قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ World https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ Trump made 96 false allegations last week

Trump made 96 false allegations last week



Fifty-three false claims are by far the most Trump has made in every 16 days of the 16 weeks we tracked, defeating the previous maximum of 41. Trump averaged about 68 false claims a week over a 16-week period – just be ashamed of 10 false claims a day.

His fraud last week focused on his behavior towards the impeachment investigation against Ukraine and the Democrats. Deep breath now:

He falsely claims to have released an accurate transcript of his July phone call with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky. He falsely claims that he did not ask Zelensky anything during the call. He falsely claims that people are no longer talking about calling.

He falsely claims that the complaint of the callers is "completely wrong". He falsely claims that whistleblowers claim he made seven or eight references to the "quid pro quo". He falsely claims that the whistle has disappeared. He falsely claims that Democrat Adam Schiff is the source of the whistleblowers.

He falsely claims that Schiff spoke about the call during a committee hearing before, and not after, the release of the rough transcript. He falsely claims that Schiff's comments are illegal. He falsely stated that Republicans were not allowed to ask questions during Democratic hearings on the impeachment investigation. And he claims these closed-door hearings are unprecedented.

Trump's most outrageous false statement: Trump's "prediction" of Osama bin Laden

The president complained that the media did not want to speak about his declaration in a 2000 book that Osama bin Laden should to be killed. In fact, he didn't say anything like that.

The president claims that today things will be different if his predictive words are heard. Again, these words do not exist.

The President states that there are still people who come to him, marveling at his incredible "prediction" for bin Laden. Again, he made no predictions about Bin Laden.

And the president states that this is a particularly remarkable prognosis, since at that time "no one" had ever heard of bin Laden. Bin Laden was prosecuted by the CIA and was listed on the FBI's Top 1
0 Most Wanted Fugitives the year before.
Here's a complete look at the facts of Trump's complicated fiction.

The most revealing false statement: how people "don't talk" about his conversation with the President of Ukraine

Trump's telephone conversation with Zelensky is at the center of Democrats' pressure to keep him. He remains the subject of discussion in the media and in the hearings on the impeachment investigation.

Trump said last week, "They don't talk about it anymore."

"They don't like to talk about the phone call," he told Hanity, "because it was perfect. "

Most politicians rotate, exaggerate, mislead. Trump is inviting people to join him in a fantastic country that is unlike anything they can see with their own eyes.

The most absurdly incorrect statement: George Washington's "Two Desks"

Trump likes to add vivid little details to his tales so they can theoretically sound more authentic.

Trying to defend himself last week against criticism of his aborted G7 summit plan at one of his resorts, he claims that George Washington not only runs a business while on duty – Washington is a major landowner and takes an active interest in his farm, so there is at least a fraction of the truth there – but Washington, "they say, had two offices. He had a presidential office and a business office."

For good measure, Trump indicated that if there were two offices near him.

The fact of Trump's scrutiny involves asking strange questions from experts who traditionally do not cling to articles about the dishonesty of elected officials. In this case, one of our recruits was Mary Thompson, a research historian in Mount Vernon, the historic home of Washington.

"I don't know that Washington had two offices in the study at the presidential mansion, which was a pretty small room," Thompson said.

Here is a complete check of the facts of this claim. And below is a complete list of this week's 96, starting with those we haven't included in a weekly update before:

Polls, Choices, and Achievements

Trump polls [19659007] "And I had great polls. I have my best polls right now. I think that's because people think it's awful what they do. Pelosi, Shifti Schiff, Schumer – these people are trying to destroy the country. " – Exchange on October 21 with reporters at a cabinet meeting

"I say this – and I see because I was – I mean, look at our fundraising. Money never goes that way. See in – my polls are were, like, most. "- Interview on October 21 with Fox News" Sean Hannity

Facts first : Trump did not say what polls he was referring to, but there is no indication that he is at its highest or "best" level ever, or that there has been some jump in numbers as a result of the Democrats' impeachment pressure.

Trump had 41.8% approval and 54.1% disapproval of the FiveThirtyEight poll on the day of those comments, October 21st. This was a decrease of 43.8% approval and 52.1% disapproval on September 25, its last peak. Trump was over 44% approval at various points in 2017 and 2018.

Trump's approval numbers with Republicans in particular are constantly above 80%, but even those numbers were not at their peak at the time he spoke here.

The people who cry

"We withdrew the ridiculous rule of United States Waters … When I did, I had people in my office – I had miners and farmers and builders building homes. And many of them they were healthy, strong men and women, and almost everyone was crying. They said, "Sir, you have returned our lives." – Speech on October 23 at the Shale Insight Conference
Facts First : We checked the video of this event in 2017 and no one behind Trump was crying. (Trump before claimed that "half" of people behind him o crying.)

Moody & # 39; s Report

Trump talks three times about household income growth with himself and Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush He said three times that the figures were from "Moody & # 39; s."

Facts first : These numbers are not from Moody & # 39; s, company spokesman Gene Kim confirmed ; they are manufactured by another company, Sentier Research. (Trump may just have been confused – he correctly referred to a recent analysis by Moody who found that he was about to win the 2020 election if the economy remained roughly as it is today.)
Recently, Sentier Research's data was mentioned by Stephen Moore, an economic associate with the Heritage Foundation and a contributor to Fox News.

Average Household Income and Energy

"Recent analysis has found that middle-class income has increased by $ 5,000. But add to that – this is average household income – add to those $ 2,000 from the reduction taxes and then $ 2,000 for energy because our energy is much cheaper … And so that will be $ 9,000 for a household. Average income. "- Speech on October 25, 2019. Justice Forum of the Second step in 2019

Facts first : There is no reason to add "$ 2000 for energy" in addition to the $ 5,000 average household income figure. [$

The $ 5,000 figure comes from Sentier Research, a privately held company run by former Census Bureau employees. The company uses a different methodology from the Census Bureau, and its estimated increase in Trump era earnings is much greater than the increase in the Census Bureau itself between 2016 and 2018.
Which figure is more accurate, there is no estimate that the average household earned "$ 2,000 in energy" over and above the $ 5,000 profit found by Sentier. Consumer spending has increased since Trump took office, as has gasoline spending.

Sentier data and inflation

"You know, a number just appeared … under the Bush administration, in eight years, the average household income has increased $ 400. This is over eight years. OK? So, remember: $ 400, eight years … so remember this: eight years, eight years, $ 400 – $ 400. You don't even know – this is wiped out by inflation. Four hundred dollars. "- October 23 Speech at the Shale Insight Conference

Facts First : As Washington Post noted Trump was wrong that the average increase in household incomes was $ 400 below Bush "gets wiped out by inflation. "Sentier data has already been adjusted for inflation, confirmed company partner Gordon Green.

