The more Trump lashes out with denials, the more he underscores the truth of the the Atlantic article’s reporting. What a sick swamp monster this boorish fraud is.
Let's consider the lame retort of those who want to discount the reporting because of "unnamed sources". Hypothetical situation will demonstrate: You know a person A who has been honest with you in the past and whose accounts of things he's seen but you haven't always turn out to be accurate when you look into them. He tells you person B has been insulting your dad, a war veteran, in distasteful terms. Person C, whom you also trust based on past experience, also reports similar comments made to him by person B, further corroborating the account of person A. Person A and C tell you they don't want this being attributed to them because they know the wrath of person B in the neighborhood. Do you believe the reports?
That's virtually the same as what happens when a legitimate journalist seeks out information from sources he has found reliable in the past, sources that because of their sensitive positions in the government are reluctant to go on the record and end up the way upright whistleblowers have in the age of Trump. To call these reports a hoax or fake news is a cheap ploy to discredit what people don't like hearing. It would be the same with a criminal case built on "circumstantial evidence" that is compelling and ultimately leaves no "reasonable doubt" as to the guilt of the accused.
In other words, a story based on numerous consistent reports from unnamed but reliable sources is as good or better than a single attributed quote from someone who claims to have knowledge of a person's conduct and statements. Further, the reports are consistent with past Trump comments and conduct. So get real. The story is more than credible. It's Trump's denials that are the fake news.