rather than insisting on “ solving ” their plots like puzzles .
But while Kafka ’ s point is often social in nature , Kaufman ’ s is existential .
In Charlie Kaufman ’ s world , in movies like Anomalisa and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Synecdoche , New York , our own narcissism and desperation to cure our loneliness conspire to form a maze from which we can never really escape .
I loved I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is about as Kaufman-esque a movie as you could hope for .
It is , unsurprisingly , hard to describe .
Based on Iain Reid ’ s 2016 novel ( though with an unmistakable Kaufman twist ) , it starts out as a story about a young woman ( Jessie Buckley ) who is embarking upon a road trip with her boyfriend ( Jesse Plemons ) to visit his parents ( Toni Collette and David Thewlis ) at their farmhouse .
She is thinking of ending their relationship — they ’ ve only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — but hasn ’ t worked up the gumption to do so yet .
His name is Jake , but hers keeps changing , especially once they make it to the farmhouse and the weird family meal that awaits them .
Is she Lucy ?
Lucia ?
Louisa ?
Is she a painter or a physicist or a poet ?
Where did she grow up ?
What does her voice even really sound like ?
Why does it feel like time is slipping forward and backward ?
The pair ’ s conversations in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but they ’ re often quoting other texts , and in fact a lot of the movie ’ s quotations and speeches and monologues are cribbed from other sources .
You get the sense that art is insufficient to address the brokenness of our hearts and the gulfs between us .
And meanwhile , mysterious scenes featuring a sad-sack school janitor ( Guy Boyd ) are cut into Jake and Lucy/Lucia/Louisa ’ s trip , layering in the feeling that something uncanny is going on .
As I said , I loved it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and yearning I ’ ve come to expect from a Kaufman movie , and it feels like a filmmaker ’ s meditation on the limits of his medium as well as the limits of our lives and loves .
It ’ s wistful , and I wanted to watch it over again immediately when it was done .
But I ’ m Thinking of Ending Things also works best if you view it as being on a continuum with Kaufman ’ s work , rather than just a stand-alone film .
In fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see it without first watching at least one other Kaufman film .
So here are five of my favorite Kaufman films , all of which you can stream right now , any of which would form a fine introduction before you launch into I ’ m Thinking of Ending Things .
Kaufman worked as a TV writer during the first half of the 1990s on shows like The Dana Carvey Show , but in 1999 his first feature film script made it to the big screen , directed by Spike Jonze .
( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but it was also his first feature . )
It quickly sets down what would become some of Kaufman ’ s signature interests — narcissism , the distance between us , the impossibility of really understanding someone else ’ s experience , and some truly brain-altering narrative tricks .
The film stars John Cusack as an unhappy puppeteer in an unhappy marriage who , at his unhappy job , accidentally stumbles on a portal into the mind of actor John Malkovich ( playing himself ) .
It is an unforgettably weird meditation on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ else , and it landed three Oscar nominations — not bad for a feature debut .
How to watch it : Being John Malkovich is streaming on Netflix .
It ’ s also available to digitally rent or purchase on iTunes , Amazon , YouTube , Google Play , and Vudu .
Kaufman ’ s third feature script , Adaptation , is itself an adaptation of a kind ; its source material is Susan Orlean ’ s 2000 nonfiction book The Orchid Thief , about the eccentric world of Florida ’ s orchid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including a man named John Laroche .
But it is anything but a typical adaptation .
Instead , Kaufman teamed up with Jonze again to tell a story about a guy named Charlie Kaufman ( Nic Cage ) who is trying desperately to adapt a book called The Orchid Thief by Susan Orlean ( Meryl Streep ) , who is following an orchid thief named John Laroche ( Chris Cooper ) .
Charlie has a twin brother named Donald ( also Cage ) who keeps offering him advice on adaptation ; he also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ played by Brian Cox ) , a famous real-life screenwriting guru .
Adaptation ’ s screenplay is credited to both Charlie and ( the fictional ) Donald ; “ they ” received an Oscar nomination , and the film netted three more for Cage , Streep , and Cooper ( who won ) .
As movies about screenwriting and angst go , Adaptation is almost certainly the best .
How to watch it : Adaptation is available to digitally rent or purchase on iTunes , Amazon , YouTube , Google Play , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Tubi .
Arguably Kaufman ’ s most well-known screenplay is Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind , directed by Michel Gondry , whose whimsical tendencies are a good fit for Kaufman ’ s melancholy story about memory , fate , love , and regret .
Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet play Joel and Clementine , who meet seemingly by chance and become a couple on a train to Montauk .
But they live in a world where it ’ s possible to have your memories erased , and soon we — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : If you knew a relationship was likely to end in disappointment , would it still be worth it ?
Kaufman won an Oscar for his screenplay , which tells its story in a nonlinear fashion and approaches a topic that sci-fi has often explored ( the erasure of memory ) in a way that ’ s deeply moving .
How to watch it : Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is streaming on Netflix .