Construction of the Empire State Building

for one year. Believe it or not, for nine months. "- October 23 speech at the Shale Insight Conference

Facts First : The Empire State Building was built in 13 months not nine months. (We would have released it if Trump had stuck to "only one year," but nine months was objectively wrong.)

The pace of road approvals

". I mean the roads are being considered – we have roads, 21 years, 22 years. They end up costing many, many times more … But the permits that took 17, 18, 19 years, we think we can get – – we are up to two years. And we think we can get around it. And you may be rejected, people, but it will be quick. "- October 23 speech at the Shale Insight Conference

Facts first : There is no clear basis for Trump's claim that it now takes only two years to obtain environmental approval for" roads " , although he was not very specific about which routes he was talking about, according to the National Environmental Policy (NEPA) page on the Federal Highway Administration page the average time for completing the environmental impact statement is 47 months over 2018, compared to 46 months in 2017 and 44 months in 2016

White House report in December 2018 reveals an average completion time of 4.5 years and an average completion time of 3.6 years for the government for various types of projects.

Brad Karkakinen, Professor a Minnesota law expert in Minnesota and an environmental and land use expert said in an email that he "has never heard of a highway project that takes 18 or 20 years, although it is certainly possible when the average time is six or seven years, several projects took twice as long, maybe more. "He said that some projects can" sail through "much faster than average time," but to suggest that Trump does that typical time has gone from 17+ years to two years is just plain stupid. "[19659002] Louisiana Governor

"… In Louisiana the next day, the governor was 66 – he couldn't get 50%." – Interview on October 21 with Fox News "Sean Hanity

] Facts first : Trump was unclear here, but Louisiana Governor John Bell Edwards was "not 66" in the ballot box or in his previous election. ] 56% of the vote when elected in 2015; Public Studies listed by FiveThirtyEight does not have it higher than 55% this year's open primary. at the office, I approved the permits for the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines. And that's a big thing. "- Speech on October 23 at the Shale Insight Conference

Facts first : That didn't quite happen. In the first week of office, Trump signed an executive order for progress on both pipelines, but he did not give final approval to Keystone XL until a little over two months in his presidency. During the third week of Trump's service, the Army announced that it would grant definitive permits for the Dakota Access Pipeline.

Quote by Charlie Kirk

"" … Our students feel POSSIBLE. There is a movement on these campuses that I have never seen. When you have 3000 students who want to get into an event that can't go in, it's pretty remarkable! "@ charliekirk11 Turning Point USA SAVE AMERICA GREAT!" – October 23 tweet

Facts first : Trump's tweet missed an important part of Fox's Curt quote: Kirk's reference to the protests at an event introducing himself and Donald Trump, Jr. The president also added a hyperbolic statement that Kirk does not make in this quote.

Introducing Kirk, founder of the conservative Turning Point USA, the hosts of Fox & Friends mentioned the protests surrounding the event at Colorado State University. Kirk said, "There is traffic going on on these campuses. There were some protests from non-students in the local area, but when you have 3000 people who wanted to get out but couldn't get out, it's pretty remarkable!"

Trump replaced Kirk's reference to the protests in his own words, "as I've never seen before."

Quote from Steve Dookie

"The majority do not want to be hindered and removed from office. 94% of the people in those states who voted for President Trump want him to continue as president. categorically in your own corner. "" @SteveDoocy – October 22 tweet

Facts first : Trump's tweet missed a significant part of Doocy's quote: Doocy noted that poll shows that the majority of respondents supported the impeachment inquiry of Democratic parliamentary members.

Doocy, co-host Fox & Friends, in fact, said: "The majority is for the investigation, but don't want him removed and removed from office and also said that I think 94% of people in those states in the battlefield who voted about President Trump, they want him to continue as president. That's right in his corner. "

The Republican Impeachment Investigation

[19659002] Republicans and the Impeachment Investigation

" But We Have No Lawyers – We Don't Have Lawyers Republicans – because this is the minority. We have no lawyers, we cannot question, we cannot do anything. We can't – they can't even get into the room … "- October 21 Fox News interview" Sean Hannity

Facts first : Trump was right that the Democratic House Majority did not allow White House lawyers in their private hearings. However, 48 Republican members of the three committees conducting the hearings – intelligence, foreign affairs and surveillance – were indeed put in the room and given equal time to question witnesses. Trump may refer to a stunt in which Republicans who were not members of any of the three committees, along with some of the Republicans who were members, stormed the protected committee room to make political point; non-members were not allowed to attend. But their members were allowed to be full participants in the process.

outdoor impeachment meetings

"Well, I think they are – – To be honest: I loved seeing that scene of unity yesterday with the congressmen going down because they have bondage. It's – you know, looking at what's going on downstairs in the small room – that little secret room. No one has ever had such a thing. This has never happened before. "- Interview on October 25 with Eric Boling of the Sinclair Broadcast Group
Facts First : It is not true that" no one has ever had anything like this "The House of Doors as part of their impeachment investigation The impeachment processes for the two presidents Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon also participated in closed-door meetings to which members of Congress gathered evidence. [1945901]

"The President's comments are wholly, wholly and utterly wrong," says Jeffrey Engle, M.Sc. Vatel Center for the History of the President at Southern Methodist University. "Just normal for these discussions to be held behind closed doors, because both will tell you all of all committee on investigations get better answers when no cameras. "

the witnesses of the impeachment

" They are interviewing – they are between looking at ambassadors I have never heard of. I don't know who these people are. I've never heard of them. And I have great respect for some of them. … Remember, many of these people were housed there during Obama, during Clinton, during the Never Trump or Bush era. You know, you've never had Trump or Bush. "- 21 октомври обмен с репортери на заседанието на кабинета

Факти първо : Както отбеляза FactCheck.org :" Всъщност сред деветте правителствени служители, които досега са свидетели на закрити заседания, само двама бяха назначени на сегашните си или наскоро подадени оставки в администрацията на Обама. Останалите седем са назначени от назначените от Тръмп или Тръмп, като държавен секретар Майк Помпео. "
Не можем окончателно да проверим дали Тръмп е чувал за собствените си назначени, но си струва да отбележим, че те наистина са собствените му назначени, че изповядва уважение към „някои от тях“ веднага след като каза, че никога не е чувал за тях и че той има история на минимизиране на отношенията си с бивши сътрудници, когато това е удобно за него.

