FactCheck

Fake Denzel Washington Story

Q: Did Denzel Washington call Barack Obama the “criminal-in-chief”?

A: No. The actor has been a steady supporter of Obama and of other Democrats.  

FULL QUESTION

Is the article “Denzel Washington: Criminal-In-Chief Obama” accurate?

FULL ANSWER

Denzel Washington has been a staunch supporter of the Democratic Party. He also has been the target of fake news stories.

The most recent such story, with a patchwork of made-up quotes attributed to the actor, claims that he said former President Barack Obama was the “criminal-in-chief.”

He did not.

The story was first posted on YourNewsWire.com, which has posted fabricated stories about celebrities allegedly espousing conservative views before. Last fall, it published a false story claiming that Morgan Freeman had called for Hillary Clinton to be jailed.

The made-up story claims that Washington made disparaging remarks about Obama during the New York premiere for the movie “Roman J. Israel, Esq.,” in which Washington plays a crusading civil-rights lawyer. But there is no record of him saying anything critical of the former president.

He also has spoken highly of Obama, telling a reporter in 2016, “I think that he served with dignity, strength, patience. And I think he did a great job.”

And he was one of the first people to show up for his front-row seat at Obama’s inauguration in 2009.

Washington had contributed $28,500 to help get Obama elected.

Then he contributed $27,000 to help get Hillary Clinton elected in 2016.

Readers wrote in to ask us if the story was made-up, and Facebook users rightly flagged the story as being potentially false. It is.

Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to help identify and label viral fake news stories flagged by readers on the social media network.

Sources

Evans, Patrick. “Denzel Washington hit by Facebook fake news story on Trump.” BBC. 15 Nov 2016.

Dmitry, Baxter. “Denzel Washington: ‘Criminal-In-Chief’ Obama ‘Tore Heart Out Of America.'” YourNewsWire.com. 1 Dec 2017.

Hale Spencer, Saranac. “Freeman Didn’t Say ‘Lock Her Up.’” FactCheck.org. 11 Jan 2018.

Denzel Washington breaks down why he thinks the black family unit is so crucial.” The Grio YouTube channel. 21 Nov 2017.

Shaw, A.R. “Denzel Washington talks the legacy of President Barack Obama.” YouTube. 8 Dec 2016.

Itemized receipts — Obama Victory Fund. Federal Election Commission. 29 Sep 2008.

Itemized receipts — Hillary Victory Fund. Federal Election Commission. 21 Aug 2016.

Share the Facts 2018-01-19 23:04:07 UTC

7 1 11

FactCheck.org Rating:

False

Denzel Washington said Barack Obama was a “Criminal-In-Chief.” Various websites – yournewswire.com

Friday, December 1, 2017 2017-12-01

info

The post Fake Denzel Washington Story appeared first on FactCheck.org.

Trump’s False Claim About Mexico’s Violence

Making a pitch for border wall funding, President Donald Trump falsely tweeted that Mexico is “now rated the number one most dangerous country in the world.” That’s wrong.

Although the number of homicides reached a record high in Mexico in 2017, the homicide rates were higher in numerous other countries in that region — let alone around the world.

Trump’s tweet came as Congress attempts to pass a temporary budget bill to avert a government shutdown. The House on Jan. 18 passed a temporary spending bill, and the issue now moves to the Senate. One of the sticking points to a budget bill is Trump’s insistence that it include funding for a border wall, a demand Democrats have opposed.

Trump made his case for wall funding in a Jan. 18 tweet.

We need the Wall for the safety and security of our country. We need the Wall to help stop the massive inflow of drugs from Mexico, now rated the number one most dangerous country in the world. If there is no Wall, there is no Deal!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 18, 2018

As we have written before, the bulk of illicit drugs passes undetected through legal ports of entry, mostly in hidden compartments of passenger vehicles and tractor trailers.

But here, we are focusing on Trump’s erroneous claim that Mexico is “now rated the number one most dangerous country in the world.”

Trump’s tweet drew quick rebuke from Mexico’s Foreign Ministry, which released a press release stating that it is “manifestly false that Mexico is the most dangerous country in the world.”

Mexico’s Foreign Ministry, Jan. 18: While Mexico has a significant problem of violence, it is manifestly false that Mexico is the most dangerous country in the world. According to UN figures for 2014 (the most recent international report), Mexico is far from being one of the most violent countries. In Latin America alone, other countries have homicide rates higher than Mexico’s (16.4), which is far below several countries in the region.

The press release went on to say that Mexico’s problem with violence is a “shared problem” caused by “the high demand for drugs in the United States and supply from Mexico (and other countries).”

Trump’s claim is “just not defensible,” said David Shirk, a global fellow at the Wilson Center’s Mexico Institute and a professor at the University of San Diego.

Although data from December are not yet available, Shirk told us the number of homicides in Mexico in 2017 apparently will top 28,000. That would be the highest number in the country’s history, and would be at or near a record on a per capita basis, he said.

That’s an alarming rise. But it’s still about 50 percent lower than the number of homicides in Brazil, Shirk said. And considered per capita, other countries in the region including El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala have far higher rates of homicide, according to the latest Global Study on Homicide compiled by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

That’s just homicides. These figures don’t include war-related killings and deaths from internal conflicts, which are far higher in countries such as Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen, Shirk said. Nor are homicides alone a full measure of a country’s violence.

Mexico is ranked the 22nd least peaceful country in the Institute for Economics and Peace’s 2017 Global Peace Index. And Mexico did not appear in the Top 20 of the least “safe and secure” countries ranked in the World Economic Forum’s 2017 Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report.

We reached out to the White House press office for support for the president’s claim, but we did not hear back. That leaves us once again guessing what the president may have been referring to.

Back in June, Trump tweeted that “Mexico was just ranked the second deadliest country in the world, after only Syria.”

Mexico was just ranked the second deadliest country in the world, after only Syria. Drug trade is largely the cause. We will BUILD THE WALL!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 22, 2017

That was based on a report from the International Institute for Strategic Studies that concluded, “Mexico’s 2016 intentional homicide total, 23,000, is second only to Syria.” But that report was subsequently removed because, the group explained on its website, “there was a methodological flaw in our calculation of estimated conflict fatalities that requires revision.”

In a press release issued on June 23, IISS said it anticipated its recalculation would result in Mexico’s “conflict remaining among the ten most lethal in the world, by estimated fatalities attributable to an armed conflict.” An IISS spokesperson told us via email that the recalculation of Mexico’s 2016 fatalities figure has not been completed. Nonetheless, as the June press release went on to explain, its surveys “do not measure homicides on either an absolute or per capita basis. We estimate deaths directly related to conflict. We do not provide an assessment of the levels of violence in any country.”

A Mexico Daily News story speculated that Trump could have been referring to a recently revised travel advisory for Mexico issued by the U.S. State Department, which warns against travel to five Mexican states due to high crime. Those states received the highest Level 4 warning, the same as given to countries like Afghanistan and Somalia, the New York Times noted. But overall, Mexico was ranked as a Level 2 country, which recommends travelers “exercise increased caution.” Specifically, the travel advisory says, “Violent crime, such as homicide, kidnapping, carjacking, and robbery, is widespread.” But, as the New York Times notes, that Level 2 ranking is the same for countries such as France, Italy and Britain.