It ’ s also available to digitally rent or purchase on iTunes , Amazon , YouTube , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finally went behind the camera for Synecdoche , New York , a truly bizarre movie I have never really been able to explain but love dearly .
It concerns a theatre director ( played by Philip Seymour Hoffman ) who — ailing , miserable , and lonely — suddenly wins a MacArthur genius grant and has the means to enact his dream project .
He wants to make the most authentic , meaningful play possible , a show that has something to say about real life .
The show becomes increasingly more elaborate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and fiction blur as he pursues his quest .
The title is a play on the literary device of a “ synecdoche , ” in which a part of a whole stands in for the entire whole , and it is a weird , ambitious , achingly bittersweet movie .
How to watch it : Synecdoche , New York is available to digitally rent or purchase on iTunes , Amazon , YouTube , Google Play , or Vudu .
Anomalisa was the first R-rated film to be nominated in the Best Animated Feature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pretty telling accomplishment .
Kaufman directed and adapted the very darkly comical film from his own 2005 radio play .
It ’ s the tale of Michael Stone ( voiced by David Thewlis ) , a customer service representative who is alienated from the world around him .
He ’ s on a business trip in Cincinnati , staying in a generic hotel , and everyone he meets seems to have the same face and the same voice ( Tom Noonan ’ s voice , in fact ) .
He ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until he meets a woman named Lisa ( voiced by Jennifer Jason Leigh ) , in whom he suddenly sees an escape .
Using stop-motion animated characters allows the film to do what live-action couldn ’ t as easily : It shows the way Michael sees the world as it morphs around him , evoking just how trapped in his own mind he truly is , and why he stands in the way of his own connection with anyone else .
How to watch it : Anomalisa is available to digitally rent or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Google Play , and Vudu .
It ’ s also available to stream on Pluto TV .
I ’ m Thinking of Ending Things is now streaming on Netflix .
Help keep Vox free for all Millions turn to Vox each month to understand what ’ s happening in the news , from the coronavirus crisis to a racial reckoning to what is , quite possibly , the most consequential presidential election of our lifetimes .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Even when the economy and the news advertising market recovers , your support will be a critical part of sustaining our resource-intensive work , and helping everyone make sense of an increasingly chaotic world .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

Charlie Kaufman might be the reason I became a film critic, so of course I was excited for I’m Thinking of Ending Things, his latest movie. (It dropped on Netflix September 4.)
Whether he’s writing screenplays for someone else or directing them himself, Kaufman has distinctive stylistic tics and thematic obsessions. He often plays with the form of the movies themselves, self-consciously flipping our expectations about truth and fantasy on their heads, which taught me, as a budding critic, how to look at a film as more than just its plot. (He also published his first novel this year, a 720-page doorstopper titled Antkind, about a failed film critic. I’m still working up the courage to read it, for obvious reasons.) Since he first broke through in the 1990s, his style and themes have become so identified with him that it’s possible to call something “Kaufman-esque,” the way you might say something is “Kafka-esque.”
In fact, Kaufman and Kafka aren’t entirely dissimilar. They share a taste for the surreal and twisty; they prefer you feel your way through their stories, rather than insisting on “solving” their plots like puzzles. But while Kafka’s point is often social in nature, Kaufman’s is existential. In Charlie Kaufman’s world, in movies like Anomalisa and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Synecdoche, New York, our own narcissism and desperation to cure our loneliness conspire to form a maze from which we can never really escape.
I loved I’m Thinking of Ending Things, which is about as Kaufman-esque a movie as you could hope for. It is, unsurprisingly, hard to describe. Based on Iain Reid’s 2016 novel (though with an unmistakable Kaufman twist), it starts out as a story about a young woman (Jessie Buckley) who is embarking upon a road trip with her boyfriend (Jesse Plemons) to visit his parents (Toni Collette and David Thewlis) at their farmhouse. She is thinking of ending their relationship — they’ve only been going out for about seven weeks — but hasn’t worked up the gumption to do so yet.
His name is Jake, but hers keeps changing, especially once they make it to the farmhouse and the weird family meal that awaits them. Is she Lucy? Lucia? Louisa? Is she a painter or a physicist or a poet? Where did she grow up? What does her voice even really sound like? Why does it feel like time is slipping forward and backward?
The pair’s conversations in the car seem erudite and wide-ranging, but they’re often quoting other texts, and in fact a lot of the movie’s quotations and speeches and monologues are cribbed from other sources. You get the sense that art is insufficient to address the brokenness of our hearts and the gulfs between us. And meanwhile, mysterious scenes featuring a sad-sack school janitor (Guy Boyd) are cut into Jake and Lucy/Lucia/Louisa’s trip, layering in the feeling that something uncanny is going on.
As I said, I loved it. It embodies all of the sadness and yearning I’ve come to expect from a Kaufman movie, and it feels like a filmmaker’s meditation on the limits of his medium as well as the limits of our lives and loves. It’s wistful, and I wanted to watch it over again immediately when it was done.