Демократи

Барак Обама и Ким Чен Ун

"Но междувременно Северна Корея, харесвам Ким, той ме харесва. Разбираме се. Уважавам го, той ме уважава. – Можеш да се озовеш във война. Президентът Обама ми каза това. Той каза: "Най-големият проблем, не знам как да го реша." Каза ми, че не знае как да го реши. Казах: „Някога ли сте му се обаждали?“ 'Не.' Всъщност той опита 11 пъти. Но мъжът от другата страна, господинът от другата страна, не се обади. ДОБРЕ? Липса на респект. Но той приема моя призив. "" – обмен на 21 октомври с репортери на заседанието на кабинета

Факти първо : Няма очевидно основание за твърдението, че Обама се опита да повика Ким Чен Ун 11 пъти. Всъщност няма доказателства, че Обама го е повикал дори веднъж. Бившите му служители по националната сигурност казват, че не е. Прочетете пълната ни проверка на фактите тук .

Conor Lamb и Тръмп

„И така, Конор Агнец – точно тук от Питсбърг. И аз оценявам – Конор, който и да си ти – нямам представа как изглеждаш дори. Но има човек на име Conor Lamb, който говори много хубаво за – знаеш ли защо? Защото си в район на Тръмп. Не, правилно е. Вярно е. Така ли е? – Не, президентът е отличен. Той върши добра работа. Мислех, че е републиканец, докато не разбрах. "- реч на 23 октомври на конференцията на Shale Insight

Факти първа : Агнец, демократичен конгресмен в Пенсилвания, който се позиционира като умерен , направи усилие да избегне атаката на Тръмп, изрази готовност да работи с Тръмп и изрази квалифицирана подкрепа за тарифите на Тръмп за стоманата и алуминия (той призова за фокус върху Китай, а не отколкото съюзници като Канада) – но Ламб не е нарекъл Тръмп "отличен" или казал, че "върши добра работа".
Тръмп преди това е преувеличил колко положително е ил Агнецът към него, лъжливо твърдейки, че Агнец е одобрил Данъчното законодателство на Тръмп Lamb беше против кампания.

Conor Lamb и пистолети

"Те искат да ви отнемат оръжията. Conor Lamb иска да ви отнеме оръжията. "- реч на 23 октомври на конференцията Shale Insight

Факти първа : Няма доказателства, че Lamb" иска да ви отнеме оръжията. "Lamb казва че подкрепя универсалните проверки на фона, но той се противопоставя на забрана за оръжие за нападение и казва, че новите закони за оръжия не са отговор на проблема с масовите стрелби.

Отговорът на Обама на руската намеса в изборите

„И на президента Обама през септември (2016 г.) беше казано за руското влияние и той не искаше да прави нищо по въпроса. Не искаше да прави нещо по въпроса. Защото предположи, че Хилари ще спечели. Така че той не направи нищо по въпроса. Никой не казв а това. "- 21 октомври интервю за Fox News" Шон Ханити

Факти първо : Обама е критикуван, дори от някои демократи защото не действайки по-силно, когато беше уведомен за намеса на Русия в изборите през 2016 г. Все пак е преувеличение да се каже, че „той не направи нещо.“ Обама и неговите висши служители направиха няколко неща в отговор на информацията. [19659008] Сан Франциско и околната среда

„Не мога да повярвам, че районът на Нанси Пелоси в Сан Франциско е в такава ужасна форма, че самият град нарушава много санитарни и екологични поръчки, което го кара да дължи Милиарди долари на федералното правителство – и всичко, върху което работи, е Impeachment. Всички трябва да работим заедно за почистването на тези опасни отпадъци и места за бездомни, преди целият град да изгние. Много лоши и опасни условия, които тежко влияят на Тихия океан и водоснабдяването. Пелоси трябва да работи върху тази бъркотия и да обърне своя окръг! "- 26 октомври туит

Факти първо: Сан Франциско не дължи на федералното правителство милиарди долари над предполагаемите си нарушения на околната среда. И твърдението, че замърсяването от бездомното население в Сан Франциско "силно влияе на Тихия океан и водоснабдяването", се оспорва остро от екологичните експерти.

През септември администраторът на Агенцията за опазване на околната среда Андрю Уилър , изпрати писмо до губернатора на Калифорния, в което твърди, че има „недостатъци“ в прилагането на фед ралните закони за околната среда в държавата. Писмото, последвало спор между администрацията на Тръмп и държавата за стандартите за автомобилни емисии, се вижда от много демократи, бивш EPA длъжностни лица и експерти по околната среда като възмездие.

Независимо от истинските мотиви на администрацията, писмото не твърди, че Сан Франциско или държавата s милиарди на федералното правителство В него се казва, че Сан Франциско "трябва да инвестира милиарди долари", за да модернизира канализационната си система; това не е едно и също нещо.

Ан Карлсън, професор по право в областта на околната среда в Калифорнийския университет, Лос Анджелис и преподавател, директор на Института Емет по изменението на климата и околната среда, отбеляза липсата на доказателства за администрацията твърдения за екологични проблеми, причинени от бездомни хора в Сан Франциско.

„Туитът на Тръмп е подвеждащ или напълно невярен на няколко фронта. Въпреки че в края на септември той заяви, че провалът на града в управлението на проблема с бездомността причинява сериозни проблеми с замърсяването на водата от игли. и човешки отпадъци, неговото СИП не представи никакви доказателства, които да подкрепят твърдението си “, каза тя.

"Всъщност, след като направи това обвинение, EPA изпрати в Сан Франциско съобщение за нарушение, което обвини града за нарушаване на федералния закон за чиста вода при експлоатацията на неговата канализация и канализация. EPA не споменава за всякакви проблеми, причинени от бездомното население – можете да се обзаложите, ако агенцията разполага с някакви доказателства, тя би включила споменаването на доказателствата в писмото. "

Джордж Вашингтон

президентска заплата

"Но аз давам президентската си за плата. Казват, че никой друг президент не го е направил. Изненадан съм, за да бъда честен с вас. Всъщност те казват, че Джордж Вашингтон може би е бил единственият друг президент. " – Забележки от 21 октомври на заседанието на кабинета

Факти Първо : Тръмп дарява заплатата си, но останалата част от искането му е неточна. Той не е единственият президент, дарил официалната заплата; и двамата Джон Ф. Кенеди и Хърбърт Хувър го направиха .
Въпреки че първоначално Вашингтон е отказал заплатата си, той се е отказал, след като Конгресът настоява.

"Двете бюра" на Джордж Вашингтон

"Но други президенти, ако погледнете – – други президенти бяха заможни. Не огромно богатство. Джордж Вашингтон всъщност се смяташе за много, много богат човек по онова време. Но те управляваха бизнеса си. Джордж Вашингтон, казва, имаше две бюра: Той имаше президентско бюро и бизнес бюро . " – обмен на 21 октомври с репортери на заседание на кабинета

Факти първо : Вашингтон, основен собственик на земя, продължава да притежава собственост, докато изпълнява функциите на през идент, и той се интересува от [19659034] в своята ферма в Маунт Върнън, докато е на служба – дори пише на официален представител на Обединеното кралство, за да обсъжда получаването на помощ за намиране на наематели за земя на Маунт Върнън. Но историците твърдят, че твърдението на Тръмп за Вашингтон да има отделно бюро за бизнес работа е неоснователно.
Тук можете да прочетете по-дълга проверка на фактите.