Again, we don’t know what prompted the president to claim that Mexico is “now rated the number one most dangerous country in the world.” All available independent analyses we found contradicted the president’s claim. We’ll update this item if the White House responds.

Share the Facts 2018-01-19 22:43:49 UTC

7 1 11

FactCheck.org Rating:

False

Mexico is “now rated the number one most dangerous country in the world.” Donald Trump President of the United States https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/president-trump

Twitter Thursday, January 18, 2018 2018-01-18

info

The post Trump’s False Claim About Mexico’s Violence appeared first on FactCheck.org.

Oprah’s 2013 Quote on Racism, in Context

Q: Did Oprah Winfrey say, “White People Just Have To Die.”

A: No. In 2013, she said that older people, who were born, and bred, and marinated” in racism “have to die” before racism can be solved.

FULL QUESTION

Did Oprah say that white people just have to die?

FULL ANSWER

Although the next presidential election is still nearly three years away, speculation that Oprah Winfrey could take the White House in 2020 has been running wild.

It’s an idea that has been simmering for years, but talk of a presidential run took off in earnest when the TV and film star recently gave a rousing speech at the Golden Globes on Jan. 7.

The flip side of all that buzz is the dissection of her previous statements.

One statement that is getting traction is based on something Winfrey said in 2013 while promoting the movie “Lee Daniels’ The Butler.”

She sat down for an interview with the BBC’s Will Gompertz shortly before the movie’s British premier and answered this question about the racism portrayed in the film:

“Are these historical comments or are we still looking at a contemporary issue?”

Winfrey answered, “It would be foolish to not recognize that we have evolved.” She credited civil-rights era laws for helping society to progress beyond the kind of ingrained prejudice that was portrayed in the film.

“Are you saying, ‘problem solved’?” Gompertz later asked.

“I’m saying, problem not solved,” Winfrey said, explaining that movies can help people to understand the historical context of issues like racism, but also show how much progress has been made and how much there is still left to make.

“As long as people can be judged by the color of their skin, the problem is not solved,” Winfrey said. “As long as there are people who still — and there’s a whole generation, I … said this for apartheid South Africa, I said this for my own community in the south — there are still generations of people, older people, who were born, and bred, and marinated in it, in that prejudice and racism, and they just have to die.”

The last five words of her answer have been clipped and recast in headlines like “Democrat Oprah Winfrey: white people have to die VIDEO” and “Oprah: ‘White People Just Have To Die.’

Facebook users flagged the stories as potentially false, and readers wrote to us asking if those headlines were true.

She didn’t say all white people have to die, but she did say that “older people, who were born, and bred, and marinated” in racism “just have to die” before racism can be solved.

Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to help identify and label viral fake news stories flagged by readers on the social media network.

Sources

Costa, Robert. “Talk of Oprah running for president captivates Democrats.” Washington Post. 8 Jan 2018.

Scher, Bill. “The Serious Case for Oprah 2020.” Politico. 1 Mar 2017.

Winfrey, Oprah. “Oprah Winfrey Receives Cecil B. de Mille Award at the 2018 Golden Globes.” NBC YouTube channel. 7 Jan 2018.

Gompertz, Will. “Oprah Winfrey: The Butler, racism and Obama.” BBC. 13 Nov 2013.

Democrat Oprah Winfrey: white people have to die VIDEO.” PacificPundit.com. 9 Jan 2018.

Oprah: ‘White People Just Have To Die.’” PatriotNewswire.com. 7 Jan 2017.

Share the Facts 2018-01-19 21:37:56 UTC FactCheck.org

7 1 11

FactCheck.org Rating:

False “Oprah: ‘White People Just Have To Die.'” Various websites – patriotnewswire.com

Saturday, January 7, 2017 2017-01-07

Read More

info

The post Oprah’s 2013 Quote on Racism, in Context appeared first on FactCheck.org.

Video: Durbin’s ‘History’ of Distortions

In this week’s fact-checking video, CNN’s Jake Tapper examines efforts by Republican Sens. Tom Cotton and David Perdue to discredit Democratic Sen. Richard Durbin’s account of President Trump using profanity to disparage African countries at an immigration meeting in the Oval Office. They said Durbin has a “history” of misrepresenting what was said at White House meetings.

As we wrote, they are referring to a 2013 Facebook post in which Durbin wrongly claimed a GOP leader had told then-President Barack Obama, “I can’t even stand to look at you.”

But there’s more to that story than Cotton and Perdue presented, and there’s a big difference between what happened then and now.

Durbin was not in the 2013 White House meeting. Rather, he shared a secondhand report he received from White House staffers that turned out to be inaccurate. The White House press secretary at the time said the misquote resulted from a “miscommunication in the readout of that meeting between the White House and Senate Democrats.”

This time, Durbin provided a firsthand account of what he heard at the Jan. 11 meeting. Durbin and Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham were at the White House to discuss their bipartisan plan to save an Obama-era program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, which Trump is phasing out. A day after the meeting, Durbin quoted Trump as saying of African nations, “‘Those shitholes send us the people that they don’t want.’”

The video about the claim by Sens. Cotton and Perdue, which can be found on CNN’s website, is part of our fact-checking collaboration with CNN’s “State of the Union.” Previous videos can be found on our website.

The post Video: Durbin’s ‘History’ of Distortions appeared first on FactCheck.org.

Trump’s Numbers

Summary

Now that President Donald Trump has been in office for one day shy of a full year, it’s time to take a look at how well his boasts  — and his critics’ complaints — stack up against hard data.

Here we offer key measures of what has happened since Trump was sworn in on Jan. 20, 2017, according to the most up-to-date and reliable statistical sources available. Some highlights:

  • Employment growth slowed by 12 percent. Nevertheless, the unemployment rate kept dropping, reaching a 17-year low. The number of job vacancies rose, also to a nearly 17-year record.
  • Economic growth picked up to a 3.2 percent annual rate in the July-September quarter from 1.5 percent for all of 2016.
  • The number of people caught trying to cross the border with Mexico fell by nearly half.
  • The number of refugee admissions fell by 70 percent.
  • Restrictions in the federal regulatory rulebook continued to grow, but at less than half the pace during the two previous administrations.
  • The number of coal mining jobs, which Trump promised to bring back, went up by only 500. Manufacturing jobs grew just a bit faster than total employment.
  • Real weekly wages rose 1.1 percent. Corporate profits and stock prices hit new records.
  • The number of people without health insurance went up — by 200,000 according to a government survey, and by 3.2 million according to a more recent Gallup poll.
  • The U.S. trade deficit that Trump promised to bring down grew instead, getting 11.5 percent larger.
  • The number of people on food stamps, which Trump wants to cut, grew by nearly 3 million.
  • The federal debt rose nearly 3 percent; projected annual deficits worsened.
  • Trump won confirmation for a dozen federal appeals court judges — quadruple the number Obama put on the bench during his first year.
  • The U.S. image abroad took a hit. The number of foreigners telling pollsters they have a favorable view of the USA fell nearly everywhere. The only big gain was in Russia.