But I’m Thinking of Ending Things also works best if you view it as being on a continuum with Kaufman’s work, rather than just a stand-alone film. In fact, I wouldn’t recommend anyone see it without first watching at least one other Kaufman film.
So here are five of my favorite Kaufman films, all of which you can stream right now, any of which would form a fine introduction before you launch into I’m Thinking of Ending Things.
Being John Malkovich (1999)
Kaufman worked as a TV writer during the first half of the 1990s on shows like The Dana Carvey Show, but in 1999 his first feature film script made it to the big screen, directed by Spike Jonze. (Jonze had made many music videos, but it was also his first feature.) It quickly sets down what would become some of Kaufman’s signature interests — narcissism, the distance between us, the impossibility of really understanding someone else’s experience, and some truly brain-altering narrative tricks. The film stars John Cusack as an unhappy puppeteer in an unhappy marriage who, at his unhappy job, accidentally stumbles on a portal into the mind of actor John Malkovich (playing himself). It is an unforgettably weird meditation on loneliness and the desire to be someone else, and it landed three Oscar nominations — not bad for a feature debut.
How to watch it: Being John Malkovich is streaming on Netflix. It’s also available to digitally rent or purchase on iTunes, Amazon, YouTube, Google Play, and Vudu.
Adaptation (2002)
Kaufman’s third feature script, Adaptation, is itself an adaptation of a kind; its source material is Susan Orlean’s 2000 nonfiction book The Orchid Thief, about the eccentric world of Florida’s orchid collectors, growers, and smugglers, including a man named John Laroche. But it is anything but a typical adaptation. Instead, Kaufman teamed up with Jonze again to tell a story about a guy named Charlie Kaufman (Nic Cage) who is trying desperately to adapt a book called The Orchid Thief by Susan Orlean (Meryl Streep), who is following an orchid thief named John Laroche (Chris Cooper). Charlie has a twin brother named Donald (also Cage) who keeps offering him advice on adaptation; he also seeks the advice of Robert McKee (played by Brian Cox), a famous real-life screenwriting guru. Adaptation’s screenplay is credited to both Charlie and (the fictional) Donald; “they” received an Oscar nomination, and the film netted three more for Cage, Streep, and Cooper (who won). As movies about screenwriting and angst go, Adaptation is almost certainly the best.
How to watch it: Adaptation is available to digitally rent or purchase on iTunes, Amazon, YouTube, Google Play, and Vudu. It’s also streaming on Tubi.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
Arguably Kaufman’s most well-known screenplay is Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, directed by Michel Gondry, whose whimsical tendencies are a good fit for Kaufman’s melancholy story about memory, fate, love, and regret. Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet play Joel and Clementine, who meet seemingly by chance and become a couple on a train to Montauk. But they live in a world where it’s possible to have your memories erased, and soon we — and they — are left with a question: If you knew a relationship was likely to end in disappointment, would it still be worth it? Kaufman won an Oscar for his screenplay, which tells its story in a nonlinear fashion and approaches a topic that sci-fi has often explored (the erasure of memory) in a way that’s deeply moving.
How to watch it: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is streaming on Netflix. It’s also available to digitally rent or purchase on iTunes, Amazon, YouTube, Google Play, and Vudu.
Synecdoche, New York (2008)
Kaufman finally went behind the camera for Synecdoche, New York, a truly bizarre movie I have never really been able to explain but love dearly. It concerns a theatre director (played by Philip Seymour Hoffman) who — ailing, miserable, and lonely — suddenly wins a MacArthur genius grant and has the means to enact his dream project. He wants to make the most authentic, meaningful play possible, a show that has something to say about real life. The show becomes increasingly more elaborate, and the lines between real life and fiction blur as he pursues his quest. The title is a play on the literary device of a “synecdoche,” in which a part of a whole stands in for the entire whole, and it is a weird, ambitious, achingly bittersweet movie.
How to watch it: Synecdoche, New York is available to digitally rent or purchase on iTunes, Amazon, YouTube, Google Play, or Vudu.
Anomalisa (2015)
Anomalisa was the first R-rated film to be nominated in the Best Animated Feature category at the Oscars, which is a pretty telling accomplishment. Kaufman directed and adapted the very darkly comical film from his own 2005 radio play. It’s the tale of Michael Stone (voiced by David Thewlis), a customer service representative who is alienated from the world around him. He’s on a business trip in Cincinnati, staying in a generic hotel, and everyone he meets seems to have the same face and the same voice (Tom Noonan’s voice, in fact). He’s miserable, alone, and self-obsessed, until he meets a woman named Lisa (voiced by Jennifer Jason Leigh), in whom he suddenly sees an escape. Using stop-motion animated characters allows the film to do what live-action couldn’t as easily: It shows the way Michael sees the world as it morphs around him, evoking just how trapped in his own mind he truly is, and why he stands in the way of his own connection with anyone else.
How to watch it: Anomalisa is available to digitally rent or purchase on iTunes, Amazon, YouTube, Google Play, and Vudu. It’s also available to stream on Pluto TV.