Външни и военни дела

Избягали ISIS затворници

"Генерал Мазлум ме увери, че ISIS се намира под много, много строго заключване, а местата за задържане са силно поддържани. Има няколко, които се измъкнаха – малък брой, сравнително казано – и те до голяма степен бяха завзети. " – Реч на 23 октомври за ситуацията в Сирия
Факти Първи : Анти-ISIS пратеникът на Тръмп, Джеймс Джефри, свидетелства пред Конгреса около час по-рано, че го прави не знам къде се намират избягалите затворници. "Ние не знаем къде се намират", заяви Джефри, който служи и като специален пратеник на глобалната коалиция, която да победи ИСИС, и като специален представител за ангажимента на Сирия, заяви пред Комитета по външни работи на Камарата.

Тръмп изявления за Ирак и петрола

"Винаги съм казвал:" Ако ще влязат … "Никой не се е интересувал толкова много, но е писано за това." Ако те ще влязат вътре. "Сигурен съм, че сте чули изявлението, защото го направих повече от всеки човек жив." Ако отиват в Ирак, пазете маслото. " Те никога не са го правили. – пресконференция на 27 октомври след смъртта на лидера на ISIS Абу Бакр ал Багдади

Факти Първи : Не можахме да намерим никакви примери за Тръмп да говори преди войната за запазването на иракския петрол. (Белият дом не отговори на искане за доказателства.) Както по отношение на позицията си по отношение на самото нашествие, Тръмп изглежда описва коментари, които е направил по време на войната, сякаш ги прави по време на настъпването на войната.

Имаше поне малко по-фактическо основание з а това твърдение, отколкото твърдението му, че се противопостави на инвазията: Тръмп имаше история да предполага, че САЩ ще получат или вземат петрола на страните от Близкия изток. Например в CNN през 1987 г. той призова САЩ да получат процент от петрола на Кувейт в замяна на военна защита. Същата година Флоридският вестник St. Petersburg Times съобщава, че Тръмп е предложил в реч в Ню Хемпшир, че "САЩ трябва да нападнат Иран" и да поемат част от нефта им. "
Но тези коментари бяха повече от 15 години преди инвазията в Ирак и не бяха за Ирак. Можете да прочетете по-дълга проверка на фактите тук.

Тръмп, неговата книга и Осама бин Ладен

"Знаеш ли, ако четеш моята книга – имаше книга, преди Световният търговски център да падне. И аз не разбирам заслуга за това, но това е ОК. Никога не го правя. Но ето ни. Написах книга – наистина много успешна книга. И в тази книга, около година преди Световният търговски център да бъде взривен, аз "Има някой на име Осама бин Ладен. По-добре да го убиете или да го изведете." Нещо в този смисъл. "Той е голям проблем." "И:" Мисля, че ставаше въпрос – ако проверите, мина една година преди Световният търговски център да падне. И казвам на хората: "Извадете Осама бин Ладен, "за който никой никога не е чувал. Никой никога не е чувал за …" – пресконференция на 27 октомври след смъртта на лидера на ISIS Абу Бакр ал Багдади

Факти първо : Книгата на Тръмп от януари 2000 г. „Америка, която заслужаваме“ спомена веднъж Бин Ладен, но тя не призовава Бин Ладен да бъде убит или да предупреди, че ще извърши голяма атака, ако не бъде убит. В отделен раздел, в книгата се казва, че САЩ са изложени на опасност от голямо терористично нападение, което ще направи бомбардировките над Световния търговски център през 1993 г. да изглеждат незначителни в срав нение – но не прогнозира, че бин Ладен или Ал Кайда ще бъдат извършителят на тази атака.

Можете да прочетете по-дълга проверка на фактите тук.

Размерът на китайската икономика

"Така че, ако не бях избран, в момента Китай би бил най-голямата икономика в света. Очакваше се. Това беше казано от мнозина хора, които Китай би направил в момента – те очакваха около втората година от този мандат. " – Забележки на 21 октомври по време на заседанието на кабинета

„Когато встъпих в длъжност, всички казаха, че Китай ще бъде най-голямата икономика в света през първите две години. И ние събрахме трилиони и трилиони долари на стойност, а Китай има загубени трилиони долари на стойност. " – обмен на 23 октомври с репортери преди отпътуването на Морска първа

Факти първо : Експертите по Китай не декларират, че китайската икономика ще бъде по-голяма от американската икономика в рамките на две години от встъпването на Тръмп в длъжност , at least not around the time Trump did take office.

"When the President took office, there were no predictions China would surpass the US in GDP within two years. Their GDP was 60% the size of the US at the time and slowing. They would have had to grow $7.5 trillion to catch us in two years even if we didn't grow at all, which would have required 30% annual increases on their part. No one would predict that," said Derek Scissors, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute and an expert on the Chinese economy.

Scissors said Trump might possibly have been thinking of three things: bad predictions at the start of the decade that China would pass the US around this time; predictions when Trump came into office that China would pass the US before the end of his hypothetical second term; figures that incorporate purchasing power parity rather than measuring the absolute size of the economies.

China's economic growth

"We are much bigger than the China economy. And we're getting bigger, and they're not." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: China's economy is getting bigger, though its growth has slowed. China reported 6% economic growth in the third quarter of 2019 — the weakest growth since 1992but growth nonetheless.
China's official figures are not always reliable, but there is no doubt that China is growing; the International Monetary Fund expects 6.1% growth in 2019 and 5.8% growth in 2020.

Trump's strike against Syria

"I wiped out the caliphate. And you also saw when I hit 58 rockets, missiles right into the middle. Tomahawk, right into the middle of — of Syria and knocked out a whole base…" — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

Facts First: A Syrian air base did indeed suffer serious damage as a result of the airstrike Trump approved in 2017, but it was not "knocked out." The Shayrat base had returned to use by the next day, according to the governor of the province of Homs and a UK-based monitoring organization, Reuters reported.
Trump himself acknowledged at the time that the runways had not been destroyed, tweeting: "The reason you don't generally hit runways is that they are easy and inexpensive to quickly fix (fill in and top)!"

Hillary Clinton and trade with South Korea

"… as an example, we finished it with South Korea. What a difference that has made. That was a Hillary Clinton deal. She said, 'This will produce 250,000 jobs.' And she was right, except the jobs were produced for South Korea, not for us, OK?" — October 23 speech at Shale Insight Conference

Facts First: There is no record of Clinton, who served as secretary of state, saying that the US trade deal with South Korea would "produce 250,000 jobs." Obama said the deal would "support at least 70,000 American jobs."
Clinton was a key figure in the negotiations over the agreement, known as KORUS, but when Trump calls it a "Hillary Clinton deal," it's worth noting that the agreement was originally signed in 2007 by the George W. Bush administration. The Obama administration renegotiated some of its provisions.

