Trump 27: Happy Holidays Orange Menace

[bashfulpixie]

Can we please have Obama back now?  The dichotomy between him and Trump is staggering

[apple1]

Yes! Oh for the days when the worst faux pas the President made was to - gasp - wear a tan suit.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/remember-when-all-we-cared-about-was-president-obamas-tan-suit_us_59a56bdae4b0446b3b866ff9

[AmazonGrace]

 

[AnywhereButHere]

4 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

...

 

Assuming Pence wants existing programs replaced with prayer and slutshaming. 

If he's that concerned about the financial well being of the Post Office he should've done his part and sent the letter by certified mail rather than FedEx...

[GreyhoundFan]

An excellent op-ed: "One nation, divided under Trump, with perilous consequences"

Spoiler

Looking for perspective on this past year and the one ahead, I turned to several of the nation’s most experienced former military commanders. One of them put it bluntly: The United States is so divided politically at home that we are becoming vulnerable to our adversaries abroad.

Our country, these retired military leaders fear, is so polarized right now that it might be difficult to mobilize the nation for war, if that were necessary. The nation survives amid division and dysfunction now, when we’re more or less at peace. But if the United States faced a serious threat abroad, say from a nuclear-armed North Korea, these domestic fissures could be paralyzing.

The shrinking space for governance worries me at year-end. The problem begins at the top: President Trump is the most unpopular president in modern times. He’s less admired than his predecessor, Barack Obama. He misreads the nation: The more divisive Trump has become — the more he picks at the nation’s scabs — the less the public likes him, according to polls. Yet Trump persists, playing to his base, with harmful consequences for the country.

Trump brags about how well the stock market is doing. Meanwhile, he attacks the FBI, the NFL and other groups he thinks it will be advantageous to impugn. The nation’s wounds get redder and rawer. But the polls suggest that the public overall isn’t buying it. Trump’s numbers remain low, and Republicans keep losing key races, as in Virginia and Alabama.

Trump took office with a narrow margin of public approval, but it’s been going the other way since February, when disapproval of his performance rose above 50 percent. It has stayed there, hovering at roughly the current 56 percent disapproval rate since the summer, according to a composite of polls gathered by the website FiveThirtyEight. Just under 38 percent of the country approves of the president.

An ominous set of snapshots of the United States came in a study released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center. Pew found that partisan divisions are now much more important than religious or educational ones in driving political views. The gap between Republicans and Democrats on key issues has increased from 15 percentage points in 1994 to 36 points now.

Sharp partisan divisions extend even to issues where factual evidence should be crucial. Pew found that only 27 percent of Republicans who said they had “high” scientific knowledge believed that climate change was causing either rising sea levels or harm to wildlife, compared with 75 percent (rising sea levels) and 73 percent (harm to wildlife) of high-knowledge Democrats.

What worries me most is that, in Trump’s America, people seem increasingly doubtful that these divisions can be healed. A CBS News poll taken in June found that 55 percent of the country thought “people of different political views can come together.” By October, only 47 percent were optimistic, and 51 percent doubted that reconciliation was possible.

How does Trump’s divided America look to foreign eyes? A Pew study in the spring found that global confidence in the U.S. president had fallen from 64 percent at the end of Obama’s tenure to 22 percent at the start of Trump’s. Those expressing “no confidence” surged from 23 percent to 74 percent.

Foreign nations have bet on our country’s internal divisions before, but they’ve mostly been wrong. Abraham Lincoln’s persistence preserved the Union, even as some European nations thought the United States would splinter. Franklin Roosevelt’s fireside chats helped keep America together during the 1930s when some left-wing and right-wing agitators were urging violence, and fascism and communism abroad seemed the wave of the future.

This country’s vulnerability to manipulation was vividly described in a 1945 report by Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, which reviewed that nation’s covert-action campaign starting in 1940 to push the United States into war. I reported on this history of “British Security Coordination,” or BSC, as it was known, nearly 30 years ago. The spymasters’ cynical assessment has haunted me ever since:

“In planning its campaign, it was necessary for BSC to remember . . . the simple truth that the United States, a sovereign entity of comparatively recent birth, is inhabited by people of many conflicting races, interests and creeds. These people, though fully conscious of their wealth and power in the aggregate, are still unsure of themselves individually, still basically on the defensive and still striving, as yet unavailingly but very defiantly, after national unity.”

Trump is a defiant nationalist, and perhaps he hopes to be a unifier. But as this year ends, the numbers tell us that he has brought a level of division and disarray that should worry even his most passionate supporters.

 

[GrumpyGran]

3 hours ago, candygirl200413 said:

NYT has really pissed me off with their reporting, but this especially. They never ask any hard hitting questions to him and a lot of reporters feel that they're being "attacked" because hard hitting questions weren't ask. 

I agree with you about the questions but he still managed to make Dumpy look incredibly stupid.

[apple1]

21 minutes ago, GrumpyGran said:

I agree with you about the questions but he still managed to make Dumpy look incredibly stupid.

Vox has an article up about that NY Times piece. It's terrifying.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/12/29/16829806/trump-interview-new-york-times

 

[AmazonGrace]

He gets stuck so much, just repeats words over and over again and then he repeats them and you know how it is, he repeats words and believe me, virtually all Democrats say he repeats words so much. 

Spoiler

 

 

Edit: I missed coloring one different. 

[GrumpyGran]

13 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

He gets stuck so much, just repeats words over and over again and then he repeats them and you know how it is, he repeats words and believe me, virtually all Democrats say he repeats words so much. 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

And the bizarre analogies. The Electoral College is like a track star? WTF! His brain is like a chain-link fence. Shit gets stuck in it as it blows through his conscienceness.

[AmazonGrace]

 

[onekidanddone]

Even if there was collusion, it is not a crime? So there is collusion is that what you are saying Donnie? Please do enlighten us how a crime is not a crime?

[Destiny]

I mean, fuck trump and all, but DID YOU GUYS SEE BUFFY IS BACK??????????????

[47of74]

39 minutes ago, GrumpyGran said:

And the bizarre analogies. The Electoral College is like a track star? WTF! His brain is like a chain-link fence. Shit gets stuck in it as it blows through his conscienceness.

Yeah and it still doesn't hit anything when ever it does blow through. 

3 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

An excellent op-ed: "One nation, divided under Trump, with perilous consequences"

  Hide contents

Looking for perspective on this past year and the one ahead, I turned to several of the nation’s most experienced former military commanders. One of them put it bluntly: The United States is so divided politically at home that we are becoming vulnerable to our adversaries abroad.

Our country, these retired military leaders fear, is so polarized right now that it might be difficult to mobilize the nation for war, if that were necessary. The nation survives amid division and dysfunction now, when we’re more or less at peace. But if the United States faced a serious threat abroad, say from a nuclear-armed North Korea, these domestic fissures could be paralyzing.

The shrinking space for governance worries me at year-end. The problem begins at the top: President Trump is the most unpopular president in modern times. He’s less admired than his predecessor, Barack Obama. He misreads the nation: The more divisive Trump has become — the more he picks at the nation’s scabs — the less the public likes him, according to polls. Yet Trump persists, playing to his base, with harmful consequences for the country.

Trump brags about how well the stock market is doing. Meanwhile, he attacks the FBI, the NFL and other groups he thinks it will be advantageous to impugn. The nation’s wounds get redder and rawer. But the polls suggest that the public overall isn’t buying it. Trump’s numbers remain low, and Republicans keep losing key races, as in Virginia and Alabama.

Trump took office with a narrow margin of public approval, but it’s been going the other way since February, when disapproval of his performance rose above 50 percent. It has stayed there, hovering at roughly the current 56 percent disapproval rate since the summer, according to a composite of polls gathered by the website FiveThirtyEight. Just under 38 percent of the country approves of the president.

An ominous set of snapshots of the United States came in a study released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center. Pew found that partisan divisions are now much more important than religious or educational ones in driving political views. The gap between Republicans and Democrats on key issues has increased from 15 percentage points in 1994 to 36 points now.

Sharp partisan divisions extend even to issues where factual evidence should be crucial. Pew found that only 27 percent of Republicans who said they had “high” scientific knowledge believed that climate change was causing either rising sea levels or harm to wildlife, compared with 75 percent (rising sea levels) and 73 percent (harm to wildlife) of high-knowledge Democrats.

What worries me most is that, in Trump’s America, people seem increasingly doubtful that these divisions can be healed. A CBS News poll taken in June found that 55 percent of the country thought “people of different political views can come together.” By October, only 47 percent were optimistic, and 51 percent doubted that reconciliation was possible.

How does Trump’s divided America look to foreign eyes? A Pew study in the spring found that global confidence in the U.S. president had fallen from 64 percent at the end of Obama’s tenure to 22 percent at the start of Trump’s. Those expressing “no confidence” surged from 23 percent to 74 percent.

Foreign nations have bet on our country’s internal divisions before, but they’ve mostly been wrong. Abraham Lincoln’s persistence preserved the Union, even as some European nations thought the United States would splinter. Franklin Roosevelt’s fireside chats helped keep America together during the 1930s when some left-wing and right-wing agitators were urging violence, and fascism and communism abroad seemed the wave of the future.