I’m Thinking of Ending Things is now streaming on Netflix.


vox--2020-09-04--Did Trump call US war dead “losers” and “suckers”? The controversy, explained.

Four reputable news outlets , all citing anonymous sources , report President Donald Trump disparaged US troops , veterans , and missing service members , with several outlets reporting he has called military members “ losers.
” Yet the president , along with current and former staff on the record , continues to dispute those stories .
The reporting is explosive .
The denials are emphatic .
And the consequences are potentially enormous .
Trump has built a lot of his political stock on being seen as a big military booster , often referencing his administration ’ s large defense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence .
But the stories — first in the Atlantic , followed by the Associated Press , Washington Post , and New York Times — could further damage his faltering support among service members and those who care about the armed services just ahead of the November election .
The Atlantic reports that during a trip to France two years ago , Trump didn ’ t want to visit a cemetery where American military service members were buried , during the commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the end of World War I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bad weather might mess up his hair .
He also felt the cemetery was , in his estimation , “ filled with losers , ” and that the nearly 2,000 Marines buried there were “ suckers ” for getting killed in a storied World War I battle .
The Atlantic story also details other disturbing incidents : that Trump railed against lowering American flags after Sen. John McCain ’ s death because McCain “ was a fucking loser , ” and that during a Memorial Day visit in 2017 to the grave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s son , who was killed in Afghanistan in 2010 , Trump asked why anyone would volunteer to serve in the military .
“ I don ’ t get it .
What was in it for them ?
” he asked the fallen Marine ’ s father .
The reports have the potential to fuel a major line of attack by former Vice President Joe Biden and Democrats for weeks to come .
On Friday afternoon , the Biden campaign used the quotes from the Atlantic ’ s story in an ad against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , unquestionably , in Trump ’ s political interest to deny the reports as strongly as he has .
“ If they really exist , if people really exist that would have said that , they ’ re lowlifes and they ’ re liars , ” Trump told reporters late on Thursday night about the Atlantic story .
“ And I would be willing to swear on anything that I never said that about our fallen heroes .
There is nobody that respects them more , ” adding , “ What animal would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has received public support from many past and current officials who were with him in France , adding credibility to his easily dismissed denial .
This could turn out to be a big moment in the presidential race , in Trump ’ s presidency , and perhaps his legacy as commander in chief .
It ’ s worth it , then , to spend some time parsing through what , exactly , the reporting says , what the specific denials are , and how they match with the facts as we know them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s alleged remarks On Thursday evening , the Atlantic ’ s editor-in-chief , Jeffrey Goldberg , published his story titled “ Trump : Americans Who Died in War Are ‘ Losers ’ and ‘ Suckers ’ ” — and its content was impossible for many to ignore .
The most important tidbits come in the second paragraph where Goldberg details why , during a 2018 visit to France to commemorate the end of World War I alongside other leaders , Trump didn ’ t want to travel to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Just take a moment to let that sink in .
It ’ s the head of a top US magazine reporting that the American president chose not to honor US war dead because of vanity and because he feels anyone who died in combat — even during an important fight for Marines during World War I — is a “ loser ” or “ sucker.
” That alone is a stunning development that could be very damaging to Trump , although partisanship appears very strong in 2020 .
But two items deserve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Atlantic ’ s sources for those scenes are “ four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day.
” It ’ s unclear from that attribution whether they actually heard Trump say those comments directly , or if they heard about his remarks from someone who did .
That lack of specificity may be to protect the sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity .
After all , if Goldberg wrote “ according to four people to whom Trump made those remarks , ” then it ’ d be pretty easy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Plus , without not-for-attribution reporting , some misdeeds or scandals wouldn ’ t come to light for fear of retribution .
Still , not knowing exactly who heard what — with none of the sources on the record — muddies the picture .
Second , and more importantly , there ’ s evidence to suggest Trump ’ s decision not to travel to the cemetery had nothing to do with his hair .
Documents obtained by BuzzFeed News ’ s Jason Leopold via the Freedom of Information Act seem to show the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ride to the cemetery due to the bad weather .
An email obtained by the Washington Examiner on Thursday night , relayed to the outlet by an unnamed White House official with the sender ’ s and receiver ’ s names redacted , appeared to confirm a “ BAD [ weather ] call ” had been made .
Other accounts don ’ t place the blame on Trump .
The New York Times reported on Thursday that Zachary Fuentes , a deputy White House chief of staff at the time , was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ travel by helicopter and assured the president it was okay to miss the event .
And former National Security Adviser John Bolton wrote in his deeply unflattering-to-Trump book that the president didn ’ t go to the cemetery solely because of poor conditions .
Bolton is referring to the fact that German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron went to the cemetery despite the weather , who were joined by then-Chief of Staff John Kelly after he was driven to the site .
However , the president did give a speech @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day during a ceremony hosted by the American Battle Monuments Commission .
The canceled trip isn ’ t the only scene the Atlantic reported on .