The size of Miami International Airport

Touting the benefits of his Doral resort in Florida, Trump said, "Right next to the airport, Miami International –one of the biggest airports in the world. Some people say it's the biggest. But one of the biggest airports in the world." — October 21 exchange with reporters at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: Miami International is certainly not the biggest airport in the world.

The airport was not in the top 20 for passenger traffic in 2018 or 2017. It ranked 15th in cargo traffic in 2018 and 14th in 2017, with less than half of the tonnage of cargo of top-ranked Hong Kong.
Though world airports authorities do not release rankings of airports' physical size, Miami International is not even close to the largest airport in the United States. Chicago's O'Hare, for example, occupies about 7,200 acres, Miami International 3,230 acres.

The Emoluments Clause

"…you people, with this phony Emoluments Clause…" — October 21 exchange with reporters at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: There's nothing phony about the Constitution's prohibitions against the President receiving payments from foreign and domestic governments.

The clause on foreign emoluments, found in Article I, Section 9, says that "no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state."

The clause on domestic emoluments, found in Article II, Section 1, says: "The President shall, at stated times, receive for his services, a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that period any other emolument from the United States, or any of them."

Trump might have been attempting to argue that it is phony to apply the clause to his own activities, but, at very least, his wording left an inaccurate impression.

A quote from Fox & Friends

"General Michael Flynn's attorney is demanding that charges be immediately dropped after they found that FBI Agents manipulated records against him. They say that James Clapper told a reporter to 'take a kill shot at Flynn. This has been a complete setup of Michael Flynn. They exonerated him completely of being an agent of Russia (Recently Crooked Hillary charged Tulsi Gabbard & Jill Stein with the same thing-SICK), and yet Mr. Comey still runs to the White House on February 14 and conjures up the Obstruction of Justice narrative against the President when Flynn had been cleared of everything long before that. The DOJ is withholding a lot of evidence & information, as are Clapper & Brennan & all of the people who participated in the complete setup of Michael Flynn.' (Terrible!) Sidney Powell. This is a disgrace!" — October 26 tweet

Facts First: We give Trump significant leeway to make minor errors when he is quoting people from television, but he went too far here. Trump attributed to Powell, a lawyer for Flynn, sentences that were actually uttered by Fox & Friends hosts Pete Hegseth and Jedediah Bila. He also added the parenthetical "Recently Crooked Hillary charged Tulsi Gabbard & Jill Stein with the same thing-SICK," which nobody on the show said.

You can watch the exchange here.

The government's land holdings

"Interior Secretary — largest landlord in the United States by a factor of about 200 — David Bernhardt. Where's David? David? Thank you, David. Stand up. What a great job. He's basically the landlord to about half of the United States." — October 23 speech at Shale Insight Conference

Facts First: We know Trump was speaking informally here, but "half" is a significant exaggeration. The Congressional Research Service reported in 2017: "The federal government owns roughly 640 million acres, about 28% of the 2.27 billion acres of land in the United States."

The land is managed by the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture.

An 'apology' from the New York Times

"And then after the election, The New York Times apologized for their coverage, because they were covering me in such a way. So when I won they actually apologized to their subscribers, because they were losing thousands and thousands of subscribers. The New York Times wrote an apology. Nothing else. You know, they're saying well, it wasn't really an apology. It was. Because they covered me so badly." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

Facts First: The Times' letter was not an apology.

The letter, from publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and executive editor Dean Baquet, did say the election had raised several questions, including this: "Did Donald Trump's sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters?"

But the letter did not issue any apology, to Trump or anyone else.

Here are the claims Trump made last week that we have previously fact checked in one of these weekly roundups:

The Ukraine scandal

The call with Zelensky

Trump said of the phone call: "There was no anything asked for. There was no pressure whatsoever." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: Trump is free to argue that his requests to Zelensky did not constitute "pressure," but he is simply wrong that he didn't make any requests at all. Trump asked Zelensky to look into former Vice President Joe Biden, into a debunked conspiracy theory about Democratic computer servers, and to speak with his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and Attorney General William Barr. In fact, prior to launching into the request about the server, Trump said, "I would like you to do us a favor though."

You can read a full fact check of this claim here.

The rough transcript

"… I released a transcription then by stenographers of the exact conversation I had." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

"So now we have a conversation that's perfect. And it's transcribed. And it's done by totally professional people, stenographers or whatever you would call them. So we have an exact conversation." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

Facts First: The document released by the White House explicitly says, on the first page, that it is not an exact transcript of the call.

In testimony on Tuesday, the National Security Council's top Ukraine expert, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, said that he tried to make edits to the document to include two things that were said on the call but not included in the document, a source told CNN.

The whistleblower's accuracy

"You know, these whistleblowers, they have them like they're angels. OK? So do we have to protect somebody that gave a totally false account of my conversation? Не знам. You tell me. " — October 21 exchange with reporters at Cabinet meeting

"And now you don't hear from the whistleblower anymore, because the whistleblower was talking about this conversation — in phony terms." And: "Well, now the funny thing is that they say — they say that the whistleblower — they don't need the whistleblower anymore. Why don't they need the whistleblower? You know why they don't need the whistleblower, because the whistleblower's account of my conversation was totally wrong." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

"Where is the Whistleblower, and why did he or she write such a fictitious and incorrect account of my phone call with the Ukrainian President?" — October 24 tweet
"But everything was about the Whistleblower (they no longer want the second Whistleblower either), which they don't want because the account of my call bore NO RELATIONSHIP to the call itself. The entire Impeachment Scam was based on my perfect Ukrainian call, and the Whistleblowers account of that call, which turned out to be false (a fraud?)." — October 25 tweet

Facts First: The whistleblower's account of the call has largely been proven accurate. In fact, the rough transcript released by Trump himself showed that the whistleblower's three primary allegations about the call were correct or very close to correct.

You can read a full fact check here.

Rep. Adam Schiff and the whistleblower

"So was there actually an informant? Maybe the informant was Schiff. It could be shifty Schiff. In my opinion it's possibly Schiff." — October 21 exchange with reporters at Cabinet meeting

"They don't like to talk about the — Adam Schiff said he doesn't want the whistleblower anymore. You know why? Because he might have given the whistleblower the things to say." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

"Who is the so-called Informant (Schiff?) who was so inaccurate? A giant Scam!" — October 24 tweet
Facts First: This is nonsensical. Schiff, a Democratic congressman and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, did not have access to the internal White House information the whistleblower revealed; he could not have told the whistleblower about the contents of Trump's phone call with Zelensky or other information the whistleblower reported. The whistleblower said information about the call came from "multiple White House officials with direct knowledge of the call."