This country’s vulnerability to manipulation was vividly described in a 1945 report by Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, which reviewed that nation’s covert-action campaign starting in 1940 to push the United States into war. I reported on this history of “British Security Coordination,” or BSC, as it was known, nearly 30 years ago. The spymasters’ cynical assessment has haunted me ever since:

“In planning its campaign, it was necessary for BSC to remember . . . the simple truth that the United States, a sovereign entity of comparatively recent birth, is inhabited by people of many conflicting races, interests and creeds. These people, though fully conscious of their wealth and power in the aggregate, are still unsure of themselves individually, still basically on the defensive and still striving, as yet unavailingly but very defiantly, after national unity.”

Trump is a defiant nationalist, and perhaps he hopes to be a unifier. But as this year ends, the numbers tell us that he has brought a level of division and disarray that should worry even his most passionate supporters.

 

What, branch trumpvidians, worry?  Fuck Face's supporters are so stupid that they don't know rabbit shit from rice krispies. 

[47of74]

China called fuck face out on his horseshit

Quote

China has rejected President Donald Trump's accusations that it was illegally supplying oil to North Korea, criticizing Friday the Republican leader's evidence, and his demeanor.

"In the photos, North Korean boats appeared to be linking up with Chinese vessels. These 'Chinese vessels' are not oil tankers and are not large-tonnage. U.S. and South Korean media believe these photos prove China violated U.N. Security Council resolutions to transfer oil to North Korea, but even in the reports it is unclear where the vessels come from or whom they belong to," The Global Times wrote Friday.

"Trump's tweet is one of the strongest responses from the U.S. and South Korea. He concluded that China was caught before the truth was clarified and commented in a strong tone. This is not how a U.S. president should behave," it continued.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"Trump’s ‘No collusion!’ cry is getting increasingly desperate"

Spoiler

You know how if you repeat a word over and over, eventually it starts to sound strange to your ear, like merely a random collection of sounds? That is apparently what President Trump is doing with the word “collusion.” Say it often enough, and perhaps it will lose all meaning.

That’s just one of the things that comes through in this bizarre and disturbing interview Trump conducted at the Trump International Golf Club with Michael Schmidt of the New York Times, apparently on the spur of the moment and with no aides there to protect him. As we’ve almost come to expect by now, when Trump speaks at length without a script, he skitters back and forth along the line that divides the comical from the terrifying, telling one obvious lie after another, making endless digressions that devolve into incomprehensible word salad, and generally sounding like someone with only the most tenuous grip on his faculties.

But there’s one thing he’s very clear about wanting everyone to know: He and his campaign did not collude with Russia during 2016. In fact, without being prompted he returned again and again to the topic, repeating the word “collusion” no fewer than 23 times:

“Frankly there is absolutely no collusion…Virtually every Democrat has said there is no collusion. There is no collusion…I think it’s been proven that there is no collusion…I can only tell you that there is absolutely no collusion…There’s been no collusion…There was no collusion. None whatsoever…everybody knows that there was no collusion. I saw Dianne Feinstein the other day on television saying there is no collusion [note: not true]…The Republicans, in terms of the House committees, they come out, they’re so angry because there is no collusion…there was collusion on behalf of the Democrats. There was collusion with the Russians and the Democrats. A lot of collusion…There was tremendous collusion on behalf of the Russians and the Democrats. There was no collusion with respect to my campaign…But there is tremendous collusion with the Russians and with the Democratic Party…I watched Alan Dershowitz the other day, he said, No. 1, there is no collusion, No. 2, collusion is not a crime, but even if it was a crime, there was no collusion. And he said that very strongly. He said there was no collusion…There is no collusion, and even if there was, it’s not a crime. But there’s no collusion…when you look at all of the tremendous, ah, real problems [Democrats] had, not made-up problems like Russian collusion.“

It should go without saying that no Democrats have said there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. Some have said that we don’t yet have definitive proof that there was a conspiracy at work, but none have proclaimed Trump exonerated in the way he’s claiming. And Trump’s claim that Democrats were the ones colluding with Russia is simply nonsensical, likely plucked from an attempt Republicans and the conservative media made a couple of months ago to execute an “I know you are but what am I” strategy on this scandal that was so ludicrous it isn’t worth revisiting in any detail (you can read about it here if you care).

This is one of those moments when you are reminded that the president has the majestic resources of the U.S. government at his disposal, yet prefers to learn the truth of what’s going on in the world from the trio manning the couch on “Fox & Friends.” So perhaps it’s unsurprising that he thinks he can convince America of his innocence by merely repeating the words “There was no collusion” again and again. What is blindingly obvious is that Trump is very, very concerned that people might be thinking he and his campaign colluded with the Russians.

That doesn’t necessarily mean they did and he’s desperate to cover it up; it could also mean that he regards such collusion as a terrible betrayal of the country he loves and wants to make sure no one falsely concludes he would countenance such a thing. But we already know that officials on his campaign (and in his own family) had repeated contacts with representatives of the Russian government and others connected with the Russian government. That’s not in question. We also know that the topic of many of those conversations was whether Russia would provide the Trump campaign with damaging information on Hillary Clinton (see here, here and here). The most generous interpretation of those contacts is that people on both sides were interested in colluding but the operation never got off the ground.

There are a hundred questions that need to be answered before this is all over (to take just one: If Michael Flynn’s conversations with the Russian ambassador were routine and appropriate, why did he feel the need to lie to the FBI about them?). What we don’t know is where Trump himself fits into this picture. So far, the only point at which we know of his involvement is that the president personally dictated the ham-handedly misleading statement Donald Trump Jr. released after the news broke of that fateful meeting that he, Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort had with a group of Russians.

Did every other contact the campaign had with Russia happen without Trump’s knowledge? It might have. He may be so insistent that “There was no collusion” because he himself is utterly innocent. It’s also possible that he sees the collusion question as his area of greatest political and legal danger, which it may or may not be; at the moment there’s more evidence that he committed obstruction of justice, which is a separate question.

But there’s something important to keep in mind when we’re interpreting Trump’s words and actions: For someone who fancies himself a genius, he is almost completely lacking in any real guile. He doesn’t play eight-dimensional chess. His lies are obvious and straightforward, clearly false at the moment they leave his lips. His strategies require no deconstruction or disentanglement to understand. He’s almost always doing exactly what he appears to be doing.

So if he sounds like a pathetic perp on “Law & Order,” crying “I don’t know the guy! I wasn’t there! I didn’t do it!,” and it looks as though he thinks if he just says he’s innocent over and over then you’ll believe him, that’s probably what’s happening. But sooner or later, we’re going to find out the truth.

I had a good laugh thinking of the TT as a "pathetic perp".

[47of74]

The Germans aren't very happy with the Orange Fornicate either. 

Quote

German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel offered a bleak view of international relations and Germany's place in the new world order at the Berlin Foreign Policy Forum on Tuesday. In his half-hour speech, Gabriel spoke of how the West, liberalism and institutions like the United Nations had failed in their stated missions.

"The US no longer sees the world as a global community, but as a fighting arena where everyone has to seek their own advantage," Gabriel said.

The Social Democrat argued that German foreign policy must be more daring, and not simply follow the line from Washington.

"Germany can no longer simply react to US policy but must establish its own position…even after Trump leaves the White House, relations with the US will never be the same."

It will take generations to repair the damage that fornicate face is doing to this world.  That's assuming we can even repair them. 

[GreyhoundFan]

"Time at Mar-a-Lago is a respite for Trump — and a headache for his staff"

Spoiler

PALM BEACH, Fla. — When President Trump sat down with a reporter for a wide-ranging, 30-minute interview at his private golf club here Thursday, not a single aide or adviser was present at the table — and not a single aide or adviser knew about it in advance.

The interview was enabled by Christopher Ruddy — a club member with a level of personal access to the president in Florida that rankles White House staff. He invited New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt as his personal guest to lunch at Trump International Golf Club, sat near Trump’s regular table and brought the reporter over to meet the president, who was still in his golf clothes.

As word trickled back to the White House, advisers worked to reach the president, with Trump’s personal aide interrupting at one point to hand him a cellphone with White House communicators director Hope Hicks on the line, who checked in on the interview from afar. 

But others were out of the loop even after The Times story posted online Thursday evening. One White House official, when asked about the president’s impromptu interview, was perplexed, wondering aloud, “What interview? Today?” Another frustrated aide called it “embarrassing.”

Mar-a-Lago — Trump’s manicured, gilded oceanfront retreat here — is the president’s “Winter White House,” the villa to which he escapes for rounds of golf and family time. But, to the chagrin of many aides, Mar-a-Lago is also the place where Trump is often his most unrestrained and unfettered, making it harder for his West Wing staff to control his daily media diet and personal contacts as they now try to do in Washington.

Inside the White House, aides filter what information gets to Trump and who meets with him, trying to prevent rash or uninformed decisions. They often monitor his call logs, with Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, who often listens in on calls, telling people to go through him when they want to speak to the president.

White House officials said they appreciate that time at Mar-a-Lago is a respite for Trump, a familiar and comfortable haven for him to recharge while surrounded by family and friends. The president often gets less riled up by the sorts of stray comments on cable news that, back in Washington, might prompt an angry tweet or rejoinder, one added. Mar-a-Lago is not necessarily a panacea for angry tweets — Trump has fired off a few agitated messages since arriving in Florida.

Mar-a-Lago also has its drawbacks, the aides said, particularly in the form of club members and guests who, they believe, try to take advantage of the president and exploit his relative freedom from the staff and regimens of the West Wing.