Here ’ s a quick list with the main revelations : • During that same trip , Trump asked his staff “ Who were the good guys in this war ?
” — that is , World War I — and why the US would intervene to help allies during the fight .
• Per three unnamed sources “ with direct knowledge , ” Trump didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s funeral ( to which the president wasn ’ t invited ) .
“ We ’ re not going to support that loser ’ s funeral , ” Trump told aides , and then got upset when he saw flags at half-mast : “ What the fuck are we doing that for ?
Guy was a fucking loser.
” • Three unnamed sources “ with direct knowledge ” also confirm that Trump — on at least two occasions — referred to former President George H.W .
Bush as a “ loser ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pilot in Japan during World War II .
The McCain part has an on-the-record defender .
Miles Taylor , who served as chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security from 2017 to 2019 , tweeted Friday morning that Trump ’ s staff told him the president was angry about the lowered flags .
( Taylor has endorsed Biden . )
What the Atlantic reported is jarring and merits pause .
But it ’ d be fair to greet the Atlantic story with a bit of skepticism , especially since none of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the record .
That ’ s where the corroborating reporting from other trustworthy outlets comes into play .
Three other outlets confirm much of the Atlantic ’ s reporting Hours after the Atlantic story broke , the Associated Press had two unnamed sources — a senior Defense Department official and senior Marine Corps officer — confirm the report .
Per the AP , Trump decided not to visit the cemetery in France after receiving his daily briefing on November 10 , 2018 — the day of the planned trip .
And while members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Secret Service told Trump he could still drive to the site , Trump said no because the cemetery was “ filled with losers.
” That ’ s important , as the AP ’ s reporting backs what the Atlantic revealed : Trump , during the morning of the scheduled visit , decided not to visit the war memorial and cemetery solely because he didn ’ t respect who was buried there .
The Washington Post broadly confirmed Trump ’ s feelings on US war dead .
On Thursday night , the paper had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Trump “ frequently made disparaging comments about veterans and soldiers missing in action , referring to them at times as ‘ losers.
’ ” The Post ’ s story then added some additional context : Trump ’ s animosity toward McCain is well known .
In 2015 , Trump derided McCain , who spent five years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam , saying , “ I like people who weren ’ t captured.
” That ’ s something he said live , on the record , on video — not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ source .
The New York Times on Friday morning also published a story that bolsters the reports that , in private , Trump blasts military service .
The Times , like others , based their reporting on unnamed “ people familiar ” or “ those familiar.
” But it does track closely with what the Atlantic , the AP , and Washington Post all revealed .
Altogether , it ’ s a bad look for Trump .
Multiple trustworthy outlets , citing unknown people familiar with his comments , report that he ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military and those who serve in uniform .
The president ’ s saving grace , for the moment , is that no one has come forward to speak on the record about those comments — and those who are speaking on the record support his side .
Trump and his allies vehemently dispute these reports Trump has taken every opportunity he ’ s had so far to push back on all the reports about his comments .
“ I would be willing to swear on anything that I never said that about our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Thursday .
“ There is nobody that respects them more .
So , I just think it ’ s a horrible , horrible thing.
” And , of course , he tweeted a staunch denial to his millions of followers for good measure .
There are many reasons to be skeptical of Trump here .
He simply lies all the time , and he has often denied reports that later turn out to be true .
Plus , there ’ s already a falsehood in his Twitter denial : Trump has openly called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ despite his saying he “ never ” had — so it ’ s possible he continued to do so even after the senator ’ s death .
But Trump has a lot of backup from aides who were with him during that France visit .
One of the first was Jordan Karem , formerly Trump ’ s body man and personal aide .
He tweeted on Thursday night that he was next to Trump “ the whole day !
” and that “ The President was greatly disappointed when told we couldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sarah Sanders , the former White House press secretary , called the Atlantic ’ s story “ total BS.
” “ I was actually there and one of the people part of the discussion - this never happened , ” she tweeted on Thursday night .
Retired Army Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg , Vice President Mike Pence ’ s national security adviser , also chimed in to deny the Atlantic ’ s reporting : “ The Atlantic story is completely false .
Absolutely lacks merit.
” Others , including current White House spokesperson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — the latter of whom was with Trump in France two years ago — pushed back on all the reporting .
That ’ s a lot of people , many at the scene of reported events , offering emphatic , unequivocal , on-record denials .
That definitely carries weight , especially since none of the reports featured anyone on the record about the president ’ s comments .
But again , the Trump administration has been less than truthful on multiple occasions — believe me , I know — so it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and his allies are saying .
It ’ s also worth noting that none of the president ’ s supporters specifically say Trump never called war dead “ losers ” or “ suckers ” or that he didn ’ t berate McCain in private .
The denials are more general , stating that none of what reported happened .
Simply put , the denials are less specific than the reporting .
What would help clear this up — right now — is if any of the sources who spoke to the outlets or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comments came forward to state on the record what they know .
As of this moment , it ’ s the word of a lot of trustworthy reporters relaying what unnamed people are saying against the word of untrustworthy people being openly clear about where they stand .