Schiff did say that it might not be necessary for the whistleblower to testify. He said it might be possible to uncover critical evidence without jeopardizing the whistleblower's anonymity.

The timing of Schiff's comments

"So he made up a lie, and I released — they never thought that I'd do this — I released a transcription done by stenographe rs o f the exact conversation I had. And now the game was up." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

"For instance, when you do a censure vote on Adam Schiff, what did he do? He made up my conversation, totally — like fiction. It was — it was fraudulent. He made it sound — he took that conversation he made it sound — now, he didn't know about that conversation. So he went up — and he made up a phony conversation, read it to Congress, read it the American people. And I released that, and that was the real conversation…" — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

"If you think — Schiff made up, his words — not my words. He went before Congress and the American people and he repeated a conversation that I never had, and then I released the conversation, because we had stenographers and transcribers, and the conversation was a perfect conversation." — October 25 interview with Sinclair Broadcast Group's Eric Bolling
Facts First: Schiff made his comments about Trump's call with Zelensky the day after Trump released the rough transcript, not before. Before he started claiming that Schiff did not expect a transcript to be released, Trump had complained that Schiff did not read the transcript available to him.

Even Trump's friendly interviewer here, Fox's Sean Hannity, seemed to be gently correcting him, noting that the conversation "was already out" when Schiff spoke.

The legality of Schiff's comments

"But he made it sound so horrible. That's illegal. I mean, it — no way you can get away with that. That's a — but that's a total fraud." — October 25 interview with Sinclair Broadcast Group's Eric Bolling

Facts First: While it's fair for Trump to be miffed about Schiff's comments at a congressional committee meeting — Schiff's mix of near-quotes from Trump, his own analysis, and supposed "parody" was at the very least confusing — Schiff's words were not illegal. The Constitution includes a specific provision that allows members of Congress to speak freely during official meetings.

The whistleblower's knowledge

"The whistleblower had second- and third-hand information. You remember that, it was a big problem." — October 21 exchange with reporters at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: Some of the whistleblower's information came from others, but some did not. Michael Atkinson, the Trump-appointed inspector general for the intelligence community, noted that the whistleblower had "direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct."

The whistleblower and quid pro quo

"And to think they took that call — now, the big thing I did with that call, Sean, the biggest thing is immediately released it because the whistleblower came out and said horrible things about this call. I think they said there were eight — seven or eight — quid pro quos. It was really a terrible call — you know, all these terrible things about this call." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

Facts First: The whistleblower did not even use the words "quid pro quo," much less specify a number of times Trump allegedly said them.

People talking about Trump's Ukraine call

"The — one of his (Zelensky's) top people — I guess, one of his heads of state came out and said this was a perfect call. There was no pressure. They didn't even know what we were talking about. To think that they're using that — now they don't talk about that anymore, because that letter was so good. So they don't talk about it anymore, Sean. And the reason they don't talk about it: there's nothing to talk about." And: "How can you take a President — now, again, they don't like to talk about the phone call because it was perfect." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

Facts First: To the contrary, Trump's call with Ukraine's President was the subject of widespread discussion among members of Congress and in the media at the time; it was a central focus of Democrats' impeachment inquiry.

The whistleblower being "gone"

"You never hear, what happened to the whistleblower? They're gone, because they've been discredited." — October 21 exchange with reporters at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: There is no evidence that either the first whistleblower (who filed the complaint about Trump's dealings with Ukraine) or the second whistleblower (whose lawyers say they have firsthand information corroborating claims made by the first whistleblower) are now somehow "gone," let alone that they are "gone" because the first whistleblower was shown to be inaccurate.

"The whistleblowers have not vanished," Bradley Moss, a colleague of Mark Zaid, a lawyer for the two whistleblowers, said on Twitter.

Foreign and military affairs

The troops being withdrawn from Syria

"But when I watch these pundits that always are trying to take a shot, I say — they say, 'What are we getting out of it?' You know what we're getting out of it? We're bringing our soldiers back home. That's a big thing." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: Trump is not bringing the troops back home, at least not at the moment.

Trump has announced that "United States troops coming out of Syria will now redeploy and remain in the region to monitor the situation and prevent a repeat of 2014, when the neglected threat of ISIS raged across Syria and Iraq," then that some troops would remain in Syria to protect oil fields. He has also announced that 1,800 more troops would be deployed to Saudi Arabia.

Trump conceded later in the Cabinet meeting that the soldiers will be "sent, initially, to different parts," but he claimed that they would "ultimately" return to the US.

The timeline in Syria

"We won't be fighting, and we'll bring our soldiers back home. They were supposed to be there for 30 days, and they've been there now for 10 years, in Syria. Ten years." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

"We want to bring soldiers back home. They were supposed to be there for 30 days. They're there for 10 years." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

"We were supposed to be there for 30 days; that was almost 10 years ago. So we're there for 30 days, and now we're leaving. It was supposed to be a very quick hit and let's get out." — October 23 speech on the situation in Syria

"We were supposed to be there for 30 days – That was 10 years ago." — October 25 tweet

Facts First: There was never any specific timeline for the US military's involvement in Syria, much less a timeline of a mere 30 days. The US began bombing Syria in 2014 and deployed ground troops in 2015 — five years ago and four years ago, not 10 years ago.

Military spending

"We are building up America's military might like never before, investing $2.5 trillion since my election." — October 23 speech on the situation in Syria

Facts First: Defense spending for fiscal years 2017, 2018 and 2019 was $2.05 trillion, and that includes more than three-and-a-half months of Obama's tenure, since the 2017 fiscal year began in October 2016.

Todd Harrison, di rector of defense budget analysis at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said he thinks Trump must have been including military funding for the 2020 fiscal year to get to the "$2.5 trillion" figure — but the 2020 fiscal year just started on October 1, and Harrison noted that the defense appropriation has not yet been approved by Congress.

The deal with Turkey

"People have been trying to make this deal for years." — October 21 exchange with reporters at Cabinet meeting

"This was an outcome created by us, the United States, and nobody else, no other nation. Very simple. And we're willing to take blame, and we're also willing to take credit. This is something they've been trying to do for many, many decades." — October 23 speech on the situation in Syria

Facts First: Trump's claim is baseless to the point of being nonsensical. The deal is a narrow agreement specifically tied to the Turkish offensive that followed Trump's decision to withdraw US troops from a Kurdish-held region of northern Syria, not an agreement that resolves longstanding regional disputes. Further, Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush never sought to give Turkey anything like the concessionary terms of Trump's deal.

You can read a longer fact check here.

The Iraq War

"If you remember, I didn't want to go into Iraq. I was a civilian, so I had no power over it. But I always was speaking against going into Iraq." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting.