The stories behind each of these quick summary figures, plus hyperlinks to the official sources, are contained in the Analysis section.

Analysis

As we did when we posted our first “Obama’s Numbers” article more than five years ago — and in the quarterly updates and final summary that followed — we’ve included statistics that may seem good or bad or just indifferent, depending on the reader’s point of view. 

We’ll say again, opinions will differ on how much credit or blame a president deserves for things that happen during his time in office. And we urge readers to be aware that some changes that have happened already won’t show up in statistics until later updates. FBI crime figures for all of last year aren’t due until September, for example. Poverty and household income figures for 2017 won’t be available until later this year. We’ll cover those and more in quarterly updates to come.

Jobs and Unemployment

Since Trump took office, job growth has slowed. Job-seekers became more scarce, and employers struggled to find workers.

Employment — Total nonfarm employment grew by 1.84 million during the president’s first 11 months in office, according to the most recent figures available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

It’s a respectable gain, to be sure. But it’s 12 percent lower than the 2.01 million jobs that were created in the 11 months before he entered office.

The average monthly job gain under Trump is now 167,182, well behind the average monthly gain of 213,708 jobs during Obama’s entire second term. It’s also well shy of the pace required to meet his goal of 25 million new jobs over 10 years.

Trump will have to pick up the pace if he is to fulfill his campaign boast that he will be “the greatest jobs creation president that God ever created.”

Unemployment — One reason for the slowdown: fewer job-seekers. The unemployment rate — which was well below the historical norm when Trump took office — has continued to fall even lower, to the lowest point in 17 years.

The rate was 4.8 percent when he was sworn in, and Janet Yellen, chair of the Federal Reserve, said the economy already was close to what economists consider “full employment.

Under Trump, the jobless rate fell further — to 4.1 percent in October, November and December. That’s the lowest the rate has been since it hit 3.9 percent for four months in 2000, at the end of the dot-com boom.

The rate also is well below the historical norm of 5.6 percent, which is the median monthly rate for all the months since the start of 1948. The lowest unemployment rate ever recorded was in 1953, when the rate was 2.5 percent for a couple of months.

Job Openings — Another reason employment growth has slowed is a continuing shortage of workers. The number of unfilled job openings hit a new record of nearly 6.2 million in September — the most in the nearly 17 years the Bureau of Labor Statistics has been tracking them.

That figure dropped back to 5.9 million in November, the most recent month for which the BLS has released figures. But that was still 254,000 (or 4.5 percent) higher than in January, when Trump took office.

Labor Force Participation — The labor force participation rate also resumed its decline under Trump, edging down 0.2 percentage points between January and December.

To be sure, this is not very significant. We mention it because Republicans often criticized Obama for the 2.8 percentage point decline that occurred during his eight years, even though the decline was (and is) due mostly to the post-World War II baby boomers reaching retirement age, and other demographic factors beyond the control of any president. (The rate is the portion of the entire civilian population age 16 and older that is either employed or currently looking for work.)

The rate under Trump has fluctuated, going from 62.9 percent when he took office to 63.0 percent in March (and again in September), and then down to 62.7 percent in October, November and December.

Manufacturing Jobs — The number of manufacturing jobs rose under Trump.

The number of manufacturing jobs recorded in December, 12.5 million, was 184,000 (or 1.5 percent) higher than when Trump took office. In the preceding 11 months, the number went down by 20,000. The increase under Trump is a little better than the 1.3 percent gain in total nonfarm employment.

Economic Growth

The economy is growing faster under Trump.

The economy grew at an annual rate of 3.2 percent during the third quarter of 2017, according to the most recent official estimate by the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

That 3.2 percent growth-rate estimate is more than double the 1.5 percent growth recorded for the full year of 2016. And it’s even higher than the 2.9 percent real growth recorded in 2015, the best full-year figure for the Obama years.

It remains to be seen whether growth in the final three months of 2017 continued at the 3.2 percent rate. The Bureau of Economic Analysis releases its first, preliminary estimate for the fourth quarter and all of 2017 on Jan. 26. Currently the “GDP Now” forecast produced by the Federal Reserve Board of Atlanta projects that the fourth quarter rate will come in at a 3.4 percent rate.

Trump has promised that the tax cuts he signed into law Dec. 22 will be “rocket fuel” for the economy, and that growth “could go to 4, 5, and maybe even 6 percent, ultimately.” Few economists agree. The nonpartisan staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation forecasts that the tax cuts will boost annual GDP growth by an average of 0.7 percent each year for the first decade, and less thereafter. In its most recent forecast, the Congressional Budget Office predicted real GDP growth of 2.2 percent in 2018. Adding 0.7 to that would bring growth to 2.9 percent.

Regulations

The growth of federal regulation slowed significantly under Trump, though it hasn’t yet come to the “sudden, screeching and beautiful halt” he claims.

The number of restrictive words and phrases (such as “shall,” “prohibited” or “may not”) contained in the Code of Federal Regulations rose by 6,973 between the day Trump was sworn in and Jan. 16, 2018, according to daily tracking done by the QuantGov project at George Mason University’s Mercatus Center.

That’s an increase of 0.6 percent since he took office, which is well below the average annual growth under each of his two most recent predecessors. Annual QuantGov tracking figures show the average increase in restrictive words in the CFR was just under 1.5 percent during both the Obama years and the George W. Bush years.

The Mercatus Center database provides a hard count of specific legal mandates and prohibitions imposed by federal regulators, which we find to be more relevant than counts of the number of pages or words in the rulebook. It doesn’t attempt to assess the cost or benefit of any particular rule — such assessments require a degree of guesswork and are sensitive to assumptions. But it does track the sheer volume of federal rules with more precision than we have found in other metrics.

At a Dec. 14 event at the White House, Trump said, “We’ve begun the most far-reaching regulatory reform in American history.” A White House fact sheet said that since Trump took office federal agencies had “withdrawn or delayed 1,579 planned regulatory actions.

Some are quite significant. Within a month of taking office, for example, Trump signed a law nullifying an Obama-era rule prohibiting coal mining companies from dumping waste into streams and waterways.

Coal and Environment

Coal Mining Jobs — As a candidate, Trump promised to “put our [coal] miners back to work,” but so far not many have regained their jobs.

A total of 36,400 coal mining jobs disappeared during the Obama years, but as of December only 500 of them had come back under Trump, according to BLS figures.

The number employed in coal mining stood at 50,000 when Trump was sworn in, rose to 51,700 in September, but then slipped back to 50,500 in December. (The BLS rounds employment figures to the nearest 100.)

The outlook for coal miners remains bleak. The U.S. Energy Information Administration currently projects that U.S. coal production will decline in 2018 and 2019. EIA expects there will be less demand for exports, and increased use of natural gas to generate electricity.

Coal Mining Deaths — The number of workers who died in coal mining accidents remained low under Trump; there were 15 deaths in 2017, the third lowest on record.

That came after a record low of eight deaths in 2016. Those seven additional deaths amounted to an 87 percent increase, prompting some overly dramatic headlines. But 48 miners died in 2010, the worst year of the Obama administration, including 29 who perished in a coal dust explosion at the Upper Big Branch mine near Charleston, West Virginia.