“At Mar-a-Lago, anyone who can get within eyesight changes the game,” said a former White House official, speaking anonymously to candidly discuss a sensitive subject, and referring to the club members and guests who sometimes try the influence the president on policy, share an opinion on his administration or simply say hello. “Everyone who is angling for something knows to be there.”

All presidents have worked to escape the constraining bubble of Washington. When former president Barack Obama, near the end of his presidency, occasionally slipped the gates of the White House, he would joke that “the bear is loose.” Yet by that metaphor, Mar-a-Lago has become a veritable ursine playground, with Trump starring in the role of chief grizzly — calling outside advisers and confidants, while playing both host and inquisitor to his wealthy members.

Mar-a-Lago, said Roger Stone, a former Trump campaign adviser and longtime friend of the president, “allows Trump to be Trump.”

“Nobody tells Donald Trump where he can and cannot go,” Stone said. “The president is able to get a lot of information that is normally blocked from getting to him . . . You don’t have the minders. There is no doubt that he makes more calls.”

Trump’s personal quarters are off-limits to most members — several friends said they have never been inside.

His regular routine is simple and predictable: He wakes up, watches television, tweets, makes phone calls, reads the papers and works. He often emerges for golf if the weather allows, before returning to the club, where he sometimes eats lunch or has meetings with White House staff. He then returns to his living quarters, before emerging again for dinner.

He used to stop by tables to chat or wander the patio, but has stopped that in recent months, members and friends say.

Instead, Trump now sets up “a virtual rope line,” said Ruddy — the chief executive of Newsmax, a conservative media company — where friends like he, Marvel chairman Ike Perlmutter and local restaurant owner Lee Lipton come to say hello. 

Trump, for instance, recently chatted with Blackstone CEO Steve Schwarzman for 30 minutes after dining with son-in-law Jared Kushner and daughter Ivanka Trump, according to people familiar with the meeting.

 Since becoming president, members’ access to Trump has tightened, said Shannon Donnelly, society editor of the Palm Beach Daily News. “It is one of the places where he can relax a little bit, but not anybody can just go up and talk to him at Mar-a-Lago,” she said, before adding, “Unless he sees you and motions for you to come over for him.”

And, Donnelly noted, on Christmas Eve Trump actually walked to the buffet and made his own plate, providing guests with yet another opportunity to mingle with the president. 

Trump often asks guests about foreign affairs or legislative accomplishments and solicits what they think of certain aides or how the White House is doing. Earlier this year, Trump probed members about the Paris climate accord and North Korea, one person familiar with his questions said. He has quizzed Mar-a-Lago guests, alternately, on the performance of former chief of staff Reince Priebus and former White House press secretary Sean Spicer, his news coverage, their opinions of Congress and his rally performances, according to several advisers.

“He used to ask guests about ‘The Apprentice,’ or Obamacare, or the Clintons or whatever the topic was,” Ruddy said. “He’s a feedback junkie. If you ever said, ‘I went to your hotel, I went to this golf course,’ he’d say, ‘How was the service? How was the food?’ He is very approachable.”

 This holiday trip, especially close to Christmas, Trump was minimally staffed and used his free time to talk to outside advisers and confidants, where he received stark warnings about how the 2018 political landscape could be challenging for Republicans and how he needs to improve the White House’s political operation.

Nearly any club member determined enough can eventually reach the president. After The Post emailed Howie Carr, a Boston Herald columnist and conservative talk radio host, Wednesday afternoon to ask about the president’s time at Mar-a-Lago, Carr happened to be dining at the club that evening and approached the president to ask if he had anything to share.

The president, Carr said in an email, specifically mentioned the Republican tax bill, the repeal of the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate and the opening of Alaska’s Arctic wilderness to oil and gas drilling. “Tell them I am relaxing and enjoying myself and I’m in very good spirits because I’ve just had the most successful first year any president has ever had in American history,” Carr said the president told him.

Asked by Carr if he wanted to say anything directly to The Post, Trump added: “Tell them to start reporting honestly. They’re very dishonest people. They have to start being truthful.”

Trump’s impromptu Thursday interview with the New York Times elicited a new round of public hand-wringing, including questions about the processes implemented by Kelly, who accepted his West Wing job promising to impose discipline and order on a White House that had been riven by chaos. 

 But the president himself had no such qualms. Trump was enthusiastic about the interview and liked that the New York Times was at his golf course, people briefed on the interview said. The president, they added, enjoyed the coverage afterward and noted that it dominated TV most of Friday.

Wow, are we supposed to be impressed that he hauled his carcass (emphasis on the ass part) to the buffet and made his own plate?

[AmazonGrace]

Everything just screams a man with some stage of dementia to me. 

Quote

One White House official, when asked about the president’s impromptu interview, was perplexed, wondering aloud, “What interview? Today?” Another frustrated aide called it “embarrassing.”

It's a sad day when the president of the USA can't be trusted to give an interview without being an embarrassment.

Quote

Inside the White House, aides filter what information gets to Trump and who meets with him, trying to prevent rash or uninformed decisions.

It's a sad day when the president of the USA can't be trusted to read a paper , talk with a person without a minder, and when he's expected to make stupid, impulsive decisions.

Quote

White House officials said they appreciate that time at Mar-a-Lago is a respite for Trump, a familiar and comfortable haven for him to recharge while surrounded by family and friends. The president often gets less riled up by the sorts of stray comments on cable news that, back in Washington, might prompt an angry tweet or rejoinder, one added.

Like a typical dementia patient, the president of the USA gets less agitated in familiar surroundings.
 

Quote

 

...club members and guests who, they believe, try to take advantage of the president and exploit his relative freedom from the staff and regimens of the West Wing.

“At Mar-a-Lago, anyone who can get within eyesight changes the game,”

 

It's a sad day when the president of the USA can be manipulated by anybody who manages to catch his eye.

Quote

He used to stop by tables to chat or wander the patio, but has stopped that in recent months, members and friends say.

The president of the USA has decreasing activity levels, he doesn't recognize most of these people anymore and he might get lost on the patio.

Quote

Trump was enthusiastic about the interview and liked that the New York Times was at his golf course, people briefed on the interview said. The president, they added, enjoyed the coverage afterward and noted that it dominated TV most of Friday.

The president of the USA didn't understand most of the coverage about his interview, he was just happy to hear his own name on TV.

The NYT found 10 lies in the interview. WAPO and Toronto Star more than double that. I guess it's a matter of deciding where one lie ends and another starts..

10 Falsehoods From Trump’s Interview With The Times

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/29/us/politics/fact-check-trump-interview.html

Most of it is the same old lies that he has been corrected on many many times.

Spoiler

 

By LINDA QIUDEC. 29, 2017

WASHINGTON — President Trump, in an impromptu interview on Thursday with The New York Times, rattled off at least 10 false or misleading claims about the Russia investigation, wars abroad, health care, immigration and trade. Here’s an assessment.

He inaccurately said the claims against Paul Manafort occurred “many years ago before I ever heard of him.”

The two men reportedly met in 2011. Paul Manafort joined the Trump campaign in March 2016, was promoted to campaign chairman and chief strategist that May and was ousted that August.

Mr. Manafort is accused of serving as an unregistered agent of Ukraine from at least 2006 to 2015, laundering payments from 2006 to 2016 and making false statements to investigators from Nov. 23, 2016, to Feb. 10, 2017.

He misrepresented what a senator has said about the Russia investigation.

According to Mr. Trump, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, appeared “on television saying there is no collusion” between his campaign and Russia in the 2016 election. Ms. Feinstein has said she has not yet seen evidence of collusion, not that the evidence shows no collusion.

“It’s an open question because there’s no proof yet that it’s happened, and I think that proof will likely come with Mr. Mueller’s investigation,” she said in an interview in October with CBS, referring to the special counsel overseeing the inquiry.

He falsely claimed the Democrats “made the Russian story up as a hoax, as a ruse, as an excuse for losing an election.”

The United States government sounded the alarms long before Mr. Trump was elected. Publicly, in October 2016, the Obama administration formally accused the Russian government of interfering in the election. Privately, at a Group of 20 meeting in September 2016 in China, President Barack Obama told President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia to “cut it out.” And John O. Brennan, the former C.I.A. director, said he also warned his Russian counterpart in a phone call that August.

He claimed to have “saved coal,” contrary to trends reported by the government.

The number of coal mining jobs fell to about 48,600 in September 2016 from almost 90,000 in January 2012. Under Mr. Trump, employment in the sector made modest gains until this September — when job numbers reached about 51,700 — but it has since declined.

Coal production, too, increased in the first quarter of 2017, but declined in the second quarter. The Energy Information Administration, in its latest assessment of the coal sector, estimated “lower exports and no growth in coal consumption” in 2018.

He overstated his influence on the special Senate election in Alabama.

Mr. Trump claimed that he brought Luther Strange, the Republican appointed to fill the Senate seat vacated by Jeff Sessions, now the attorney general, “up by 20 points” during the Republican primary race for the special Senate election in Alabama. But that assertion is not supported by the data.

Before Mr. Trump endorsed Mr. Strange for the August vote, Mr. Strange placed second behind Roy S. Moore by two and eight points in two polls, and led the field by two points in another. He was not in “fifth” among the candidates in the Republican primary race, as Mr. Trump said. During the subsequent runoff election in September, Mr. Strange trailed Mr. Moore by an average of 11 points in polls and eventually lost by 9.2 percentage points.