The sources speaking publicly surely wouldn ’ t end the controversy — there will always be people who back the president no matter what — but their public comments would shed light on one of the most consequential stories of the Trump era .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , especially ahead of an election .
Help keep Vox free for all Millions turn to Vox each month to understand what ’ s happening in the news , from the coronavirus crisis to a racial reckoning to what is , quite possibly , the most consequential presidential election of our lifetimes .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
But our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ market recovers , your support will be a critical part of sustaining our resource-intensive work , and helping everyone make sense of an increasingly chaotic world .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

Four reputable news outlets, all citing anonymous sources, report President Donald Trump disparaged US troops, veterans, and missing service members, with several outlets reporting he has called military members “losers.” Yet the president, along with current and former staff on the record, continues to dispute those stories.
The reporting is explosive. The denials are emphatic. And the consequences are potentially enormous.
Trump has built a lot of his political stock on being seen as a big military booster, often referencing his administration’s large defense budgets and push for military parades as evidence. But the stories — first in the Atlantic, followed by the Associated Press, Washington Post, and New York Times — could further damage his faltering support among service members and those who care about the armed services just ahead of the November election.
The Atlantic reports that during a trip to France two years ago, Trump didn’t want to visit a cemetery where American military service members were buried, during the commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the end of World War I.
His reasons? Among them, the bad weather might mess up his hair. He also felt the cemetery was, in his estimation, “filled with losers,” and that the nearly 2,000 Marines buried there were “suckers” for getting killed in a storied World War I battle.
The Atlantic story also details other disturbing incidents: that Trump railed against lowering American flags after Sen. John McCain’s death because McCain “was a fucking loser,” and that during a Memorial Day visit in 2017 to the grave of then-Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly’s son, who was killed in Afghanistan in 2010, Trump asked why anyone would volunteer to serve in the military. “I don’t get it. What was in it for them?” he asked the fallen Marine’s father.
The reports have the potential to fuel a major line of attack by former Vice President Joe Biden and Democrats for weeks to come. On Friday afternoon, the Biden campaign used the quotes from the Atlantic’s story in an ad against the president.
Mr. President, if you don’t respect our troops, you can’t lead them. pic.twitter.com/hcX9hGgdm5 — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) September 4, 2020
It’s therefore, unquestionably, in Trump’s political interest to deny the reports as strongly as he has.
“If they really exist, if people really exist that would have said that, they’re lowlifes and they’re liars,” Trump told reporters late on Thursday night about the Atlantic story. “And I would be willing to swear on anything that I never said that about our fallen heroes. There is nobody that respects them more,” adding, “What animal would say such a thing?”
Trump has received public support from many past and current officials who were with him in France, adding credibility to his easily dismissed denial.
I was with POTUS in France, with Sarah, and have been at his side throughout it all. Complete lies by “anonymous sources” that were “dropped” just as he begins to campaign (and surge). A disgraceful attempt to smear POTUS, 60 days before the Presidential Election! Disgusting!! https://t.co/mQfCNUlyZm — Dan Scavino (@DanScavino) September 4, 2020
This could turn out to be a big moment in the presidential race, in Trump’s presidency, and perhaps for his legacy as commander in chief. It’s worth it, then, to spend some time parsing through what, exactly, the reporting says, what the specific denials are, and how they match with the facts as we know them.
What the Atlantic reported about Trump’s alleged remarks
On Thursday evening, the Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, published his story titled “Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’” — and its contents were impossible for many to ignore.
The most important tidbits come in the second paragraph, where Goldberg details why, during a 2018 visit to France to commemorate the end of World War I alongside other leaders, Trump didn’t want to travel to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris where US troops are buried:
Trump rejected the idea of the visit because he feared his hair would become disheveled in the rain, and because he did not believe it important to honor American war dead, according to four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day. In a conversation with senior staff members on the morning of the scheduled visit, Trump said, “Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.” In a separate conversation on the same trip, Trump referred to the more than 1,800 marines who lost their lives at Belleau Wood as “suckers” for getting killed.
Just take a moment to let that sink in. It’s the head of a top US magazine reporting that the American president chose not to honor US war dead because of vanity and because he feels anyone who died in combat — even during an important fight for Marines during World War I — is a “loser” or “sucker.” That alone is a stunning development that could be very damaging to Trump, although partisanship appears very strong in 2020.
But two items deserve further mention here.
First, the Atlantic’s sources for those scenes are “four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day.” It’s unclear from that attribution whether they actually heard Trump say those comments directly, or if they heard about his remarks from someone who did.
That lack of specificity may be to protect the sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity. After all, if Goldberg wrote “according to four people to whom Trump made those remarks,” then it’d be pretty easy for the administration to identify those people. Plus, without not-for-attribution reporting, some misdeeds or scandals wouldn’t come to light for fear of retribution. Still, not knowing exactly who heard what — with none of the sources on the record — muddies the picture.