Carbon Emissions — Carbon dioxide emissions from energy consumption continued going down under Trump. During his first eight full months in office, the U.S. put 1.2 percent less of the greenhouse gas into the atmosphere from burning coal, natural gas, gasoline and other petroleum products, according to the most recent estimates available from the Energy Information Administration.

In October, EIA posted an analysis saying carbon emissions were expected to fall for the full year in 2017 for the third straight year. EIA also projected carbon emissions to rise 2.2 percent in 2019 — not due to any policy changes, but largely due to more demand for heating and cooling.

Border Security

A key measurement of illegal immigration declined sharply under Trump.

The number of people caught while illegally trying to cross the U.S. border with Mexico dropped 48 percent during Trump’s first full 11 months in office, compared with the same period in 2016, according to the most recent and historical figures released by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

The number of apprehensions plunged to a low of 11,127 in April, but then climbed to around 29,000 in November and December. But every month under Trump was well below the monthly average of 36,912 in 2016.

To be sure, the number of apprehensions is an imperfect measure of total illegal immigration, because nobody knows how many succeed in crossing the border illegally without being caught. Nevertheless, authorities and news media use apprehensions as a measure of trends in illegal immigration, on the assumption that the ratio of those who are caught to those who are not remains fairly constant.

The drop in apprehensions comes despite the fact that Trump’s promised border wall is still not built, or even begun. CBP is testing eight sample wall designs in San Diego, but so far Congress hasn’t approved funding for construction (and Mexico says it isn’t paying, either).

Meanwhile, arrests and deportations of those already here illegally are on the rise, according to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

ICE states that its enforcement officers made 110,568 administrative arrests between Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20 and Sept. 30, the end of fiscal year 2017, representing a 42 percent increase over the same period in 2016. ICE also reported the number of “interior removals” (deportations) increased 37 percent, to 61,094 during the same period. (This does not count those returned after being caught at or near the border. Counting those, total removals actually decreased, due to the drop in apprehensions.)

ICE also is moving aggressively against businesses that employ immigrants living in the country illegally. In September a federal court ordered the Asplundh Tree Experts Company to pay $95 million for employing thousands of immigrants who aren’t authorized to work in the U.S. And on Jan. 10, ICE agents raided 98 7-Eleven convenience stores and arrested 21 people in what the acting director, Thomas D. Homan, said was meant as “a strong message to U.S. businesses that hire and employ an illegal workforce.”

Refugees

Refugee admissions went down 70 percent under Trump. From Jan. 20, 2017, to Jan. 18, 2018, 29,722 refugees were admitted to the U.S. under Trump. During the same time frame in 2016-2017 under Obama, 98,266 were admitted.

The number of refugees admitted into the country has varied widely over the past several decades (see this chart from the Migration Policy Institute). Under Obama, the low point for admissions in a fiscal year was 56,424 in 2011. All of these figures come from the State Department’s Refugee Processing Center.

Admissions can depend on world events, such as the civil war in Syria, which has caused millions to flee the country, according to the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees. But it’s up to the president each year to issue a determination on the total number of refugees the United States could accept.

The Obama administration had upped its fiscal year limit to 110,000 for fiscal 2017, which began Oct. 1, 2016. And the numbers were nearly on pace to reach that maximum before Trump took office. But monthly admissions then plummeted.

The Trump administration, which has issued executive orders halting refugee admissions and instituting new criteria, announced a limit of 45,000 for fiscal 2018, the lowest yearly limit instituted under the procedures set by the Refugee Act of 1980.

Corporate Profits

Corporate profits surged under Trump, hitting a record annual rate of nearly $1.86 trillion in the third quarter of 2017.

That figure for after-tax profits comes from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and is the most recent available. It’s 10.1 percent higher than the full-year figure for 2016.

After-tax profits are expected to get a further boost in 2018, when the top federal tax rate on corporate income falls to 21 percent, from 35 percent, under the tax bill Trump signed into law Dec. 22.

Stock Market

Stock prices continued their long rise under Trump, setting record after record.

In the year since Trump took office, the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock average has gained another 24 percent, after going up 166 percent during Obama’s eight years. (We measure from the close on the last trading day prior to inauguration.)

Other indexes posted even bigger gains. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, made up of 30 large corporations, was up 32 percent during Trump’s first year, (after rising 138 percent under Obama). And the NASDAQ Composite index, made up of more than 3,000 companies, also rose 32 percent (after going up 262 percent under Obama).

The bull market that began in March 2009, at the depths of the Great Recession, is now nearing its ninth anniversary, and is the second longest on record.

Wages and Inflation

The upward trend in wages continued under Trump, while prices continued to rise slowly.

CPI — The Consumer Price Index rose 1.6 percent during Trump’s first 11 months, continuing a period of historically low inflation.

The CPI rose an average of 6.8 percent each year during the 1970s, 5.7 percent during the 1980s, eased down to 3.1 percent during the 1990s and 2.1 percent in the next decade (measuring the 12-month change ending in December each year). Since 2010 that average 12-month increase has been 1.8 percent.

Wages — The purchasing power of weekly paychecks resumed its rise during Trump’s first 11 months. The average weekly earnings of all private-sector workers, in “real” (inflation-adjusted) terms, rose 1.1 percent, after going down 0.4 percent during the previous 11 months.

Real wages have been on a generally upward path since the 1990s, after tanking in the 1970s and 1980s. During Obama’s eight years, they rose 4.1 percent for all workers.

Those figures for all workers include managers and supervisors, and only go back to 2006. For longer-term trends we rely on BLS’ figures for rank-and-file production and non-supervisory workers, who make up 82 percent of private-sector workers.

In December, their real earnings were 18 percent higher than they were in January 1996, the recent low point. But they have yet to regain their high point; they’re still 10 percent below their peak in October 1972.

Consumer Sentiment

Consumer confidence in the economy turned less optimistic at the end of Trump’s first year.

The University of Michigan’s Survey of Consumers reported that its preliminary Index of Consumer Sentiment sank in January to 94.4, a drop of 4.1 points since Trump took office.

The index is closely watched as an indicator of how likely consumers are to spend money.

It has waxed and waned during Trump’s time, going as high as 100.7 in October, the highest point since January 2004, before dropping in November, December and January.

The survey said that despite “largely positive view of the tax reform” recently signed by Trump, the tax plan is creating some uncertainty among consumers.  The survey noted “uncertainties about the delayed impact of the tax reforms,” especially among high-income consumers who live in high-tax states. The new law limits deductions for state and local taxes, and will result in higher federal taxes for some.

Home Prices & Ownership

Home Prices — Home prices have continued to rise and set new highs under Trump.

The most recent sales figures from the National Association of Realtors show the national median price of an existing, single-family home sold in November was $248,800, up 8.8 percent since January. The median price was even higher earlier in the year, hitting a record $265,500 in June. The total number of homes sold in November (including condominium and cooperative apartments) was the highest in nearly 11 years, the Realtors reported.

Home Ownership —  Meanwhile the number of people who own homes has continued to recover from a years-long slide, gaining 0.2 percentage points.

