>>Begin story excerpt
>>'Somebody should run against McCain,' who has been, in my opinion, not so hot. And I supported him for president! I raised a million dollars for him. That's a lot of >>money! I supported him. He lost. He let us down. But he lost. So I never liked him much after that, because I don't like losers."

That was in 2015, clearly referring to a losing presidential race. Sheesh, he says so 4 times: "He lost. He let us down. But he lost. So I never liked him much after that, because I don't like losers."

In 2020: The Atlantic:
"Trump remained fixated on McCain, one of the few prominent Republicans to continue criticizing him after he won the nomination. When McCain died, in August 2018, Trump told his senior staff, according to three sources with direct knowledge of this event, ‘We’re not going to support that loser’s funeral,’ and he became furious, according to witnesses, when he saw flags lowered to half-staff. ‘What the f--- are we doing that for? Guy was a f---ing loser,’ the president told aides."

Trump's response to Atlantic allegation is along the lines of "I never called him a loser!"

You and the MSM seem to focus on the word "never" to pretend he's denying the 2015 accusation that McCain lost an election, rather than responding "I never said that!" to the much more vicious 2020 Atlantic narrative.

Your argument seems to be that if Trump scolded McCain for losing the presidential election in 2015, that proves he also spoke ill of the dead in 2018.

Really?

It's a simple fact that Trump had total say over flag lowering and use of Airforce 1. The same people who insist he refuses advice especially when riled, now insist he was persuaded wrt McCain despite being publicly banned from attending the funeral. So I'll throw a question back at you:

How would you expect Trump to respond when banned from attending McCain's funeral so that it could be conducted "with dignity?"

>>Regarding Jeffrey Goldberg:
>>Check him out:
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Goldberg
>>His journalist creds are impeccable.
>>Again, which is more likely?

Alternatively, which is more likely if all the official documentation and every person allegedly in the room when things are supposed to have happened, denies Goldberg's version?