Second, and more importantly, there’s evidence to suggest Trump’s decision not to travel to the cemetery had nothing to do with his hair.
Documents obtained by BuzzFeed News’s Jason Leopold via the Freedom of Information Act seem to show the US Navy canceled Trump’s helicopter ride to the cemetery due to the bad weather. An email obtained by the Washington Examiner on Thursday night, relayed to the outlet by an unnamed White House official with the sender’s and receiver’s names redacted, appeared to confirm a “BAD [weather] call” had been made.
Regarding the lede of this story: I obtained documents from the Navy via #FOIA about Trump's 2018 trip to Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris and the documents say his transport was canceled by the Navy due to rain. https://t.co/oNWsvAPy1z pic.twitter.com/keFtW7QC8b — Jason Leopold (@JasonLeopold) September 4, 2020
Other accounts don’t place the blame on Trump. The New York Times reported on Thursday that Zachary Fuentes, a deputy White House chief of staff at the time, was the one who decided Trump shouldn’t travel by helicopter and assured the president it was okay to miss the event. And former National Security Adviser John Bolton wrote in his deeply unflattering-to-Trump book that the president didn’t go to the cemetery solely because of poor conditions:
Marine One’s crew was saying that bad visibility could make it imprudent to chopper to the cemetery. The ceiling was not too low for Marines to fly in combat, but flying POTUS was obviously something very different. If a motorcade were necessary, it could take between ninety and a hundred and twenty minutes each way, along roads that were not exactly freeways, posing an unacceptable risk that we could not get the President out of France quickly enough in case of an emergency. It was a straightforward decision to cancel the visit ... The press turned canceling the cemetery visit into a story that Trump was afraid of the rain and took glee in pointing out that other world leaders traveled around during the day. Of course, none of them were the President of the United States, but the press didn’t understand that rules for US Presidents are different from the rules for 190 other leaders who don’t command the world’s greatest military forces.
Bolton is referring to the fact that German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron went to the cemetery despite the weather, and were joined by then-Chief of Staff John Kelly after he was driven to the site. However, the president did give a speech in Suresnes, France, the next day during a ceremony hosted by the American Battle Monuments Commission.
The canceled trip isn’t the only scene the Atlantic reported on. Here’s a quick list with the main revelations:
During that same trip, Trump asked his staff, “Who were the good guys in this war?” — that is, World War I — and why the US would intervene to help allies during the fight.
Per three unnamed sources “with direct knowledge,” Trump didn’t want his administration to support McCain’s funeral (to which the president wasn’t invited). “We’re not going to support that loser’s funeral,” Trump told aides, and then got upset when he saw flags at half-mast: “What the fuck are we doing that for? Guy was a fucking loser.”
Three unnamed sources “with direct knowledge” also confirm that Trump — on at least two occasions — referred to former President George H.W. Bush as a “loser” for getting shot down as a Navy pilot in Japan during World War II.
The McCain part has an on-the-record defender. Miles Taylor, who served as chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security from 2017 to 2019, tweeted Friday morning that Trump’s staff told him the president was angry about the lowered flags. (Taylor has endorsed Biden.)
Mr. President, this is not true. You were angry that DHS notified federal buildings to lower the flags for Sen. McCain. I would know because your staff called and told me. https://t.co/C28fqZ4Whu — Miles Taylor (@MilesTaylorUSA) September 4, 2020
What the Atlantic reported is jarring and merits pause. But it’d be fair to greet the Atlantic story with a bit of skepticism, especially since none of what was reported came from sources on the record.
That’s where the corroborating reporting from other trustworthy outlets comes into play.
Three other outlets confirm much of the Atlantic’s reporting
Hours after the Atlantic story broke, the Associated Press had two unnamed sources — a senior Defense Department official and senior Marine Corps officer — confirm the report. Per the AP, Trump decided not to visit the cemetery in France after receiving his daily briefing on November 10, 2018, the day of the planned trip. And while members of the National Security Council and the Secret Service told Trump he could still drive to the site, Trump said no because the cemetery was “filled with losers.”
That’s important, as the AP’s reporting backs what the Atlantic revealed: Trump, during the morning of the scheduled visit, decided not to visit the war memorial and cemetery solely because he didn’t respect who was buried there.
The Washington Post broadly confirmed Trump’s feelings on US war dead. On Thursday night, the paper had an unnamed former senior administration official confirm that Trump “frequently made disparaging comments about veterans and soldiers missing in action, referring to them at times as ‘losers.’”
The Post’s story then added some context:
In one account, the president told senior advisers that he didn’t understand why the U.S. government placed such value on finding soldiers missing in action because they had performed poorly and gotten caught and deserved what they got, according to a person familiar with the discussion. Trump believed people who served in the Vietnam War must be “losers” because they hadn’t gotten out of it, according to a person familiar with the comments. Trump also complained bitterly to then-Chief of Staff John F. Kelly that he didn’t understand why Kelly and others in the military treated McCain, who had been imprisoned and tortured during the Vietnam War, with such reverence. “Isn’t he kind of a loser?” Trump asked, according to the person familiar with Trump’s comments.