The home ownership rate peaked at 69.2 percent of households for two quarters in 2004, then lost 6.3 percentage points before bottoming out at 62.9 percent in the second quarter of 2016. That was the lowest point in more than half a century, and tied the lowest on record.

From there the rate recovered to 63.7 percent in the last quarter of 2016. After Trump took office, it edged up to 63.9 percent in the third quarter of 2017, according to the most recent Census Bureau figures.

Trade

The trade deficit that Trump promised to reduce grew larger.

Census figures show the U.S. imported nearly $465 billion more in goods and services than it exported during Trump’s first full 10 months in office. That gap was $48 billion, or 11.5 percent, higher than in the same period in 2016.

China — The trade deficit in goods with China grew by 7.8 percent during the period. Trump didn’t label China a “currency manipulator” as he had promised to do, and instead began praising China’s leader, Xi Jinping, as “a very special man” during a trip to Bejing on Nov. 9. “I look forward to building an even stronger relationship between our two countries,” Trump said.

Mexico — Meanwhile, the trade deficit in goods with Mexico grew by 11 percent. Trump’s negotiations to alter the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada are currently bogged down. They are set to resume in Montreal on Jan. 23.

Health Insurance Coverage

The number of people lacking health insurance went up.

The most recent report from the National Health Interview Survey estimates that during the first six months of last year 28.8 million people were uninsured. That’s an increase of only 200,000 people from 2016, and still 19.8 million fewer than were uninsured in 2010, the year Obama signed the Affordable Care Act.

More recent polling by the Gallup organization found an even larger increase in the uninsured — estimating that 3.2 million Americans entered the ranks of the uninsured in 2017.

Gallup’s polling covered the last three months of 2017 and is based on interviews with 25,000 adults.

Trump conspicuously failed to “repeal and replace” Obama’s Affordable Care Act as he promised to do. But in December, he signed a tax bill that will end Obamacare’s tax penalty for people who fail to obtain coverage. That becomes effective in 2019.

Repealing the mandate will increase the number of uninsured by millions, according to an estimate by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. CBO projects that ending the mandate will cause 4 million people to lose or drop coverage in 2019, rising to 12 million two years later and 13 million in 2025.

CBO said that ending the mandate would cause policy premiums for those buying individual policies to rise 10 percent in most years. “[H]ealthier people would be less likely to obtain insurance and … the resulting increases in premiums would cause more people to not purchase insurance,” CBO said.

Food Stamps

Ironically, the number of food stamp recipients went up under Trump — even as he proposed to cut the program.

As of October, the most recent month for which figures are available, more than 45.6 million people were receiving the aid, the highest number since March 2015. The number has gone up nearly 3 million, or 6.9 percent, since January when Trump took office.

Now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, the program was greatly expanded under President George W. Bush, during whose time 14.7 million beneficiaries were added, swelling the rolls by 85 percent. The rolls grew by another 33 percent during Obama’s time, when a net total of 10.7 million more were added.

The number peaked at nearly 47.8 million in December 2012, during the long and painful recovery from the Great Recession of 2007-2009. From there it drifted downward during Obama’s last term, as the economy recovered and incomes improved.

That decline in food stamp recipients continued and accelerated during the first seven months of Trump’s administration — going down by more than 1.6 million between January and August, nearly double the rate of Obama’s last seven months, when 860,000 went off the SNAP rolls.

But then in August, Hurricane Harvey caused devastating flooding in Texas, and soon after Hurricanes Irma and Maria devastated Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Florida Keys. Meanwhile wildfires raged in eight Western states. Food stamps were part of the federal government’s disaster relief efforts. Between August and October, nearly 4.6 million people were added to the SNAP rolls, leaving a net gain of just under 3 million under Trump so far.

Judiciary Appointments

Trump is putting his mark on the federal courts faster than Obama was able to do in his first months.

Supreme Court — So far Trump has won Senate confirmation for one Supreme Court nominee, Justice Neil Gorsuch. Obama also was able to fill one high court vacancy during his first year, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

Court of Appeals — But as of Jan. 17, Trump also had won confirmation for 12 U.S. Court of Appeals judgesfour times as many as Obama at the same point in his first term. (Obama later won confirmation of his fourth appeals court judge — one minute after noon on Jan. 20, 2010, and thus one minute into his second year in office.)

District Court — Ten of Trump’s nominees to be federal District Court judges have been confirmed, one more than the nine for whom Obama had won confirmation at the same point in his presidency.

More nominations are working their way toward the Senate floor in coming days. On Jan. 18, the Senate Judiciary Committee cleared the nominations of 17 more Trump appointees, including three named to be appellate judges.

Federal Debt and Deficits

Trump inherited rising federal debt and deficits, and his tax cut is projected to make both rise faster.

The federal debt held by the public stood at more than $14.8 trillion at the last count on Jan. 17, up 2.8 percent under Trump. And that figure will go up even faster in coming years unless Trump and Congress impose massive spending cuts.

The annual federal deficit for fiscal year 2017 (which ended Sept. 30 and was largely the result of spending and taxes set under Obama) was nearly $666 billion, up from just under $586 billion the year before.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office had expected that deficit to drop a bit in the current year before resuming an indefinite upward path. But Trump’s cuts in corporate and individual income tax rates stand to cause the red ink to gush even faster.

On Jan. 2, CBO officially estimated that the tax cuts would cause the deficit for the current fiscal year to rise to $699 billion, and continue rising for the foreseeable future, exceeding $1 trillion annually starting in FY2020.

CBO’s estimates don’t include any allowance for increases in economic growth resulting from the tax cuts. However, blending the results from three different computer models of the economy, the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation officially estimated on Dec. 22 that the expected increase in growth would be 0.7 percent annually, as previously mentioned. It also calculated that added growth would increase government revenues and reduce the projected deficits by a total of only $32 billion in the current fiscal year, and an average of $38.5 billion annually for the next decade.

Oil Production and Imports

U.S. crude oil production resumed its upward trend, rising 5.8 percent to an average of 9.3 million barrels per day during Trump’s first full 11 months in office, compared with the same period in 2016.

Domestic oil production increased every year since 2008, except for a 5.6 percent drop in 2016 after prices plunged to below $30 a barrel, from over $100 previously. The price returned to over $50 a barrel by the end of 2016, calling forth increased drilling and production.

As a result, the trend to reduced reliance on foreign oil also resumed. During the first 11 months of 2017 the U.S. imported only 19.6 percent of its oil and petroleum products, down from 24.4 percent in 2016. That figure peaked in 2005, when the U.S. imported 60.4 percent of its petroleum, and has declined every year since except for 2016, when it ticked up by 0.3 percentage points.

U.S. Image Abroad

The U.S. image abroad has suffered under Trump.

Polling by the Pew Research Center in 37 countries after Trump took office shows a median figure of only 49 percent said they had a favorable view of the United States, down 15 percentage points from the end of the Obama presidency.

Not surprisingly, one of the worst declines was among Mexicans, whom Trump said he would bill for his promised border wall. Only 30 percent of Mexicans now view the U.S. favorably, down by a full 36 percentage points under Trump.

