“Climate change is an urgent and growing threat to our national security, contributing to increased natural disasters, refugee flows, and conflicts over basic resources like food and water. The present day effects of climate change are being felt from the Arctic to the Midwest. Increased sea levels and storm surges threaten coastal regions, infrastructure, and property. In turn, the global economy suffers, compounding the growing costs of preparing and restoring infrastructure.”–U.S. National Security Strategy, February 15, 2015
The White House issued a Fact Sheet on President Obama’s historic step to address national security implications of climate change:
On Sept. 21, President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum (PM) on Climate Change and National Security, establishing a policy that the impacts of climate change must be considered in the development of national security-related doctrine, policies, and plans. To achieve this, 20 Federal agencies and offices with climate science, intelligence analysis, and national security policy development missions and responsibilities will collaborate to ensure the best information on climate impacts is available to strengthen our national security. The Presidential Memorandum was released alongside a report from the National Intelligence Council identifying pathways through which climate change will likely pose significant national security challenges for the United States over the next two decades, including threatening the stability of other countries.
There is current and growing attention paid by national security experts to ways in which climate impacts are adversely affecting national security now, and will stress national security even more dramatically in the coming decades. In addition to tackling the impacts from climate change by reducing emissions, there is a need for increased collaboration among the climate science, intelligence, and national security policy communities to prepare for the impacts that we can no longer avoid.
This announcement builds on steps the Obama Administration has already taken to address emerging national security challenges impacted by climate change. For example, because climate change in the Arctic will necessitate greater presence in the region’s open seas, the Administration proposed in 2015 to accelerate the acquisition of a replacement heavy icebreaker for the Arctic and began planning for the construction of additional icebreakers. This year, the Administration requested $150 million from Congress to accelerate production of a new Polar Icebreaker, and the Administration continues to call on Congress to provide this critical funding to the U.S. Coast Guard this year.
PRESIDENT OBAMA DIRECTS FEDERAL AGENCIES TO TAKE ACTION TO ADDRESS THE NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATIONS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
Today’s Presidential Memorandum adds an essential element to the President’s comprehensive approach to addressing climate change at all levels, providing the policy guidance and direction needed to ensure that climate risks are fully characterized and considered in our national security planning, through:
Establishing a dedicated Federal Climate and National Security Working Group, led by representatives from the National Security Council staff and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and including over 20 Federal agencies and offices with climate science, intelligence, and national security responsibilities. The Working Group will identify the U.S. national security priorities related to climate change and national security, and develop methods to share climate science and intelligence information to inform national security policies and plans.
The Climate and National Security Working Group will create a Climate Change and National Security Action Plan within 90 days to identify specific steps that are required to perform the Working Group’s functions, which includes facilitating the exchange of climate data and information with the intelligence community and identifying gaps; recommending research guidelines concerning the Federal Government’s ability to detect climate intervention activities; identifying the most current information on regional, country, and geographic areas most vulnerable to current and projected impacts of climate variability for the next 30 years; and developing recommendations for the Secretary of State to help ensure that the work of U.S. embassies, including their planning processes, are better informed by relevant climate change-related analyses.
Directing individual agencies to develop Implementation Plansaddressing climate-related hazards and threats to national security; identifying economic considerations arising from the impacts of climate change globally and the resulting specific impacts on national security, human mobility (including migration and displacement), global water and food security, nutrition, public health, and infrastructure; identifying climate change-related risks to agency missions; and identifying risks that may be caused by agency policies, programs, and actions concerning international development objectives, fragility, and regional stability.
NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE COUNCIL RELEASES REPORT ON IMPLICATIONS FOR US NATIONAL SECURITY OF ANTICIPATED CLIMATE CHANGE
The National Intelligence Council released a report finding that the effects of climate change are “likely to pose significant national security challenges for the United States over the next two decades,” including by stressing our military operations and bases. Globally, the report found that climate-related national security disruptions are underway now and climate change and its resulting effects are likely to pose wide-ranging national security challenges for the United States and other countries over the next 20 years through a number of pathways including:
Overwhelming a state’s capacity to respond or recover, its authority can be so undermined as to lead to large-scale political instability. In the most dramatic cases, state authority may collapse partially or entirely;
Decreasing water and disputes over access to arable land will increase the risk of conflict between people who share river basins, aquifers, or land areas;
Contributing to migrations that exacerbate social and political tensions, some of which could overwhelm host governments and population; and
Straining the capacity of US and allied armed forces to deliver humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.
“These effects will be especially pronounced as populations continue to concentrate in climate-vulnerable locations such as coastal areas, water-stressed regions, and ever-growing cities.
“While President Obama continues to pursue all practical actions to reduce harmful greenhouse gases and other carbon sources, it is important to evaluate and pursue the actions needed to identify the current and projected climate impacts on our national security, and develop actions to mitigate these impacts,” the White House stated in the fact sheet.
The White House issued this Fact Sheet about the third revision in second quarter economic growth estimates:
WASHINGTON, DC – Jason Furman, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, issued the following statement today on the third estimate of GDP for the second quarter of 2016. You can view the statement HERE.
Summary: Real GDP growth in the second quarter was revised up to 1.4 percent at an annual rate according to BEA’s third estimate.
Second-quarter economic growth was revised to 1.4 percent at an annual rate in the third estimate, up 0.3 percentage point from the second estimate. Consumer spending grew strongly at 4.3 percent in the second quarter—its second-fastest quarterly growth since 2006—and, in contrast to recent quarters, net exports and business fixed investment also added to GDP growth. Some of this growth was offset by a large decline in inventory investment (one of the most volatile components of GDP), along with declines in residential investment and government spending. Overall, growth in the most stable and persistent components of output—consumption and fixed investment—was revised up to 3.2 percent. Today’s report underscores that there is more work to do, and the President will continue to take steps to strengthen economic growth and boost living standards by promoting greater competition across the economy; supporting innovation; and calling on Congress to increase investments in infrastructure and to pass the high-standards Trans-Pacific Partnership.
FIVE KEY POINTS IN TODAY’S REPORT FROM THE BUREAU OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS (BEA)
Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) increased 1.4 percent at an annual rate in the second quarter of 2016, according to BEA’s third estimate. Consumer spending grew 4.3 percent, well above its pace over the prior four quarters, with faster growth in both durable and nondurable goods spending. In addition, export growth was positive in the second quarter, and net exports contributed positively to GDP growth. Nonresidential fixed investment increased modestly in the second quarter, with strong growth in intellectual property products investment (see point 4 below) offset by continued weakness in both structures and equipment investment. Inventory investment—one of the most volatile components of GDP—subtracted 1.2 percentage points from GDP growth. Residential investment contracted following eight straight quarters of increases.
Real Gross Domestic Income (GDI)—an alternative measure of output—decreased 0.2 percent at an annual rate in the second quarter. (In theory, GDP and GDI should be equal, but in practice they usually differ because they use different data sources and methods.) The average of real GDP and real GDI, which CEA refers to as real Gross Domestic Output (GDO), increased 0.6 percent at an annual rate in the second quarter. CEA research suggests that GDO is a better measure of economic activity than GDP (though not typically stronger or weaker).
Second-quarter real GDP growth was revised up 0.3 percentage point, though the overall pattern of growth remained largely unchanged following revisions. Revisions in the third estimate included an upward revision to nonresidential fixed investment (which now is estimated to have made a positive contribution to GDP growth), reflecting a smaller contraction in structures investment than originally estimated. Smaller upward revisions to exports and inventory investment were partly offset by a small downward revision to the services component of consumer spending.
In today’s release, BEA revised down its estimate of real GDI growth in the second quarter from an increase of 0.2 percent to a decrease of 0.2 percent due to a downward revision to State-level data on indirect business taxes.