Trump’s animosity toward McCain is well known. In 2015, Trump derided McCain, who spent five years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, saying, “I like people who weren’t captured.” That’s something he said live, on the record, on video — not in private or disclosed by an anonymous source.
The New York Times on Friday morning also published a story that bolsters the reports that, in private, Trump blasts military service.
People familiar with Mr. Trump’s comments say he has long scorned those who served in Vietnam as being too dumb to have gotten out of it, as he did through a medical diagnosis of bone spurs in his heels. At other times, according to those familiar with the remarks, Mr. Trump would marvel at people choosing military service over making money.
The Times, like others, based its reporting on unnamed “people familiar” or “those familiar.” But it does track closely with what the Atlantic, the AP, and Washington Post all revealed.
Altogether, it’s a bad look for Trump. Multiple trustworthy outlets, citing unknown people familiar with his comments, report that he’s said some disturbing things about the military and those who serve in uniform. The president’s saving grace, for the moment, is that no one has come forward to speak on the record about those comments — and those who are speaking on the record largely support his side.
Trump and his allies vehemently dispute these reports
Trump has taken every opportunity he’s had so far to push back on all the reports about his comments.
“I would be willing to swear on anything that I never said that about our fallen heroes,” he said on Thursday. “There is nobody that respects them more. So, I just think it’s a horrible, horrible thing.”
And, of course, he tweeted a staunch denial to his millions of followers for good measure.
..Country, had to be approved by me, as President, & I did so without hesitation or complaint. Quite the contrary, I felt it was well deserved. I even sent Air Force One to bring his body, in casket, from Arizona to Washington. It was my honor to do so. Also, I never called.. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 4, 2020
....John a loser and swear on whatever, or whoever, I was asked to swear on, that I never called our great fallen soldiers anything other than HEROES. This is more made up Fake News given by disgusting & jealous failures in a disgraceful attempt to influence the 2020 Election! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 4, 2020
There are many reasons to be skeptical of Trump here. He simply lies all the time, and he has often denied reports that later turn out to be true. Plus, there’s already a falsehood in his Twitter denial: Trump has openly called McCain a “loser” before — despite his saying he “never” had — so it’s possible he continued to do so even after the senator’s death.
But Trump has a lot of backup from aides who were with him during that France visit.
One of the first was Jordan Karem, formerly Trump’s body man and personal aide. He tweeted on Thursday night that he was next to Trump “the whole day!” and that “The President was greatly disappointed when told we couldn’t fly” to the cemetery.
Again, this is 100% false. I was next to @POTUS the whole day! The President was greatly disappointed when told we couldn’t fly there. He was incredibly eager to honor our Fallen Heroes. https://t.co/8YZlWS83I3 — Jordan Karem (@JordanKarem1) September 4, 2020
Sarah Sanders, the former White House press secretary, called the Atlantic’s story “total BS.”
“I was actually there and one of the people part of the discussion - this never happened,” she tweeted on Thursday night.
The Atlantic story on @realDonaldTrump is total BS. I was actually there and one of the people part of the discussion - this never happened. I have sat in the room when our President called family members after their sons were killed in action and it was heart-wrenching... — Sarah Huckabee Sanders (@SarahHuckabee) September 4, 2020
Retired Army Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, Vice President Mike Pence’s national security adviser, also chimed in to deny the Atlantic’s reporting: “The Atlantic story is completely false. Absolutely lacks merit.”
The Atlantic story is completely false. Absolutely lacks merit. I’ve been by the President’s side. He has always shown the highest respect to our active duty troops and veterans with utmost respect paid to those who have given the ultimate sacrifice and those wounded in battle. — Keith Kellogg (@generalkellogg) September 3, 2020
Others, including current White House spokesperson Alyssa Farah and communications adviser Dan Scavino — the latter of whom was with Trump in France two years ago — pushed back on all the reporting.
That’s a lot of people, many at the scene of reported events, offering emphatic, unequivocal, on-record denials. That definitely carries weight, especially since none of the reports featured anyone speaking on the record about the president’s comments.
But again, the Trump administration has been less than truthful on multiple occasions — believe me, I know — so it’s completely fair not to believe what Trump and his allies are saying. It’s also worth noting that none of the president’s supporters specifically say Trump never called war dead “losers” or “suckers” or that he didn’t berate McCain in private. The denials are more general, stating that none of what reported happened.
Simply put, the denials are less specific than the reporting.
What would help clear this up — right now — is if any of the sources who spoke to the outlets or anyone else who heard Trump’s comments came forward to state on the record what they know. As of this moment, it’s the word of a lot of trustworthy reporters relaying what unnamed people are saying against the word of untrustworthy people being openly clear about where they stand.
The sources speaking publicly surely wouldn’t end the controversy — there will always be people who back the president no matter what — but their public comments would shed light on one of the most consequential stories of the Trump era. The truth about all this is vital information, especially ahead of an election.