To the north, only 43 percent of Canadians view the U.S. favorably, down 22 percentage points. Among NATO allies, the U.S. favorability rating dropped 22 points among Germans, to 35 percent. It is down 17 points among the French, to 46 percent, is down 28 percent among the Dutch, to 37 percent, and is down 11 points among the British, only half of whom now view the U.S. favorably.

Fifty-seven percent of Japanese still view the U.S. favorably, but that figure is down 15 points from where it was under Obama. And 81 percent of Israelis still view the U.S. favorably, unchanged from the end of Obama’s time.

The only big improvement was among Russians. Pew’s polling found 41 percent of Russians now view the U.S. favorably, an increase of 26 points under Trump.

— by Brooks Jackson, with Lori Robertson

 

Sources

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National); Total Nonfarm Employment, Seasonally Adjusted.” Data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey; Unemployment Rate, Seasonally Adjusted.” ” Data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey: Job Openings, Seasonally Adjusted.” Data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey; Labor Force Participation Rate.” Data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey; All employees, thousands, manufacturing, seasonally adjusted” Data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. “National Income and Product Accounts, Gross Domestic Product: Third Quarter 2017 (Third Estimate) Corporate Profits: Third Quarter 2017 (Revised Estimate) News release. 21 Dec 2017.

U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. “Table 1.1.1. Percent Change From Preceding Period in Real Gross Domestic Product” Interactive data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Taxation. “Macroeconomic Analysis Of The Conference Agreement For H.R. 1, The “Tax Cuts And Jobs Act” 22 Dec 2017.

U.S. Congress, Congressional Budget Office. “June 2017 Baseline Forecast—Data Release (Calendar Year” Data supplementing “An Update to the Budget and Economic Outlook: 2017 to 2027” 29 June 2017.

McLaughlin, Patrick A., and Oliver Sherouse. 2017. “QuantGov—A Policy Analytics Platform.” Daily Summary tracking of restrictions in the eCFR (Electronic Code of Federal Regulations). Downloaded 18 Jan 2018.

McLaughlin, Patrick A., and Oliver Sherouse. 2017. “QuantGov—A Policy Analytics Platform.” “RegData 3.0 Restrictions by Year.” Downloaded 18 Jan 2018.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey; All employees, thousands, coal mining, seasonally adjusted” Data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. Short Term Energy Outlook. 9 Jan 2018.

U.S. Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration. “Coal Mining Fatalities by State by Calendar Year” 3 Jan 2018, accessed 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration. “Coal Fatalities for 1900 through 2017” undated, accessed 18 Jan 2018.

Urbina, Ian. “No Survivors Found After West Virginia Mine Disaster” New York Times. 9 Apr 2010.

U.S. Border Patrol. “U.S. Border Patrol Apprehensions FY2018 YTD(October 1 – December 31).” Undated. Accessed 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Border Patrol. “Total Illegal Alien Apprehensions By Month Fiscal Years 2000-2017.” Undated. Accessed 18 Jan 2018.

Rodriguez, Nicole. “Border Agents Batter Trump’s Wall Samples With Jackhammers to Test Vulnerabilities.” Newsweek. 6 Dec 2017.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “ICE Impact in FY 2017” Undated web page, accessed 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “Fiscal Year 2017 ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Report” Undated web page, accessed 18 Jan 2018.

Rubinkam, Michael. “Tree company Asplundh to pay record fine for immigration practices”The Associated Press. 29 Sep 2017.

Ballesteros, Carlos “ICE Raids 100 7 Eleven Stores–And the Trump Administration Says It’s Just Getting Started” Newsweek. 10 Jan 2018.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “Statement from ICE Deputy Director Thomas D. Homan on 7-Eleven Operation” news release, 10 Jan 2018.

State Department. Refugee Processing Center. Admissions and Arrivals. accessed 18 Jan 2018.

State Department. Refugee Processing Center. Summary of Refugee Admissions. accessed 18 Jan 2018.

United Nations. Syria emergency. United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees. accessed 18 Jan 2018.

Bruno, Andorra. “Refugee Admissions and Resettlement Policy.” Congressional Research Service. 7 Nov 2017.

Eilperin, Juliet. “White House raises refugee target to 110,000.” Washington Post. 14 Sep 2016.

Connor, Phillip and Krogstad, Jens Manuel. “U.S. on track to reach Obama administration’s goal of resettling 110,000 refugees this year.” Pew Research Center. 20 Jan 2017.

Wadhams, Nick. “Trump Sets Annual Refugee Limit at 45,000, the Lowest in Decades.” Bloomberg News. 27 Sep 2017.

U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. “Corporate Profits After Tax (without IVA and CCAdj)” (NIPA Table 1.12, line 45) 21 Dec 2017.

Yahoo! Finance. “Dow Jones Industrial Average” Accessed 18 Jan 2018.

Yahoo! Finance. “S&P 500” Accessed 18 Jan 2018.

Yahoo! Finance. “NASDAQ Composite”  Accessed 18 Jan 2018.

Santoli, Michael. CNBC.com  “Second-longest bull market ever aging gracefully, but investors wonder how long it will last” 14 Sep 2017.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Consumer Price Index – All Urban Consumers.” Data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National); Average Weekly Earnings of All Employees, 1982-1984 Dollars.” Data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National); Average Weekly Earnings of production and nonsupervisory employees, 1982-1984 Dollars.” Data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers. “The Index of Consumer Sentiment” 19 Jan 2018.

National Association of Realtors. “Sales Price of Existing Single-Family Homes.” 20 Dec 2017.

National Association of Realtors. “Existing-Home Sales Soar 5.6 Percent in November to Strongest Pace in Over a Decade” 20 Dec 2017.

U.S. Census Bureau. “Time Series: Not Seasonally Adjusted Home Ownership Rate.” Data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Census Bureau. “U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, Balance of Payments, Seasonally Adjusted” monthly data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Census Bureau. “Trade in Goods with Mexico” monthly data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Census Bureau. “Trade in Goods with China” monthly data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; National Health Interview Survey. “Health Insurance Coverage: Early Release of Estimates From the National Health Interview Survey, January–June 2017.” 1 Nov 2017.

Auter, Jack “U.S. Uninsured Rate Steady at 12.2% in Fourth Quarter of 2017” Gallup News. 16 Jan 2018.

U.S. Congress, Congressional Budget Office. “Repealing the Individual Health Insurance Mandate:
An Updated Estimate” 8 Nov 2017.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Data as of Jan 5 2017).” Data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) data, fiscal years 1968-2017.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. “Food Assistance for Disaster Relief” web page accessed 18 Jan 2018.

Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, “Confirmation Listing; Judicial Confirmations; 115th Congress” web page accessed 18 Jan 2018.

Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, “Judicial Confirmations for February 2010” archived web listing of confirmations in 110th Congress, accessed 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Treasury. “The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It.” Data extracted 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Treasury. “Final Monthly Treasury Statement of Receipts and Outlays of the United States Government For Fiscal Year 2017 Through September 30, 2017” 20 Oct 2017.

U.S. Congress, Congressional Budget Office. “An Update to the Budget and Economic Outlook: 2017 to 2027” 29 Jun 2017.

U.S. Congress, Congressional Budget Office. “Estimated Deficits and Debt Under the Conference Agreement of H.R. 1” 2 Jan 2017.