“We can concretely say that Donald Trump’s endorsement, and active campaigning for Sen. Strange, had absolutely no impact on the ballot,” Firehouse Strategies, a Republican polling firm, wrote after the runoff.

He gave a premature estimate of the cost of the wars in the Middle East.

The $7 trillion cost, “as of about a month ago,” that Mr. Trump cited appears to refer to an assessment from Brown University that tallies war appropriations, increases in the Pentagon’s war budget, veterans’ care, increases in spending at the Department of Homeland Security and interest payments. Researchers at Brown estimated in September that war spending had reached $4.8 trillion and could total $7.9 trillion by 2053.

He falsely claimed to have “essentially gutted and ended Obamacare.”

As part of the tax law, Republicans repealed the Affordable Care Act’s so-called individual mandate that required that most people have health insurance, but that does not amount to a full repeal of the current health care law.

The mandate is, indeed, a core component of the Affordable Care Act. But other vital parts of the current law — the expansion of Medicaid eligibility, rules stipulating insurance policies cover essential health benefits and new taxes to pay for the cost of subsidized coverage — remain intact.

With no evidence, he accused other countries of sending their “worst people” through the diversity visa lottery.

Mr. Trump correctly noted that the man accused of killing eight people in a terrorist attack in October in New York entered the United States from Uzbekistan through the diversity immigration visa program. But he was wrong to draw the sweeping conclusion that other countries use the program to expel the “bad, worse” members of their societies.

Foreign government do not select entrants, but rather millions of individuals enter the lottery of their own volition. A computer chooses winners at random and, before receiving a visa, those selected must undergo a screening process that bars criminals and the indigent.

Immigrants who have been admitted through the program have higher rates of employment and of finding work in professional or managerial occupations than most other immigrants.

He exaggerated the trade deficit with other countries.

The figures that Mr. Trump listed account only for the United States’ trade in goods and do not include trade in services. In 2016, the United States’ trade balance amounted to a $309 billion deficit with China (not $350 billion); a $63 billion deficit with Mexico (not $71 billion); and a $7.7 billion trade surplus with Canada (not a deficit of $17 billion).

In Mr. Trump’s telling, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada disputed the president’s estimate of a $17 billion deficit when they discussed the issue behind closed doors, but he excluded oil and lumber to claim a balance. The trade balance data does, in fact, include oil and lumber.

He exaggerated the number of followers he has on social media.

Mr. Trump, who began the year by falsely claiming the largest inaugural crowd ever, ended it by playing up the extent of his support on social media. As of Friday, Mr. Trump has 45.4 million followers on Twitter, 24.2 million on Facebook and 8.1 million on Instagram, for a total of 77.7 million, less than half of the 158 million he claimed. (The White House’s accounts on those same platforms would bring him up to 106 million.)

 

Quote

 

He gave a premature estimate of the cost of the wars in the Middle East.

The $7 trillion cost, “as of about a month ago,” that Mr. Trump cited appears to refer to an assessment from Brown University that tallies war appropriations, increases in the Pentagon’s war budget, veterans’ care, increases in spending at the Department of Homeland Security and interest payments. Researchers at Brown estimated in September that war spending had reached $4.8 trillion and could total $7.9 trillion by 2053.

 

The sad thing is I don't think this is a lie. The president of the USA watched a two minute clip of that report somewhere and was able to understand 20 % of what it said and forgot half of what he understood. This is the result. That or he doesn't know what year it is now.

Mike Schmidt who got the interview wrote this:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/29/insider/mike-schmidt-interview-donald-trump.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-2&action=click&contentCollection=Politics&region=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article
 

Spoiler

 

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — Shortly after 1 p.m. on Thursday, President Trump came off the 18th hole of his golf course here and walked into the club house’s Grill Room. Waiters scurried to bring menus and drinks to a large round table reserved for him as he stopped to shake hands and make small talk with members eating lunch.

The president, in black pants and a white golf shirt, sat down with his golf partners for the day, including his son Eric and the pro-golfer Jim Herman. He took off his white hat, “45” emblazoned in black on the side, ordered a salad and began talking politics to his golf partners.

Usually I cover national security in the Washington bureau, but I spent the past week in Florida covering the president’s Christmas vacation to give my colleagues on the White House beat the chance to take some time off. It’s a familiar assignment for me; I also covered Barack Obama’s vacations in Hawaii in 2014 and 2016.

Until Thursday, my time in Florida had been quiet. But that afternoon, I went to Mr. Trump’s golf club with his longtime confidant Christopher Ruddy, who had invited me for lunch. We were seated at a table next to the president and a few minutes into our meal, Mr. Ruddy, who runs the conservative website and television channel Newsmax, went over to say hello to Mr. Trump. The president appeared excited to see Mr. Ruddy, who often goes on cable television to defend him.

I stood behind Mr. Ruddy, who told the president that Mike Schmidt from The New York Times was with him. As I made eye contact with the president, he appeared confused about who I was and why I was there. I walked up, shook his hand and reminded him that I had interviewed him in July in the Oval Office along with two of my colleagues, Maggie Haberman and Peter Baker. He said he remembered me and, despite the fact that we’re “the failing New York Times,” he thought we had treated him fairly.

The president believes he is his best spokesman, and he immediately began touting the landmark tax legislation he signed into law last week. I was convinced that the longer I talked with him, the more comfortable he would be with me and the more likely he would be to allow me to interview him. So I got into a catcher’s squat next to his chair, conveying to him that I was listening intently but also forcing him to look down at me while he talked, which kept him from being distracted by the others at the table.

It’s been 20 years since I was a catcher in Little League, and a few minutes into our conversation my legs began to ache. But I knew I couldn’t stand up while I had the president one-on-one.

I began to think about what had happened a day earlier. On Wednesday, the president invited the press to a local fire department, where he shook hands with emergency medical workers. He said little of note, but I sensed from watching him that he was bored by vacation and wanted to engage with the news media.

With that in mind, I told him that I thought what he was saying was new and interesting and that I wanted to interview him about it. He said he liked the idea and promised that we would talk after he finished lunch. I went back to my table with Mr. Ruddy and two other guests he had for lunch: Andrew J. Stein, a former Manhattan borough president, and Lee Lipton, a local restaurant owner.

Five minutes later, I heard the president call my name.

“Michael, come on, Michael,” he said as he stood up.

“Come on, sit over there,” he said as he motioned to a large empty table.

We sat down next to each other, I asked whether he was O.K. with me recording, he agreed and we were off. Mr. Trump immediately told me that there was no collusion between his associates and Russia’s effort to influence the election — something he would repeat 15 more times during the interview.

It is unusual to land an interview with the president, but even more rare for a reporter to get him one-on-one. I knew that what I was doing was not going to go over well with the White House press office, which hates being blindsided by the president making news. But for much of the next half-hour, Mr. Trump and I sat alone.

During our conversation in July, I learned the challenges this president poses in interviews. He can jump from an issue like the Russia investigation to a policy matter before going off on a tangent about something like his golf game. If you try to interrupt him, he often continues talking. Given this, I employed a strategy in which I asked questions about the most pressing issues of his presidency and then allowed him to talk.

Some readers criticized my approach, saying I should have asked more follow-up questions. I believed it was more important to continue to allow the president to speak and let people make their own judgments about his statements. It was the best way to learn as much as possible about the president’s mind-set and his views on issues like North Korea.

In the interview, the president did make news. He contradicted members of his own party, saying he believes the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, will treat him fairly. He said for the first time explicitly that he had gone soft on trade with China in the hopes that Beijing would help put pressure on North Korea to stop its nuclear weapons program. And he said that he never thought Roy Moore would win the Senate race in Alabama and that he had endorsed Mr. Moore only out of obligation.

At the end of the interview, Mr. Trump, who had asked about my golf game, told me that I should go out and play his course that afternoon. I told him I would not do that and I needed to file a story off the interview on deadline. He asked me to treat him fairly, we shook hands and I headed for my rental car. As I drove away from the club, I called my editors to tell them I had just spent half an hour alone with the president.

 

Quote

I stood behind Mr. Ruddy, who told the president that Mike Schmidt from The New York Times was with him. As I made eye contact with the president, he appeared confused about who I was and why I was there. I walked up, shook his hand and reminded him that I had interviewed him in July in the Oval Office along with two of my colleagues, Maggie Haberman and Peter Baker. He said he remembered me and, despite the fact that we’re “the failing New York Times,” he thought we had treated him fairly.

The president of the USA is confused about the identity of a reporter he met six months ago even after being told his name and occupation

Quote

So I got into a catcher’s squat next to his chair, conveying to him that I was listening intently but also forcing him to look down at me while he talked, which kept him from being distracted by the others at the table.

The president of the USA won't remember who he was talking to if he is distracted by seeing another person.

Quote

During our conversation in July, I learned the challenges this president poses in interviews. He can jump from an issue like the Russia investigation to a policy matter before going off on a tangent about something like his golf game. If you try to interrupt him, he often continues talking.

The president of the USA has problems following a train of thought and has failing social skills.

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/analysis/2017/12/29/donald-trump-made-25-false-claims-in-his-latest-new-york-times-interview.html
 

Spoiler

 

WASHINGTON—U.S. President Donald Trump sat down Thursday for a rare interview with a media outlet other than Fox News, holding an impromptu 30-minute session with New York Times reported Michael Schmidt at his golf club in West Palm Beach, Fla.