Real personal consumption expenditures, which account for over two-thirds of GDP, grew 4.3 percent at an annual rate in the second quarter, supported by rising real incomes. The second quarter of 2016 ranked as the second-strongest quarter for consumer spending growth since 2006. Consumer spending contributed 2.9 percentage points to GDP growth in the second quarter, reflecting improved economic conditions for many households. This month, the Census Bureau reported that real median household income increased 5.2 percent from 2014 to 2015, the fastest annual growth on record. Data from 2016—including a continued solid pace of job growth and a noticeable pickup in real hourly earnings—point to further strong gains in household incomes. The chart below shows four-quarter percent changes in real consumer spending and in aggregate real wages and salaries paid by domestic employers. The two series tend to move closely together, though the correlation between the two fell during the 2000s business cycle, as growth in consumer spending far outpaced growth in real aggregate wages and salaries. This was likely due to the rapid accumulation of household debt during this period, which sustained the faster growth in consumption. Deleveraging by households over the recession and the recovery has sharply increased the correlation of growth in wages and consumer spending in the current business cycle, such that recent gains in real incomes are likely to support continued strength in consumer spending growth in future quarters.
Real private investment in research and development (R&D) made a larger contribution to GDP growth in the second quarter than in any previous quarter on record. Private R&D investment contributed 0.28 percentage point to overall GDP growth, accounting for most of the 9.0-percent growth in intellectual property products (IPP) investment and offsetting weakness in other components of business fixed investment. Private R&D investment grew at a 17.0-percent annual rate in the second quarter, the second-fastest quarterly growth since 1960. Private R&D investment has reached an all-time high as a share of overall output. Although this share (1.8 percent) is still relatively small, increased investment in R&D can help boost productivity growth in the future, which will be needed to help reverse the slowdown across advanced economies in the last decade.
Real private domestic final purchases (PDFP)—the sum of consumption and fixed investment—rose 3.2 percent at an annual rate in the second quarter, noticeably faster than overall GDP growth. PDFP—which excludes more volatile components of GDP like net exports and inventory investment, as well as government spending—is generally a more reliable indicator of next-quarter GDP growth than current GDP. In the second quarter, the divergence between the strong contribution of PDFP to growth and the relatively slower growth of overall real GDP was largely accounted for by the large negative contribution of inventory investment. Overall, PDFP rose 2.3 percent over the past four quarters, above the pace of GDP growth over the same period.
As the Administration stresses every quarter, GDP figures can be volatile and are subject to substantial revision. Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any single report, and it is informative to consider each report in the context of other data as they become available.
As we mark the passing of Shimon Peres, the former President of Israel, who New York Times in its obituary called A Pillar of Israel, From Its Founding to the Oslo Accords, I reflect back on what was very possibly the closest Israel and Palestine ever came to forging a true peace, and it came during the 2010 Clinton Global Initiative, when Peres sat next to Salam Fayyad, Prime Minister of the Palestinian National Authority, on a panel with President Bill Clinton and Bahrain’s Crown Prince and Deputy Supreme Commander Salman bin Hamad Al-Khalifa and provided a roadmap to cooperation. Here’s my column from that panel, on September 21, 2010:
Israel, Palestine Leaders Offer Vision of Peace – and It Looks Real
Prayers for peace in the Middle East are a ritual in Great Neck, and for one hour last week at the Clinton Global Initiative, a vision for peace seemed less than a perennial dream, and took the shape of a real prospect.
During a special session at the Clinton Global Initiative, which brings together world leaders, business moguls, philanthropists and do-gooders who labor at nongovernmental organizations, the President of Israel and the Prime Minister of the Palestinian National Authority painted their vision of what peace would look like: a vast economic region with joint projects including a water pipeline crossing the Red Sea to the Dead Sea, modern irrigation techniques that could make the Palestinian desert bloom as it does in Israel, even a regional electric grid, and an economic boom that could snuff out the anger that fuels terrorism. There would even be equality for women.