"If you read about the history of Donald Trump — I was a civilian. I had absolutely nothing to do with going into Iraq, and I was totally against it." And: "In Iraq — so they spent — President Bush went in. I strongly disagreed with it, even though it wasn't my expertise at the time, but I had a — I have a very good instinct about things." — October 27 press conference after the death of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi

Facts First: Trump did not publicly oppose the invasion of Iraq before it began. Trump was tentatively supportive of the war when radio host Howard Stern asked him in September 2002, "Are you for invading Iraq?" He responded: "Yeah, I guess so. I wish the first time it was done correctly." The day after the invasion in March 2003, he said, "It looks like a tremendous success from a military standpoint." Trump did not offer a definitive position on the looming war in a Fox News interview in January 2003, saying, "Either you attack or don't attack."

Trump started publicly questioning the war later in 2003, and he was an explicit opponent in 2014. You can read a longer fact check here.

China and nuclear weapons

"Right now we have the most powerful nuclear force in the world. … And we are discussing with Russia, and we're discussing with China. During the recent trade deal with China, I said, 'We should all get together and work out something — a cap, have a cap. We don't need 10,000 weapons, have a cap.' And I will say China and Russia are talking about it. … I'm very excited about it. … And I think Russia would like to make a deal, and I think China would like to make a deal. And I think that's a big — that would be a terrific thing. I'd love to be a part of that." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

Facts First: There is no apparent basis for Trump's claim that "China would like to make a deal" that would limit its nuclear arsenal. While we can't know what Chinese officials might have said to Trump in private, China has publicly expressed vehement opposition to negotiating any limits with the US and Russia.

After Trump previously suggested that China wanted to participate in a trilateral deal with the US and Russia, a spokesperson for the Chinese government said in May: "We oppose any country's attempt to make an issue out of China on arms control and will not participate in any negotiation for a trilateral nuclear disarmament agreement."
In October, Bloomberg reported that Fu Cong, director general of the foreign ministry's Arms Control Department, had said, "China has no interest in participating in a nuclear-arms-r eduction negot iation with the U.S. or Russia, given the huge gap between China's nuclear arsenal and those of the U.S. and Russia."

Retired Air Force Col. Cedric Leighton, a CNN military analyst, told us this week: "China has developed an expansive overarching military strategy and they don't believe submitting to a potentially disadvantageous (for them) arms control regime is in China's best interest. While China did accede to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1968, it has never agreed to limits on its short- and intermediate-range missiles. As an ascendant power, China has no real incentive to limit its nuclear arsenal unless it determines that it doesn't need nuclear weapons to achieve its foreign policy goals."

Economy and energy

Ivanka Trump and jobs

"Through our Pledge to American Workers, more than 360 companies have committed to providing over 14 million training jobs and career opportunities for the American worker. My daughter, Ivanka, worked so hard on that. That's her love. It's her passion. It's incredible. She came to me at the beginning of the administration, and she said, 'I want to help people get jobs, Dad. But they have to be trained.' She was a great student. She's a great person. And she said, 'But they have to be trained.' I said, 'What's your goal?' She said, '500,000 jobs.' She just hit 14 million. Can you be — I said, 'That's Ivanka.' You know, that's Ivanka. Fourteen million jobs." — October 25 speech to 2019 Second Step Presidential Justice Forum
Facts First: Given that fewer than 6.5 million jobs had been created during the entire Trump presidency through September, Ivanka Trump, the President's daughter and White House adviser, was obviously not responsible for "14 million jobs." As Trump alluded to in a slightly more accurate remark earlier in this paragraph, companies have promised to create more than 14 million "new opportunities" for workers as of Wednesday — but many of these "opportunities" are internal training opportunities, not new jobs.

The web page for the pledge program describes them as "education and training opportunities." Also, as CNN has previously reported, many of the companies had already planned these opportunities before Ivanka Trump launched the initiative.

The Cameron LNG plant in Louisiana

"Th ink what that — I just left Louisiana recently. And we opened a $10 billion LNG plant. I don't know if I've ever seen a longer building. It's like a skyscraper laid on its side. It is the most incredible thing you've ever seen. More pipes in that building that — nobody realized how complex it is. But it took years and years, and it was a dead project. And I had it approved almost immediately." — October 23 speech at Shale Insight Conference

Facts First: The permits for the Sempra Energy facility Trump visited in May were granted by the Obama administration.

The company says on its website: "The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission authorized the project in June 2014." The company confirmed to FactCheck.org: "You are correct, Cameron LNG was approved in 2014." The facility made its first shipment in late May.

Energy independence

"Since I came in we're now energy independent." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

"We're now energy independent. Who would've thought that? That wasn't going to happen for a long time." — October 23 speech at Shale Insight Conference

Facts First: While definitions of "energy independence" vary, the US is not "energy independent" by any definition; it is expected to export more energy than it imports by 2020, according to the government's Energy Information Administration, but that has not happened yet. In the first five months of 2019, PolitiFact noted, the US also consumed more energy than it produced. There have been occasional, brief periods where US exports have exceed imports or where its production has exceeded consumption, but this hasn't happened for a full recent year.

You can read a longer fact check here.

The unemployment rate

"Unemployment is at the lowest rate in more than 51 years." — October 23 speech at Shale Insight Conference

Facts First: This was one of Trump's sig nature little exaggerations. The September rate3.5%, was the lowest since December 1969, just under 50 years ago.

Unemployment for women

Trump said women have their lowest unemployment numbers in "71 years." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: This was another exaggeration. It has been 66 years since the women's rate has been as low as it was in September, 3.4%, not 71 years.

Prescription drug prices

"And we had the first year ever where prices actually went down." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: Trump was exaggerating. The Consumer Price Index for prescription drugs showed a 0.6% decline between December 2017 and December 2018, which was the first calendar-year decline since 1972, not the first one "ever." (As The Washington Post pointed out in its own fact check, some experts say the Consumer Price Index is a flawed measure of trends in drug prices, since it doesn't include rebates that drug companies pay to insurers. The IQVIA Institute for Human Data Science, which studies drug prices, found that "net drug prices in the United States increased at an estimated 1.5% in 2018.")

China and trade

China's economic performance

"China is doing very poorly. Worst year they've had in 57 years. I wonder why. I wonder why. I'm sure you can't figure it out." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

"All over the world — countries aren't doing well. China's not doing well. China's having the worst year they've had in 57 years." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

Facts First: China's second-quarter GDP growth of 6.2% and third-quarter GDP growth of 6% were its worst since 199227 years ago.

Trump has repeatedly made clear that he knows that 27 years is the reported figure, but he has added additional years for no apparent reason.