He made nearly one false claim per minute — 25 false claims in all.

The Star is keeping track of every false claim Trump makes as president. As of Dec. 22, Trump had already made 978 false claims; adding the Times interview, the tally will pass the 1,000 mark in the next update.

Here’s every false claim Trump made in the interview:

1) “But I think it’s all worked out because frankly there is absolutely no collusion, that’s been proven by every Democrat is saying it … Virtually every Democrat has said there is no collusion. There is no collusion.”

Democratic members of Congress have not said en masse that they are convinced that there was no collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia. Some have acknowledged that they have not seen evidence of collusion, but they have pointed out that the investigation is ongoing.

2) “And you’re talking about what Paul (Manafort) was many years ago before I ever heard of him. He worked for me for — what was it, three and a half months? ... Three and a half months.”

Manafort worked for the Trump campaign for just under five months, from March 28, 2016 to his resignation on August 19, 2016.

 

3) “I saw (Democratic Sen.) Dianne Feinstein the other day on television saying there is no collusion.”

Trump appeared to be referring, as he has in the past, to a November CNN interview with Feinstein — in which she did not declare that there is no collusion. Feinstein was specifically asked if she had seen evidence that the Trump campaign was given Democratic emails hacked by Russia. “Not so far,” she responded. She was not asked about collusion more broadly, and her specific answer made clear that she was referring only to evidence she has personally seen to date, not issuing a sweeping final judgment.

4) “She’s (Feinstein) the head of the committee.”

Feinstein, a Democrat, is not the head of any committee: Republicans control Congress and thus lead the committees. She is the ranking member — the top Democrat — on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

5) “So, I actually think that it’s turning out — I actually think it’s turning to the Democrats because there was collusion on behalf of the Democrats. There was collusion with the Russians and the Democrats. A lot of collusion … starting with the dossier.”

The word “collusion” — in common language, a “secret agreement or co-operation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose” — simply does not apply to the dossier produced by a former British spy about alleged ties between Trump’s campaign and Russia. Trump’s administration, seeking to turn the “collusion” allegation around on its opponents, has argued that the dossier, which was funded in part by the Clinton campaign, amounts to the “Clinton campaign colluding with Russian intelligence.” This is absurd on its face. Russian intelligence favoured Trump and tried to damage Clinton, U.S. intelligence agencies say; the British ex-spy was simply using Russian sources — who have not been identified — to attempt to figure out how Trump’s campaign was linked to the Russian government. Such research is not illegal or deceitful, and it does not come close to qualifying as the type of possible “collusion” investigators are probing with regard to the Trump campaign: coordination with the Russian government’s efforts to interfere with the election.

6) “ … it’s very hard for a Republican to win the Electoral College. O.K.? You start off with New York, California and Illinois against you. That means you have to run the East Coast, which I did, and everything else. Which I did and then won Wisconsin and Michigan. (Inaudible.) So the Democrats. … (Inaudible.) … They thought there was no way for a Republican, not me, a Republican, to win the Electoral College … The Electoral College is so much better suited to the Democrats (inaudible).”

This claim that the Electoral College is tilted in favour of Democrats — and that “they” think it is impossible for a Republican to win the election in 2016 —- is obvious nonsense. Six of the last nine presidents, all of whom except for Gerald Ford had to win an Electoral College election, have been Republicans.

7) “They made the Russian story up as a hoax, as a ruse, as an excuse for losing an election that in theory Democrats should always win with the Electoral College.”

Democrats, of course, did not invent the “Russian story” for electoral purposes, nor is it a “hoax.” U.S. intelligence agencies say that the Russian government interfered in the election for the purpose of helping Trump win; that Russian interference was the original story, and Democrats were talking about it well before Election Day. Perhaps Trump is correct that there was no illegal collusion between his campaign and the Russians, but this matter is being investigated by a special prosecutor appointed by his own deputy attorney general, not “Democrats,” and many senior Republicans believe the investigation has merit.

8) “They (Democrats) thought it would be a one-day story, an excuse, and it just kept going and going and going.”

This is simple nonsense. Democrats did not think that the question of Russian interference in the election on behalf of Trump, or the question of the Trump campaign’s relationship with those efforts, would be a “one-day story.”

9) “Just so you understand. When I endorsed him (Alabama Senate candidate Luther Strange), he was in fifth place. He went way up.”

Strange was in second place in both polls taken in the week prior to Trump’s endorsement, according to RealClearPolitcs’s poll tracker. Strange was in first place in the poll prior to that.

10) “I was for Strange, and I brought Strange up 20 points ….almost 20 points.”

Not even close. Here’s what happened. Strange was in the middle of the Republican primary’s five-candidate first round when Trump endorsed him. In the last poll taken before Trump’s endorsement, Strange was down by eight points to Roy Moore. In the first poll after the endorsement, Strange was up three. So, even though the polls were taken by different firms, Trump can arguably claim credit for a temporary 11-point bump. However, Strange immediately fell back down big, and he ended up losing the first round by six. So, at best, Trump brought Strange up two points, from down eight to down six. If you look solely at polls of the head-to-head Moore-Strange matchup, the story is even worse for Trump: Strange was down two points in the last preendorsement poll, then down 19 points in the first post-endorsement poll. He ended up losing by 9.

11) “Luther Strange was brought way up after my endorsement and he almost won.”

We’ve already addressed the falseness of Trump’s claim that Strange was “brought way up after my endorsement.” It’s also false that Strange “almost won.” Strange lost the runoff by 9.2 percentage points, 54.6 per cent to 45.4 per cent.

12) “Almost won. … He (Alabama Senate candidate Luther Strange) lost by 7 points, 7 or 8 points.”

Strange lost by 9.2 percentage points.

13) “I feel that I have to endorse Republicans as the head of the party. So, I endorsed him (Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore). It became a much closer race because of my endorsement. People don’t say that. They say, ‘Oh, Donald Trump lost.’ I didn’t lose, I brought him up a lot.”

There is no evidence at all that Trump brought Moore “up by a lot.” Moore led Democratic candidate Doug Jones in four of the six polls taken in the week before Trump’s endorsement. He ended up losing.

14) “The problem with Roy Moore, and I said this, is that he’s going to lose the election … And I wish you would cover that, because frankly, I said, ‘If Luther doesn’t win, Roy is going to lose the election.’”

Trump never declared that Moore was “going to lose the election.” His actual statement was not nearly so definitive: “Roy has a very good chance of not winning.”

15) “Michael, we have spent, as of about a month ago, $7 trillion in the Middle East. And the Middle East is worse than it was 17 years ago. … (Inaudible.) Seven trillion.”

There is no basis for the “$7 trillion” figure. During the 2016, Trump cited a $6 trillion estimate that appeared to be taken from a 2013 report from Brown University’s Costs of War Project; that report estimated $2 trillion in costs up to that point but said the total could rise $4 trillion by 2053. Trump, however, used the $6 trillion as if it was a current 2016 figure. He later explained that since additional time has elapsed since the campaign, he believes the total is now $7 trillion. That is incorrect. The latest Brown report, issued a month before Trump made this remark, put the current total at $4.3 trillion, and the total including estimated future costs at $5.6 trillion.

16) “I know more about the big bills. … (Inaudible.) … Than any president that’s ever been in office. Whether it’s health care and taxes.”

There is no way to conclusively demonstrate that this false, but it’s so ridiculous that we are going to take a rare liberty and declare it false anyway. Trump has consistently misstated the details of major bills, spoken only in generalities about the health bill (“fantastic health-care”), and brushed off almost all specific questions. Whatever one thinks of Obamacare, Barack Obama demonstrated a vastly greater understanding of the nuances of his bill than Trump did about any version of the Republicans’ proposed replacement bills.

17) “I believe we can do health care in a bipartisan way, because now we’ve essentially gutted and ended Obamacare.”

Gutted? Perhaps. Trump repealed a central pillar of Obamacare: the “individual mandate,” a requirement that Americans obtain health insurance or pay a financial penalty. The law might now experience new problems. But Trump is wrong, again, to claim that he has already “ended” Obamacare. The individual mandate is a key part of Obamacare, but it is far from the entire thing. Trump did not touch Obamacare’s expansion of the Medicaid insurance program for low-income people, the federal and state Obamacare marketplaces that allow other uninsured people to buy insurance, and the subsidies that help many of them make the purchases. Nor did he touch various Obamacare rules for the insurance market, like its prohibition on insurers denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. The very day after the tax law passed, the government announced that 8.8 million people had signed up for coverage through the federal marketplace, down by only 0.4 million from last year despite Trump’s efforts to dissuade people from signing up.

18) “Now here’s the good news. We’ve created associations, millions of people are joining associations. Millions. That were formerly in Obamacare or didn’t have insurance. Or didn’t have health care. Millions of people.”

This has not happened. Trump issued an executive order on Oct. 12 to ask his Secretary of Labor to propose regulations to allow more employers to make use of “association health plans.” But the actual change has not actually been made yet, noted Timothy Jost, an expert on health law as an emeritus professor at Washington and Lee University — so even if millions of people will eventually use these plans, they have, obviously, not been able to do so yet.

19) “We’ve created associations, millions of people are joining associations. Millions. That were formerly in Obamacare or didn’t have insurance. Or didn’t have health care. Millions of people. That’s gonna be a big bill, you watch.”