And for that hour, it all seemed within grasp, with the Bahrainian Crown Prince giving his imprimatur to how the whole region would benefit from a peace “dividend.”
But just days after, the expiration of Israel’s 10-month moratorium on settlement building in the disputed territory of the West Bank which brought out jubilant and triumphant settlers who released white-and-blue balloons, has burst that bubble of optimism over whether the Palestinian Authority will follow through on its threat to pull out of this latest effort at peace negotiations.
Still, the Palestinians seemed to hang in there as the Obama Administration – Sec. Hillary Clinton and special envoy George Mitchell – were frantically trying to keep things together.
Here’s why this time might be different: the leaders were able to specify the economic and social benefits.
What is more, the body language looked good.
Salam Fayyad, Prime Minister of the Palestinian National Authority and Shimon Peres, President of the State of Israel shook hands, genuinely, then took seats next to each other, rather than bookending President Bill Clinton and HRH Prince Salman bin Hamad Al-Khalifa, Crown Prince and Deputy Supreme Commander of the Kingdom of Bahrain. Seated elbow to elbow, Fayad and Peres looked straight into each other’s faces when the other was speaking. Mostly.
President Clinton posed the question to the Prime Minister first: “Assume that the parties come together, and don’t want to wait another decade, what would peace look like?”
Fayyad, offered his vision of what peace would look like in the state of Palestine, but when I heard him say “Jerusalem as its capital” I thought the session would end as quickly as it began, or veer off. But Peres never addressed the remark; his body language did not change.
But Fayyad continued: “What the region might look like minus the conflict? The vast economic potential – the region looks like a single economic space. ..vast growth potential, that can be exploited by dealing with elements that impeded commerce across state lines…That’s the kind of region that I believe can emerge after so many decades of conflict, with obvious benefits – for Arabs, Israelis and the rest of the Arab world.
“Amongst the possibilities: infrastructure improvements that cut across borders. Several have been on the drawing board – one is [close to] the heart of Shimon Peres – a project intended to link the Red Sea to the Dead Sea, to deal with ever shrinking [water supplies] that threatens to make it even more dead than it is. That’s one project that could happen..even before the conflict over. Something that could prepare for a better future. There are a lot of projects of direct benefit, cutting across boundaries in the region – in the area of energy, electricity, regional power grid….
“We could devote more energy, time and resources to bring about development –economic, socially, culturally. [Peace] would remove all the obstacles to interact with the rest of humanity on the basis of shared values, equal opportunity, no discrimination against women… ”
Women’s rights, Fayyad said “is something that unfortunately has caused us a lot of problems in region and around the world. The problem has to be addressed not only because of vast potential if women are afforded opportunity, but because it’s the right thing to do… ”
Then to Peres, Clinton said, “Suppose peace was made 3 or 4 days ago. What does Israel want out of it, what can Israel do to make sure it takes hold In order to make sustainable peace? [Particularly in the area of food production]… Today you can produce food not by size or land but science and technology. There is almost no water, yet [Israel’s] agriculture produces eight times more from same acre than 50 years ago.”
Technology has unleashed economic development throughout the developing world, and can do its magic in the Middle East, as well. Sharing Israel’s innovations with the Palestinian state would be a key benefit of the peace dividend, Peres offered.
“One thing both of us agree – not just governmental intervention but private initiative…we all are ready to accept high tech in their countries- that has nothing to do with territory… it’s global,” Peres said. “The two young boys that created Google didn’t hurt anyone…[technology] can build an economy, and I think that should be the first…. We are ready in Israel to share what we have. Our high tech started with agriculture. You can have it the next morning, and provide food to the children. That’s number one, after peace. Number two is health. ..There is no hospital in Israel where you don’t have Arab doctors and Arab patients…. If we can live in peace in hospital, why can’t we live in peace out of hospital?