U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Taxation. “Macroeconomic Analysis Of The Conference Agreement For H.R. 1, The ‘Tax Cuts And Jobs Act’” 22 Dec 2017.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. “U.S. Crude Oil Production.” Short Term Energy Outlook. 9 Jan 2018. Data extracted 27 Sep 2017.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. “U.S. Field Production of Crude Oil” Annual data, accessed 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. “Weekly Cushing OK WTI Spot Price FOB” Weekly oil price data, accessed 18 Jan 2018.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. “Table 3.3a Petroleum Trade: Overview.” Monthly Energy Review. 22 Dec 2017. Accessed 18 Jan 2018.

Wike, Richard and Bruce Stokes, Jacob Poushter And Janell Fetterolf, “U.S. Image Suffers as Publics Around World Question Trump’s Leadership” Pew Research Center. 26 Jun 2017.

Wike, Richard and Bruce Stokes, Jacob Poushter And Janell Fetterolf, “The tarnished American brand” Pew Research Center. 26 Jun 2017.

Pew Research Center, Global Indicators Database “Opinion of the United States: Do you have a favorable or unfavorable view of the U.S.?” Data accessed 18 Jan 2018.

The post Trump’s Numbers appeared first on FactCheck.org.

Trump Tweets Faulty Black Approval Claim

President Donald Trump’s approval ratings among African Americans have declined, not “doubled,” as the president claimed in a recent tweet.

The source of Trump’s boast appears to be a misreading of data from the online polling firm SurveyMonkey. Weekly surveys conducted by that organization show that his approval rating among black Americans has declined from 23 percent between Jan. 26 and Jan. 30, 2017, to 17 percent between Dec. 28, 2017, and Jan. 3, 2018. Polling by the Pew Research Center and Gallup show declines over a similar period, too.

Trump made the claim about improved approval ratings in a Jan. 16 tweet that came just days after Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin said Trump referred to African nations as “shitholes” during a Jan. 11 White House meeting on immigration.

Unemployment for Black Americans is the lowest ever recorded. Trump approval ratings with Black Americans has doubled. Thank you, and it will get even (much) better! @FoxNews

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 16, 2018

Trump is correct that the unemployment rate for blacks is the lowest it has been going back to 1972, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. When Trump took office in January, the rate was 7.8 percent – the lowest in nearly 10 years. It was 6.8 percent in December, the lowest on record.

That 1 percentage point decrease continues a trend for the past several years. There was a similar drop in 2016, and there were even larger decreases in 2013, 2014 and 2015.

The White House did not respond to our request for evidence that Trump’s approval among blacks has “doubled.” And we didn’t find support for it, either.

As other news organizations have pointed out, Trump’s tweet may have been based on a segment on “Fox & Friends,” a morning TV program the president watches regularly. After all, he included the Fox News Twitter handle at the end of his tweet.

On the Jan. 16 edition of the show, co-host Brian Kilmeade made this claim during a segment about negative news coverage of Trump: “Believe it or not, through all this negative coverage, they did a survey of 600,000 people about how black America views this president. His numbers have actually doubled in approval.”

Kilmeade didn’t offer a source for his statement, but it sounded similar to something reported two days earlier by the conservative Breitbart website.

That article — “Donald Trump’s Support Among Blacks Has Doubled Since 2016, Amid Racism Claims” — included this explanation:

Breitbart, Jan. 14: Among black men, Trump’s “2017 average approval rating significantly exceeds his 2016 vote share,” admitted a January 11 article in the Atlantic by author Ronald Brownstein. “23 percent of black men approved of Trump’s performance versus 11 percent of black women,” said the article.

That score averages out to 17 percent, or twice the 8 percent score he was given in the 2016 exit polls.

But Kilmeade and Breitbart both misrepresented SurveyMonkey’s findings.

The polling organization conducted over 600,000 interviews with Americans of all races in 2017, not just black Americans, as Kilmeade suggested. And, as we mentioned, its publicly available data show that Trump’s approval rating among blacks dropped from 23 percent very early in his presidency to around 17 percent as of the seven days ending Jan. 3, 2018.

It’s true that the Atlantic reported that 23 percent of black men and 11 percent of black women approved of Trump’s job performance in 2017, based on figures SurveyMoney provided to the magazine. But it’s not correct to just add those two figures together to produce an average, as Breitbart did. In fact, the New York Times reported that SurveyMonkey didn’t even interview the same number of men and women.

It’s also wrong to compare those approval ratings to exit poll data from the 2016 general election to claim that Trump’s “support among blacks has doubled.” The figures don’t make for a useful comparison because they measure two different things.

The exit poll data show the percentage of black voters who preferred Trump to his presidential rivals, and the 2017 survey data show the percentage of black Americans — some voters and some not — who approve of Trump’s performance as president.

Even if the latter percentage is twice as much as the former, that does not mean that Trump’s approval rating has doubled.

Data from Gallup show that his approval among blacks declined from 15 percent between Jan. 20 and Jan. 29, 2017, to 6 percent between Dec. 25 and Dec. 31, 2017. And data from the Pew Research Center show that Trump’s approval in that demographic dropped 7 percentage points in 2017 — from 14 percent in February to 7 percent in December.

That’s in addition to the SurveyMonkey data that also show a decline.

Share the Facts 2018-01-18 22:41:09 UTC

7 1 11

FactCheck.org Rating:

False

“Trump approval ratings with Black Americans has doubled.” Donald Trump President of the United States https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/president-trump

Twitter Tuesday, January 16, 2018 2018-01-16

info

The post Trump Tweets Faulty Black Approval Claim appeared first on FactCheck.org.

Durbin’s ‘History’ of Misrepresentations

Republican Sens. Tom Cotton and David Perdue sought to discredit Democratic Sen. Richard Durbin’s account of President Trump using profanity to disparage African countries at an immigration meeting in the Oval Office, saying Durbin has a “history” of misrepresenting what was said at White House meetings.

They are referring to a 2013 Facebook post in which Durbin wrongly claimed a GOP leader had told then-President Barack Obama, “I can’t even stand to look at you.”

But there’s more to that story than Cotton and Perdue presented, and there’s a big difference between what happened then and now. 

Durbin was not in the 2013 White House meeting. Rather, he shared a secondhand report he received from White House staffers that turned out to be inaccurate. The White House press secretary at the time said the misquote resulted from a “miscommunication in the readout of that meeting between the White House and Senate Democrats.”

This time, Durbin provided a firsthand account of what he heard at the Jan. 11 meeting. Durbin and Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham were at the White House to discuss their bipartisan plan to save an Obama-era program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, which Trump is phasing out. A day after the meeting, Durbin quoted Trump as saying of African nations, “‘Those shitholes send us the people that they don’t want.'” In an interview with Charleston’s Post and Courier, Republican Sen. Tim Scott said Graham told him that the media reports about Trump’s language were “basically accurate.”

Trump initially issued a vague denial, tweeting on Jan. 12, “The language used by me at the DACA meeting was tough, but this was not the language used,” without explaining which remarks he denied making or what exactly he said at the meeting. On Jan. 15, the president tweeted that Durbin “totally misrepresented what was said at the DACA meeting.”