The move toward association health plans is not going to be a bill at all, let alone a “big bill.” This “would be a change in regulation or guidance,” not legislation, Jost noted.

20) “Chain migration and the lottery system. They have a lottery in these countries. They take the worst people in the country, they put ‘em into the lottery, then they have a handful of bad, worse ones, and they put them out. ‘Oh, these are the people the United States…’”

This is, as always, an inaccurate description of Diversity Visa Lottery program. First, the lottery is run by the State Department, not conducted in foreign countries. Second, foreign governments do not toss their worst citizens into the lottery to try to dump them on the United States: would-be immigrants sign up on their own, as individuals, of their own free will.

21) “Last year, we had a trade deficit with China of $350 billion, minimum.”

Trump would have been correct if he had said “$350 billion, maximum,” and specified he was talking about trade in goods alone, but not when he simply says “$350 billion, minimum”: the actual U.S. deficit with China was $347 billion if you exclude trade in services, $310 billion all things considered, according to the U.S. government’s own Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

22) “ … and, you know, I have — what do have now, John, 158 million, including Facebook, including Twitter, including Instagram, including every form, I have a 158 million people.”

Even if you’re counting generously, Trump does not have that many followers on social media. Adding up his Twitter account (45 million followers), his Facebook account (23 million followers), the White House Facebook account (8 million followers), his Instagram account (8 million followers), the White House Instagram account (4 million followers), the official “POTUS” Twitter account (22 million followers), and the official “POTUS” Facebook account (2 million followers), Trump is at 112 million followers. Since many of these people undoubtedly follow him on more than one platform, the total number of actual humans is even further below 158 million.

23) “You know, it’s easier to renegotiate it if we make it a fair deal because NAFTA was a terrible deal for us. We lost $71 billion a year with Mexico, can you believe it?”

Even if you only count trade in goods alone, the U.S. trade deficit with Mexico is not that large: it was $64 billion in 2016, $60 billion in 2015, $55 billion in 2014 and $54 billion in 2013, according to the U.S. government’s own Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, and it has not exceeded $67 billion since 2007. Further, when trade in services is included, the 2016 deficit was $56 billion.

24) “Seventeen billion (trade deficit) with Canada — Canada says we broke even. But they don’t include lumber and they don’t include oil. Oh, that’s not. … (Inaudible) … My friend Justin he says, “No, no, we break even.” I said, ‘Yeah, but you’re not including oil, and you’re not including lumber.” When you do, you lose $17 billion.”

According to the U.S. government’s own Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the U.S. had a trade surplus of $12.5 billion with Canada last year when services trade was included. Even counting goods trade alone, the Trade Representative says the deficit was $12.1 billion, not $17 billion.

25) “I’m the one that saved coal.”

The coal industry has not been “saved,” and to the extent it rebounded modestly in 2017, market forces, not Trump, were the main reason.

As Reuters explained in a comprehensive story in November, “U.S. utilities are shutting coal-fired power plants at a rapid pace and shifting to cheap natural gas, along with wind and solar power.” Reuters wrote: “A year after Donald Trump was elected president on a promise to revive the ailing U.S. coal industry, the sector’s long-term prospects for growth and hiring remain as bleak as ever. A Reuters review of mining data shows an industry that has seen only modest gains in jobs and production this year — much of it from a temporary uptick in foreign demand for U.S. coal rather than presidential policy changes.” Trump can applaud a slight increase in the employment of people employed in coal mining: it stood at 51,200 in November, 1,500 higher than the number upon Trump’s election a year prior. But this was still down more than a third even from its levels in 2012, it can hardly be counted as “saving” the industry, and its connection to Trump is tenuous at best.

There was an 8 per cent increase in U.S. coal production this year. Analysts said this increase had little or nothing to do with Trump; James Stevenson, a coal analyst at IHS Markit, told Reuters it was “largely attributable to demand for U.S. coal from Asian steel mills after temporary outages from their usual suppliers in Australia.”

 

The president of the USA struggles with numbers, doesn't understand what legislation he signed and what it does, misunderstands TV interviews he saw, can't change his thinking or clarify even after being corrected multiple times.

That is not to say that he's not also a life long pathological liar and conman but now he's a life long pathological liar and a conman with dementia. He used to be smarter about his lies. Now he's so ridiculous it's immediately obvious.

Quote

16) “I know more about the big bills. … (Inaudible.) … Than any president that’s ever been in office. Whether it’s health care and taxes.”

He's been a lifelong braggart and unable to admit any failings but this is no longer bragging, this is anosognosia, lack of insight into his own incompetence, denial, defensiveness in the face of his disease. I

[AmazonGrace]

The Wapo fact checker

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/12/29/in-a-30-minute-interview-president-trump-made-24-false-or-misleading-claims/?utm_term=.5213a693f376

Spoiler

 

In a 30-minute interview, President Trump made 24 false or misleading claims

By Glenn Kessler December 29 at 3:34 PM

(AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

President Trump gave an impromptu half-hour interview with the New York Times on Dec. 28. We combed through the transcript and here’s a quick roundup of the false, misleading or dubious claims that he made, at a rate of one every 75 seconds. (Some of the interview was off the record, so it’s possible the rate of false claims per minute is higher.)

“Virtually every Democrat has said there is no collusion. There is no collusion. . . . I saw Dianne Feinstein the other day on television saying there is no collusion.”

Trump appears to be referring to an interview with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. She did not flatly say there was no collusion and instead was more nuanced. Asked by CNN’s Jake Tapper on Nov. 5 whether she had “seen any evidence that this dirt, these emails, were ever given to the Trump campaign,” she replied: “Not so far.” Tapper than asked: “Have you seen any communications that suggested that the Trump campaign wanted them to release them through a different means?” She answered: “I have not.”

“I think it’s been proven that there is no collusion.”

Trump is entitled to his own opinion, but he sidesteps the fact that the investigation has revealed that members of the Trump campaign interacted with Russians at least 31 times throughout the campaign. There are at least 19 known meetings, in addition to the indictments or guilty pleas of his campaign manager, national security adviser and others. Here’s The Fact Checker’s video on our count.

3:09

All the times members of the Trump campaign interacted with Russians

The Trump campaign and the White House have said there was no contact between anyone on their staff and Russia. This isn't true. (Meg Kelly/The Washington Post)

“There was collusion with the Russians and the Democrats. A lot of collusion. . . . Starting with the dossier. But going into so many other elements. And Podesta’s firm.”

Trump has falsely accused Clinton campaign manager John Podesta of being involved with a Russian company. Tony Podesta co-founded the Podesta Group, a lobbying firm, with his brother John. But it’s a U.S.-based company, not a company in Russia. Trump likely is referring to the Podesta Group being paid $170,000 over six months to represent Sberbank, a Russian bank. The Podesta Group said its work for Sberbank USA was “never about getting sanctions lifted,” and “was simply about helping to clarify to what extent our client, the U.S. subsidiary [of Sberbank], was subject to sanctions. We confirmed they were not.” As for alleged collusion between the Democrats and Russia, Trump is referring to the fact that Fusion GPS, the political research firm that assembled the dossier as part of an assignment for Democrats, relied on a British intelligence agent who used Russian sources for his research. So that’s a rather big stretch.

Here’s the Fact Checker’s video on the Fusion GPS Russian connections.

 

“I won because I campaigned properly and she didn’t. She campaigned for the popular vote. I campaigned for the electoral college.”

There is no evidence that Hillary Clinton campaigned for the popular vote, which Trump has previously has said he would have won if not for fraud. Clinton campaigned in many battleground states, including Republican-leaning ones where she thought she had a chance. She did not campaign as much in two states — Michigan and Wisconsin — that were considered locks for Democrats but which Trump narrowly won. Clinton won the popular vote by nearly 3 million. If 40,000 votes had switched in three states, Trump would have also lost the electoral college.

“Paul [Manafort] only worked for me for a few months.”

Trump skips over lightly the fact that Manafort, now under indictment, was his campaign manager in the critical period in which he secured the nomination and accepted it at the GOP convention.

“There was tremendous collusion on behalf of the Russians and the Democrats. There was no collusion with respect to my campaign.”

This is a breathtakingly false statement. Little evidence has emerged of any collusion between the Democrats and Russia, whereas evidence has emerged of many contacts between Trump campaign officials and Russian-linked individuals. The FBI, CIA and National Security Agency earlier this year concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin and his government “aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him.”

“What I’ve done is, I have absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department.”

Presidents do not have unfettered right to interfere with Justice Department investigations, unless they are actively seeking a constitutional crisis.

“I’m the one that saved coal. I’m the one that created jobs. You know West Virginia is doing fantastically now.”

West Virginia’s gross domestic product increased 3 percent in the first quarter of 2017. The recent bump is due in part to the increased price of metallurgic coal, which is used to make steel, and a price increase in natural gas exports. West Virginia produces roughly 5 percent of the natural gas in the U.S. and as the price of natural gas rises, the demand for coal increases, spurring growth in the state. Trump can’t take credit for the change in prices, which fluctuate with market forces. He previously earned Four Pinocchios for this claim, but he keeps saying it.

“There is tremendous collusion with the Russians and with the Democratic Party. Including all of the stuff with the — and then whatever happened to the Pakistani guy, that had the two, you know, whatever happened to this Pakistani guy who worked with the DNC?”

