Max Fisher du magazine Vox utilise 4 fois le mot treason dans son article sur Hersh,
mais c'est pour démonter les thèses du susdit : Si Hersh avait raison, cela voudrait dire qu'il y a eu Trahison ... et c'est donc impossible ...
the highest act of treason in modern American history
... nor to interrogating what certainly sounds like an act of treason ...
Yet Hersh claims, with no evidence, that Dempsey was so opposed to arming Syrian rebels that he would commit an apparent act of treason to subvert those plans
We are required to believe that the senior-most leaders of our military one day in 2013 decided to completely transform how they behave and transgress every norm they have in a mass act of treason, despite never having done so before, and then promptly went back to normal this September when Dempsey retired
Autre argument de Fisher, le témoignage de Hersh s'appuie sur une seule personne, Hersh lui répond :
j'ai testé à plusieurs occasions cette source qui doit rester anonyme sous peine d'être poursuivie
It’s usually anonymous sources you get criticized for, and that’s always been traditionally, although any day in The New York Times or The Washington Post they’re full of anonymous sources. That’s an easy way out. I wish I could tell you that I haven’t been relying on this particular person since 9/11, but I have been. Many of the stories that I wrote for The New Yorker about what was going on inside Iran, there was no bombs inside of Iraq, part of those early stories I was writing—All came from one particularly well-informed person, who for a lot of reasons I can’t make public. One of them is the government would prosecute him.