On the Sunday talk shows on Jan. 14, Cotton and Perdue — who were among the attendees at the immigration meeting – also claimed that Durbin misrepresented what happened at the meeting. Both suggested that Durbin’s version should not be believed because, they said, Durbin has a history of misrepresenting what had been said in White House meetings.

Here’s what Perdue said on ABC’s “This Week”: “In 2013, Senator Durbin also made the same accusation against a Republican leader in a meeting with President Obama, and said that it was – he chewed out the president, it was so disrespectful to President Obama, we couldn’t even have the meeting. That’s what he said in 2013. Later that day, the president’s own press secretary came out and said, and I quote, ‘It did not happen.’ This is about a gross misrepresentation. It’s not the first time.”

And on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Cotton said, “I certainly didn’t hear what Senator Durbin has said repeatedly. Senator Durbin has a history of misrepresenting what happens in White House meetings, though, so perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised by that.” Cotton later repeated the accusation, saying, “Senator Durbin has misrepresented what happened in White House meetings before, and he was corrected by Obama administration officials by it.”

They are not telling the whole story. (We asked Cotton’s office if there were other instances besides the 2013 example, but we did not get a response.)

Back in 2013, Durbin posted on his Facebook page that during a meeting with Obama during a government shutdown, a “GOP House Leader told the president: I can’t even stand to look at you.” Durbin later clarified that he was not at the meeting, but he said that’s what he was told by a White House staffer who briefed him on the meeting.

Three days after Durbin posted the comment on Facebook, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said at a press briefing on Oct. 23, 2013, “I looked into this and spoke with somebody who was in that meeting, and it did not happen.”

But that wasn’t Carney’s final word on the matter. At a press briefing the following day, Carney elaborated: “Let me just say that yesterday I was simply saying that the quote attributed to a Republican lawmaker in the House GOP meeting with the president was not accurate. I wasn’t accusing anybody of anything. And what I can tell you is that there was a miscommunication when the White House read out that meeting to Senate Democrats, and we regret the misunderstanding.”

Carney later added that “the quote attributed to the lawmakers was not accurate, but there was a miscommunication in the readout of that meeting between the White House and Senate Democrats, and we regret that.”

Durbin told reporters at the time that Carney had essentially admitted that the White House had “misled members of Congress.”

“They [the White House] gave me a bad quote and then they said it didn’t occur,” Durbin said.

Again, Carney said there was a “miscommunication” that led to a “misunderstanding.” At the time, Durbin said there was no misunderstanding on his part, and that when a “staffer in the White House” relayed what was said at the meeting, he found the comments so “earth-shattering” that he wrote them down verbatim, the Associated Press reported.

Whether there was a “miscommunication” or the White House staffer relayed incorrect information to Durbin, those circumstances are different from Durbin’s firsthand account of what he says he heard Trump say last week.

The post Durbin’s ‘History’ of Misrepresentations appeared first on FactCheck.org.

Trump’s Mistake on DACA

At an immigration meeting with members of Congress, President Donald Trump mistakenly said that foreign-born residents in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program “could be 40 years old, 41 years old.” In fact, they can be no more than 36 years old, because the program is only open to those born after June 15, 1981. On average, they are 25 years old.

The Obama administration created the DACA program in 2012 to allow some people illegally brought to the U.S. as children to avoid deportation proceedings and obtain work authorization for two years, subject to renewal. On Sept. 5, 2017, the Trump administration announced it would accept no new applications for the program and it would phase out the program for current recipients.

The White House and Congress are seeking an agreement on a bill that would keep the program intact before the March 5 deadline set by the president. The administration has said it won’t renew any current DACA designations that expire after that date. As part of the negotiations, the president met with some members of Congress at the White House on Jan. 9. Trump talked about the ages of the DACA recipients when discussing the possibility of a “clean DACA bill,” which is a bill that would address only the issue of what to do about DACA and not other immigration issues.

Although 800,000 have been approved for DACA since 2012, there are currently about 690,000 people enrolled.

Trump, Jan. 9: No, I think a clean DACA bill, to me, is a DACA bill where we take care of the 800,000 people. They are actually not necessarily young people; everyone talks about young — you know, they could be 40 years old, 41 years old, but they’re also 16 years old.

Trump also brought up the ages of DACA recipients earlier in the meeting when Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley spoke in favor of a path to citizenship for DACA recipients who “didn’t break the law because their parents, who broke the law, brought them here.” Trump seemed open to providing DACA recipients a path to citizenship, but again noted that the DACA recipients are “not really kids.”

Trump: That whole path is an incentive for people — and they’re not all kids. I mean, we’re used to talking about kids. They’re not really kids. You have them 39, 40 years old, in some cases. But it would be an incentive for people to work hard and do a good job. So that could very well be brought up.

In both cases, Trump overstated the ages of current DACA recipients.

The program, as instituted by the Obama administration, was open only to those who have lived continuously in the United States since June 15, 2007, and were both under the age of 16 when they came to the country and “under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012.” That would mean that applicants had to be born after June 15, 1981 — a fact that was highlighted recently with the deportation of Jorge Garcia, a 39-year-old landscaper from Lincoln Park, Michigan.

Garcia was brought to the U.S. illegally as a child and has lived in the United States for 30 years, but he is not eligible for the DACA program because he was too old to qualify for it, as USA Today writes. He was deported on Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

USA Today, Jan. 15: Jorge Garcia is too old to qualify for the federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which allows children of undocumented immigrants who came to the United States before age 16 and were born after June 15, 1981, to legally work and study here.

Garcia said he had asked Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials if they could wait until new DACA legislation is passed, which might expand the age range for immigrants to qualify. But officials refused and said he had to leave by Jan. 15.

There are at least five bills in Congress that would provide legal status to those illegally brought to the U.S. as children, according to the Migration Policy Institute. Four of them have no birth date requirement, so age would not be an impediment for someone like Garcia, said Julia Gelatt, a senior policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute. One of them — the SUCCEED ACT, which was introduced by Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina — maintains the current age limit, Gelatt said.

Trump’s remarks about DACA recipients being “40 years old” fit a theme of his administration, which has emphasized the current age of DACA recipients rather than the age at which they arrived in the United States.

When Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the administration’s plan to phase out the program, he described DACA recipients as “800,000 mostly-adult illegal aliens.” But, as we wrote at the time, Tom K. Wong, an assistant professor of political science at the University of California, San Diego, oversaw a national survey of 3,063 DACA holders last year and found that on average they were 6-and-a-half years old when they arrived in the U.S. Most of them — 54 percent– were under the age of 7 (see page 13).

That survey also showed that the average age of DACA recipients last year was 25 years old, and the vast majority — 82.5 percent — were under the age of 30 (see page 12). None was 39, 40 or 41 years old, because that would be too old to be eligible for the program.

Share the Facts 2018-01-17 23:16:41 UTC

7 1 11

FactCheck.org Rating:

False

Claimed foreign-born residents in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program “could be 40 years old, 41 years old.” Donald Trump President of the United States https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/president-trump

White House Tuesday, January 9, 2018 2018-01-09

info

The post Trump’s Mistake on DACA appeared first on FactCheck.org.