Trump echoes a conspiracy theory that a criminal case involving a Pakistani information technology specialist who worked for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz — who had chaired the Democratic National Committee — was somehow related to the Russian hack of DNC emails. The case involves a fraudulent loan, and no evidence has emerged to connect it to the Russia investigation.

“They made the Russian story up as a hoax, as a ruse, as an excuse for losing an election that in theory Democrats should always win with the electoral college. The electoral college is so much better suited to the Democrats.”

Trump is falsely labeling nonpartisan investigations as made up by Democrats. The CIA concluded in 2016 that Russia intervened in the U.S. presidential election to help elect Trump, an assessment backed up by FBI Director James B. Comey and then-Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. As we noted, the intelligence community released a declassified report expressing “high confidence” in this judgment. Senate and House committees led by Republicans have begun their own investigations, and a special prosecutor has been appointed. Meanwhile, Democrats obviously do not have an electoral college lock. According to a tally by John Pitney of Claremont McKenna College, every Republican president since Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876 won a larger share of the electoral college votes than Trump, with the exception of George W. Bush (twice) and Richard Nixon in 1968.

“I was for Strange, and I brought Strange up 20 points. Just so you understand. When I endorsed him, he was in fifth place. He went way up. Almost 20 points.”

Polls indicate that Trump’s endorsement made little difference — and in fact Strange lost to Roy Moore by a greater margin than polls suggested at the time of Trump’s endorsement. While Trump says Strange was in fifth place, there were only three candidates in the GOP primary.

“I endorsed him [Alabama senate candidate Roy Moore]. It became a much closer race because of my endorsement. People don’t say that. They say, ‘Oh, Donald Trump lost.’ I didn’t lose, I brought him up a lot.”

Polls can vary, but there is little evidence this is the case. The fact remains that Moore lost an election in a state where Democrats usually lose by double digits.

“We have spent, as of about a month ago, $7 trillion in the Middle East. And the Middle East is worse than it was 17 years ago. … $7 trillion.”

Trump, who previously would cite a number of $6 trillion, is lumping together the wars in Iraq (in the Middle East) and Afghanistan (in South Asia), which together cost about $1.6 trillion from 2001 to 2014. He is also adding in estimates of future spending, such as interest on the debt and veterans’ care for the next three decades.

“By the way, and for that, we’ve ended across state lines. So we have competition. You know for that I’m allowed to [inaudible] state lines. So that’s all done.”

Trump signed an executive order encouraging the formation of health plans across state lines. But there is still a law in place that exempts insurance companies from aspects of federal antitrust law and ensures that individual states remained the primary regulators of insurance. We wrote about this before, when Vice President Pence earned Four Pinocchios for a false claim.

“I know the details of taxes better than anybody. Better than the greatest C.P.A. I know the details of health care better than most, better than most.”

Lawmakers who dealt with Trump on taxes and especially health care privately told reporters they were shocked how little he knew about these issues.

“We’ve created associations, millions of people are joining associations. Millions. That were formerly in Obamacare or didn’t have insurance. Or didn’t have health care. Millions of people.”

Trump is referring to an executive order, mentioned above, but it has no force in law on its own and no one has yet joined these associations. The rules spelling out how the executive order would work have not been issued yet, so Trump is simply making up his “millions” number.

“Now that the individual mandate is officially killed, people have no idea how big a deal that was. It’s the most unpopular part of Obamacare. But now, Obamacare is essentially … You know, you saw this. … It’s basically dead over a period of time.”

While the individual mandate was an important incentive for Americans to seek health insurance, it was only one part of a far-reaching law that remains intact. The repeal does not take effect until 2019, and enrollment in Obamacare has remained strong. The Congressional Budget Office says the marketplaces are expected to remain stable for years.

“We see the drugs pouring into the country, we need the wall.”

The wall will have virtually no effect on drugs coming into the country. According to reports by the DEA, the majority of drugs are smuggled through legal ports of entry or smuggled through underground tunnels. Trump previously earned Four Pinocchios for this claim, but he keeps saying it.

“They have a lottery in these countries. They take the worst people in the country, they put them into the lottery, then they have a handful of bad, worse ones, and they put them out. ‘Oh, these are the people the United States.’ … We’re going to get rid of the lottery.”

This is a gross misrepresentation of the diversity visa program. Individuals apply for the visa system, and must have at least a high school diploma or work in specific industries to be eligible for the program. As the term “lottery” implies, applicants are selected via a randomized computer drawing. The selected applicants undergo a background check before entering the country, and some applicants undergo an additional in-depth review if they are considered a security risk.

“I like very much President Xi. He treated me better than anybody’s ever been treated in the history of China.”

The Chinese put on a show for Trump, knowing he likes them, but this is a fairly ridiculous comment to make, especially given the limited interactions between the two men — and China’s 3,500-year history.

“This [North Korea] is a problem that should have been handled for the last 25 years. This is a problem, North Korea. That should have been handled for 25, 30 years, not by me. This should have been handled long before me. Long before this guy has whatever he has.”

Previous presidents, notably Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, made major efforts to rein in North Korea’s nuclear ambitions. But the deals they struck did not stick.

“When I campaigned, I was very tough on China in terms of trade. They made — last year, we had a trade deficit with China of $350 billion, minimum.”

The trade deficit in goods and services in 2016 with China was $310 billion. Trump often just cites the goods deficit, which was $347 billion, according to the U.S. Trade Representative. Under the Trump administration, the trade deficit with China has increased 7 percent so far in 2017.

“We lost $71 billion a year with Mexico. Can you believe it?”

Trump, as is his practice, inflates the size of the trade deficit by only counting goods, not goods and services. The 2016 trade deficit with Mexico was $55 billion, according to the U.S. Trade Representative.

“$17 billion with Canada — Canada says we broke even. But they don’t include lumber and they don’t include oil. Oh, that’s not. My friend Justin he says, ‘No, no, we break even.’ I said, ‘Yeah, but you’re not including oil, and you’re not including lumber.’ When you do, you lose $17 billion.”

In recounting a conversation with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Trump gets his facts quite wrong. Trudeau said Canada had a total trade deficit with the United States while Trump insisted it was the other way around. In reality, the U.S. goods trade deficit with Canada was $12.1 billion in 2016, but the U.S. services trade surplus with Canada was $24.6 billion in 2016, according to the U.S. Trade Representative. So Trudeau was right, according to U.S. government data.

 

 

“This [North Korea] is a problem that should have been handled for the last 25 years. This is a problem, North Korea. That should have been handled for 25, 30 years, not by me. This should have been handled long before me. Long before this guy has whatever he has.”

The president of the USA can't remember off hand the names of any previous presidents, whoever is in charge in North Korea and whatever he is thought to have

 

Another Wapo commentary

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/12/29/11-curious-quotes-from-trumps-new-york-times-interview/?tid=pm_politics_pop&utm_term=.ef9d254491f3
 

Spoiler

 

President Trump sat down with the New York Times's Michael S. Schmidt on Thursday for a wide-ranging half-hour interview. And while he didn't make any really big news, there were plenty of worthwhile nuggets, bold claims and factual inaccuracies.

Below are 11 of them, with a little analysis of each (and click here for the full excerpts from the Times):

1. On special counsel Robert S. Mueller III: “It doesn’t bother me, because I hope that he’s going to be fair. I think that he’s going to be fair. ... There’s been no collusion. But I think he’s going to be fair.”

This might have been the newsiest bit from the interview. Trump seemingly contradicts many of his supporters by saying he thinks Mueller will be fair. Conservative media and Republicans in Congress have spent much of the past few weeks attacking the credibility of the Mueller investigation. Trump hasn't really joined in that effort publicly, but he has attacked the FBI and the Justice Department.

2. “I have absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department. But for purposes of hopefully thinking I’m going to be treated fairly, I’ve stayed uninvolved with this particular matter.”

And here's the other side of the coin. In this quote, Trump seems to buy into what those same supporters have been arguing about his authority to control the Justice Department. This is a rather remarkable assertion of power, even as it's not terribly surprising from a president who clearly has some authoritarian tendencies. It seems Trump is suggesting he can do things like fire Mueller if he wants to, even as he says he thinks Mueller is being fair and as the White House denies that is even being considered.

[The fight for control over the special counsel's Russia investigation]

3. “I don’t want to get into loyalty, but I will tell you that — I will say this: [Eric] Holder protected President Obama. Totally protected him. When you look at the IRS scandal, when you look at the guns for whatever, when you look at all of the tremendous, ah, real problems they had — not made-up problems like Russian collusion, these were real problems — when you look at the things that they did, and Holder protected the president. And I have great respect for that, I’ll be honest, I have great respect for that.”

Trump begins this quote by saying, “I don't want to get into loyalty,” but then he goes on to unmistakably suggest that Attorney General Jeff Sessions hasn't been loyal enough to him — or at least that he hasn't been as loyal as then-Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. was to President Barack Obama. Add this to the list of quotes showing just how upset Trump remains with Sessions.

4. On 2020: “Another reason that I’m going to win another four years is because newspapers, television, all forms of media will tank if I’m not there. Because without me, their ratings are going down the tubes. Without me, the New York Times will indeed be not the failing New York Times, but the failed New York Times. So they basically have to let me win. And eventually, probably six months before the election, they’ll be loving me because they’re saying, 'Please, please, don’t lose Donald Trump.'”

I've long thought Trump believed this, but it's remarkable to hear him say it out loud. It's almost like he's making a case to the media for why it should help him win reelection in 2020 and/or not be too tough on him. And it's not the first time that he's said something that seems to misunderstand the media's role in American governance. Reports have long suggested Trump thought his media coverage would improve once he was elected president.