China's agricultural purchases

"Well, one little example is the farmers. So they were told and I was told, if we could get $20 billion a year in purchase — the biggest they've ever done is $16 (billion), is what I've heard and what they've said. If we could get $20 billion a year from China — that China purchases $20 billion a year of agricultural product — that would be a great thing." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: China spent $25.9 billion on American agricultural products in 2012, according to figures from the Department of Agriculture.

Who is paying for the tariffs on China

"And we're doing great. We're taking in billions and billions of dollars in tariffs from China, and they're eating the tariffs because they devalued their currency." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

"Don't forget China's paying us tens of billions of dollars in tariffs, and it's had a huge impact on China. And it hasn't cost us anything because they devalued their currency or they've poured money in. It hasn't cost us — they've eaten that. They've eaten it totally." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

Facts First: A bevy of economic studies have found that Americans are bearing the overwhelming majority of the tariff costs, and Americans make the actual tariff payments.

The USMCA and Canada

"We need — for our farmers, our manufacturers, for, frankly, unions and non-unions, we need USMCA to be voted on. If it's voted on, it'll pass. It's up to Nancy Pelosi to put it up. … Mexico and Canada have approved it; it's done. They're waiting for our approval. And we can't seem to get the votes." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

"…and all the things we've done, and we have to get USMCA done, and they don't want to put it up for a vote. And the Do-Nothing Democrats, they will pass it, but it has to be put up Nancy Pelosi. … It's approved by Mexico. It's approved by Canada. It's approved by everybody that has to be approved. We have to give it a vote. It's been sitting for a long time." — October 23 speech at Shale Insight Conference

Facts First: Mexico's Senate has voted to approve the USMCA trade agreement, but Canada's Parliament has not. (The agreement is highly unlikely to be rejected by Parliament, but still, the voting has not happened yet.)

Crowds

The crowd in Dallas, part 1

"I was in Dallas the other night, we set a record in a stadium — I don't know, it's got to be an arena that's got to be 20 years old … we have a record." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

"I go to these massive basketball arenas, like in Dallas, where the Mavericks play, and fill it up and set a record." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: Trump did not break the attendance record at the American Airlines Center. Jason Evans, a spokesman for the Dallas Fire-Rescue Department, told CNN that the fire department and the arena calculated an attendance of 18,500. The Dallas Mavericks, who play in the arena, had an average announced attendance of 20,013 per game last season, among the highest in the NBA, according to ESPN data.

The crowd in Dallas, part 2

Trump said of his rally the previous week in Dallas: "I had 25,000 people, close, in that arena." — October 21 exchange with reporters at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: Again, the Dalas Fire-Rescue Department put the number at 18,500.

The crowd outside in Dallas

Trump said of the Dallas rally: "And we had 20,000 people outside, at least." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: Trump's estimate was way off, though it was lower than the "close to 30,000" he had claimed during the speech. "We didn't have 30K outside. Probably had upward of 5K outside," Dallas Police Department spokesman Sgt. Mitchell Warren told CNN in response to that previous Trump estimate.

Rally crowds in general

"I haven't had an empty seat at a rally." — October 21 exchange with reporters at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: There have been empty seats at various Trump rallies, including a rally earlier this month in Minneapolisa July rally in Greenville, North Carolina, an October 2018 rally in Houston and an April 2017 rally in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, according to journalists on the scene.

Trump's approval rating with Republicans

"I love the Republicans. Ninety-four and 95% approval rating they gave me recently." — October 23 speech at Shale Insight Conference

Facts First: Trump's approval rating among Republicans is very high, regularly in the 80s and sometimes creeping into the 90s, but it has not been 95% in any recent major poll we could find.

Trump was at 90% with Republicans in a CNN poll conducted from October 17-20, 83% with Republicans in a Quinnipiac University poll conducted from October 17-21, 81% in an Ipsos/Reuters poll conducted October 18-22.

Special elections in North Carolina

"Look at North Carolina. Great state. Great people. Two races that were going to be lost, I went in, made a speech, let everybody know I really respect these two guys and they're going to be great, they both won. They both won by good margins." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

"You saw what happened in North Carolina: We picked up two seats that people didn't think we were going to pick up. That was two weeks ago." — October 21 remarks at Cabinet meeting

Facts First: The special elections in North Carolina were six weeks ago, not two weeks ago. While the race in the 9th District was considered competitive, the race in the 3rd District was expected by pollsters and analysts to be won easily by the Republican candidate.

Both seats had previously been held by Republicans, so the party did not pick them up. (Trump might have just been speaking informally.)

Democrats and borders

"Look, I think that the Democrats are not good politicians. I think they have lousy policy. They have policy of open borders and sanctuary cities and crime." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

"Their policies are horrible: open borders, sanctuary cities, take everyone's guns away." — October 23 speech at Shale Insight Conference

"LOUISIANA! Extreme Democrat John Bel Edwards has sided with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer to support Sanctuary Cities, High Taxes, and Open Borders." — October 26 tweet

Facts First: Even 2020 Democratic presidential candidates who advocate the decriminalization of the act of illegally entering the country, such as Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro, do not support completely unrestricted migration, as Trump suggests.

The Washington Post

"The Fake Washington Post keeps doing phony stories, with zero sources, that I am concerned with the Impeachment scam. I am not because I did nothing wrong." — October 26 tweet.
Facts First: There is simply no evidence that the Post fabricated its sources for this article. Trump is entitled to argue that the sources aren't correct, but there is no basis for the claim that the sources don't exist.

The article began: "After weeks of dismissing the impeachment inquiry as a hollow partisan attack, President Trump and his closest advisers now recognize that the snowballing probe poses a serious threat to the president — and that they have little power to block it, according to multiple aides and advisers."

The cost of the Mueller investigation

"It ended with a very poor performance (by Robert Mueller, testifying to Congress). And this is after more than two years of an investigation where they spent $45 million or something like that." — October 21 interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

"I fought off the Mueller hoax. I fought off all of them, and it continues. It's just crazy. This has never happened to a president before, and they spend $45 million. … I could find something on you for $45 million, and you're perfect." — October 25 interview with Sinclair Broadcast Group's Eric Bolling

"This is a hoax — just like there was no collusion. After two years, they found out and wasted $45 million. This is a disgrace that this could happen in our country." — October 25 exchange with reporters before Marine One departure
"Spent $45 million, and they found nothing." — October 25 speech to 2019 Second Step Presidential Justice Forum
Facts First: The Mueller investigation cost $32 million, not $45 million, according to figures released by the Justice Department, and the government is expected recoup about $17 million as a result of the investigation, according to a CNN analysis of the sentences handed out to people charged by Mueller.

The vast majority of this $17 million is expected to come from former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who was ordered to forfeit assets and pay millions to the Internal Revenue Service.

CNN's Aaron Kessler contributed to this article.


Source link