5. “Look, I like China, and I like [President Xi Jinping] a lot. But, as you know, when I campaigned, I was very tough on China in terms of trade. They made — last year, we had a trade deficit with China of $350 billion, minimum. That doesn’t include the theft of intellectual property, okay, which is another $300 billion. So, China — and you know, somebody said, 'Oh, currency manipulation.' If they’re helping me with North Korea, I can look at trade a little bit differently, at least for a period of time. And that’s what I’ve been doing. But when oil is going in, I’m not happy about that.”

This is in response to a report in a South Korean newspaper that U.S. satellites had caught Chinese ships transferring oil to North Korean vessels, in violation of United Nations sanctions imposed on Kim Jong Un's regime. It's also notable that Trump suggests he ignored issues like currency manipulation while pursuing a better relationship with China. No, it's not the first time he has suggested he was looking the other way on certain things in the name of cooperation on the North Korea issue. But Trump has also maintained that China stopped manipulating its currency. So now he's saying it didn't actually do that?

6. “I like very much President Xi. He treated me better than anybody’s ever been treated in the history of China.”

Perhaps a small point here, but China is more than 3,500 years old, so this is a pretty big claim even for Trump.

7. “We started taxes. And we don’t hear from the Democrats. You know, we hear bulls‑‑‑ from the Democrats. Like Joe Manchin. Joe’s a nice guy. ... But he talks. But he doesn’t do anything. He doesn’t do. 'Hey, let’s get together, let’s do bipartisan.' I say, 'Good, let’s go.' Then you don’t hear from him again. I like Joe. You know, it’s like he’s the great centrist. But he’s really not a centrist. And I think the people of West Virginia will see that. He not a centrist. … I’m the one that saved coal. I’m the one that created jobs. You know, West Virginia is doing fantastically now.”

Speaking of big claims, Trump seems to suggest he has completely turned West Virginia and the coal industry around in less than a year. Oh, and he uses the word “bulls‑‑‑" during an on-the-record interview.

8. “I know the details of taxes better than anybody — better than the greatest CPA. I know the details of health care better than most, better than most. And if I didn’t, I couldn’t have talked all these people into doing [it], ultimately only to be rejected.”

Here's Big Claim No. 3. “Better than the greatest CPA.” Trump has a history of this kind of claim.

9. On the Alabama Senate race: “I was for [Luther] Strange, and I brought Strange up 20 points. Just so you understand, when I endorsed him, he was in fifth place. He went way up. Almost 20 points. But he fell a little short. ... And by the way, when I endorsed [Roy Moore], he went up. It was a much closer race.”

The president's claims about the impact of his endorsements in Alabama have long been fanciful, but even against that backdrop, this is grandiose. While Trump has wrongly claimed that Strange shot up in the polls, saying he was in fifth place at the time of the endorsement is laughable. There were only three major candidates in the race, and when Trump endorsed Strange in early August, two of the last three polls showed him in a virtual tie for first place.

Senator Luther Strange has done a great job representing the people of the Great State of Alabama. He has my complete and total endorsement!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 9, 2017

10. “And by the way, I didn’t deal with Russia. I won because I was a better candidate by a lot. I won because I campaigned properly and [Hillary Clinton] didn’t.”

This may be reading into what Trump was saying too much (especially since he tends to ramble), but “I didn't deal with Russia” sounds firmer than “There was no collusion” — Trump's usual denial. It suggests there was no contact whatsoever, rather than just that there was no cooperation or collusion.

11. On the electoral college: “It would have been a whole different thing [if the election were decided by popular vote]. The genius is that the popular vote is a much different form of campaigning. Hillary never understood that.”

First off, I completely agree with Trump that the campaign would have been run completely differently if it were decided by popular vote. It's why I think it's dumb to say Clinton was the real winner because she won the popular vote. But suggesting Clinton was campaigning for the popular vote is just ludicrous. Her campaign may have missed how much trouble they were in in Rust Belt states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, but she was campaigning in important electoral college states, too.

 

 

[AmazonGrace]

 Presidential Word Salads

by Yuval Levin December 29, 2017 11:57 AM

Spoiler

 

There’s lots to marvel at in the partial transcript the New York Times released of reporter Michael Schmidt’s interview with President Trump yesterday. But I think my favorite part has got to be this little bit about health care:

But Michael, I know the details of taxes better than anybody. Better than the greatest C.P.A. I know the details of health care better than most, better than most. And if I didn’t, I couldn’t have talked all these people into doing ultimately only to be rejected.

Now here’s the good news. We’ve created associations, millions of people are joining associations. Millions. That were formerly in Obamacare or didn’t have insurance. Or didn’t have health care. Millions of people. That’s gonna be a big bill, you watch. It could be as high as 50 percent of the people. You watch. So that’s a big thing. And the individual mandate. So now you have associations, and people don’t even talk about the associations. That could be half the people are going to be joining up. … With private [inaudible]. So now you have associations and the individual mandate.

I believe that because of the individual mandate and the associations, the Democrats will and certainly should come to me and see if they can do a really great health care plan for the remaining people. [Inaudible.]

...

After reading this, it is advisable to take a moment to wonder at the absurdity of life, to offer a quiet prayer of thanks for the fact that any of us is still alive, and then to pursue—yet again, and surely not for the last time—that recurring question of our era: What in the world is the president talking about?

The first paragraph, in which we see him interrupting his own boasting with the realization that since no health-care bill passed he should probably stop saying he worked to convince Republicans to vote for one, is just comedy gold. The rest is a fascinating jumble.

My best guess is that at some point President Trump was briefed by his staff about the executive order he signed in October that, among other things, instructed his administration to expand the scope of association health plans. The word salad we find here is what remained of that briefing (or maybe of a conversation with a knowledgeable AHP supporter, like Rand Paul) after it was minced and digested by the president’s mind into a mess of little unconnected proofs of his own acumen and prowess.

Trump appears to believe that millions of people are joining such plans, but in fact his order has yet even to be translated into a proposed rule, so that it has had no practical effect so far. He describes his order (I take it) as “a big bill”—and this from the man who earlier in the same interview said “ I know more about the big bills. … [Inaudible.] … Than any president that’s ever been in office”. But maybe he just meant a big deal. He suggests that half of some presumably significant group of people will join such plans, and that in combination with the zeroing out of the individual mandate these plans will somehow drive Democrats to make a deal on health care.

I have no doubt these claims began as duly grounded and modest statements of fact in some policy discussion. But they have ended up as worse than nonsense—worse, I say, because the only function they are left to perform is to affirm the president’s belief in things that aren’t true.

This is a narrow example of a broader pattern, of course. It doesn’t matter all that much if the president doesn’t really know anything about Association Health Plans. He’s got bigger problems to worry about. But it’s hard to deny that he seems to approach those bigger problems in the same general way, and that the broader pattern is therefore itself a very big problem, given the nature and demands of the modern presidency. A year into Trump’s term, we’ve had countless examples of this pattern, but every new one somehow manages to amaze.

 

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/455008/trump-health-care-yuval-levin

[AmazonGrace]

 

[GrumpyGran]

15 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

His regular routine is simple and predictable: He wakes up, watches television, tweets, makes phone calls, reads the papers and works. He often emerges for golf if the weather allows, before returning to the club, where he sometimes eats lunch or has meetings with White House staff. He then returns to his living quarters, before emerging again for dinner.

I'm calling bullshit on this. Read that again. It is impossible for him to do all of that before lunch. He gets up, probably around 5, watches Faux for the entirety of the program, then tweets for 30 minutes, get dressed and has breakfast, probably half a pound of bacon, four eggs, and a stack of hotcakes, then he may make a call or two and it's off to the golf course where he stays until 2 or 3. No work.

This Ruddy guy is either as delusional as Dumpy or the worst friend ever.

And who thought it was a good idea to let the Terrible Toddler go off on his own for the holidays? Sorry folks, but as long as you all continue to enable this travesty, you all better be prepared to rotate baby-sitting duties 365 days a year.

[onekidanddone]

1 hour ago, GrumpyGran said:

His regular routine is simple and predictable: He wakes up, watches television, tweets, makes phone calls, reads the papers and works.

I believe he has said it himself that he doesn't read. As for work, policy by twitter does not count.

[AmazonGrace]

Someone factchecked his deregulatory achievements and it will come as a shock to y'all but he's talking bullshit. Taking credit for changes that started under Obama and counting rule changes that were outdated anyway and do not help the business in any way. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-29/trump-stretches-meaning-of-deregulation-in-touting-achievements

And minor tweaks, such as whether the rule is in effect in May or in August. 

[onekidanddone]

7 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

Someone factchecked his deregulatory achievements and it will come as a shock to y'all but he's talking bullshit. Taking credit for changes that started under Obama and counting rule changes that were outdated anyway and do not help the business in any way. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-29/trump-stretches-meaning-of-deregulation-in-touting-achievements

And minor tweaks, such as whether the rule is in effect in May or in August. 

Yes but think of the thousands, million, billion, trillion jobs he has brought back. 

How long will the TDs continue to buy this shit? Will they get a clue that no, the jobs aren't there. That their neighbors, friends, family, they themselves don't have jobs. Who are the going to blame when they have lost their health insurance, No, the deep hard core base will never get it.