“Next: Education. The moment we have peace is the moment we can provide for education.
“Other things: Tourism. Tourism accounts for 17% of world economy, and we have everything to attract the largest amount of tourists but peace. If we shall make peace – with the Palestinians and the Jordanians, have enough points of attraction to promote ..
“Water. We are saving half of the water that is being used elsewhere. By irrigation, by recycling, by introducing vegetation that don’t drink so much water, using electronic controls. All of this is available.
“Now when it comes to electricity – the choice is that everyone will build a nuclear reactor for electricity… The greatest nuclear reactor in the world is the sun. The sun is democratic, open to everyone. We know already how to produce solar energy, but not to produce it in a competitive way. We believe by [marshalling] solar energy…. it would enable us to be natural, would be cheaper…and give the people water and electricity..
“We introduced ‘drip irrigation,’ now we have ‘drip electricity’ – we can move electricity from one place to another without physical connection.” [Israeli companies have developed a technology that transmits electricity the same way, over the same architecture, as wireless voice communications.]
“We can send electricity 2-4 miles away, and it can reach the target. It is quite revolutionary,” he said.
“I believe that the future, that the most sensational 10 years in human life will occur because of the level of computerization.”
President Clinton noted that even in this economic downturn, Israel has done well, “and most certainly will be the first to have 100,000 electric cars on the road.”
Israel and Palestine have a lot to gain from a peace dividend, but how might countries in the region like Bahrain benefit? Will there be a regional economy, and what does that mean for you? President Clinton posed to Prince Salman.
“Our region is caught between the rule of the gun and the rule of Koran, captive market and capitalist markets, pluralism and plutocrats,” Prince Salman said. “The region has been held back by the negative. In every choice, people have singled out their fear, mistrust, disappointment, in the ability of governments to achieve the dignity they [deserve]. We must achieve this peace – because the future is very bright.”
He said that the region represents a $1 trillion market, and by 2020 will be a $2 trillion market…”It grew at 70% in the last 8 years, 40% [of exports] go to the region, so you can start to see that regional economic cooperation is a reality… and if we can build on what President Peres said about science… that the world in 15-20 years will be fundamentally different, then the future will be bright, whether agriculture, medicine, productivity. I am very optimistic…. the ease by which we can communicate, the productivity we have gained… in the development of human history, this is a flash, a spike.
“We will be cooperating, the dislocations that shake us, to our core, will be absent. ….It is a future I see very much in a positive way…. That I will dedicate myself to, to come true, and one in which all of us have a role to play.
“The private sector in US., government in Middle East. We must all believe in this process, make the hard choices that need to be made, and when the process looks shaky, that we are there to support it. Thank you Mr. President, for getting us here today, and even though I am on the periphery and not a direct negotiator, my life, my children’s lives will be immeasurably better.”
Giving a vision of hope, Peres suggested it might finally be time. “In Europe, if someone would have stood up in 1943 that in 30-40 years, Europe would be united, people would laugh. It took generations for French, Germans, British to come together. The young people, anyway, live in a different world. They are connected personally. The world is more connected, and the younger you are, the more connected.
“Today the greatest choice before the Middle East is either to be a Middle East of independent states or fall under the spell of Iranians,” Peres said. “This is the greatest danger. Under the spell of Iranians is also terror. We have a common menace, if not a common enemy, so we have a common purpose.
But Clinton noted, “If the vision [for peace and regional cooperation] you are sketching out takes hold, the Iranians would have a very different choice than they do today. It would maximize that the current fears we have can be resolved in a peaceful way, and maximize the risk if they choose not to do that.”
“I think [peace] would be better for everyone,” said Fayyad. “People throughout the region could interact more freely – in peace, security. We could focus on doing things better, governing better, providing services more effectively. Our economy is only 4% the size of the Israeli economy – that alone, even if you don’t factor in what this means in regional cooperation, and better access to rest of region — simply by virtue of sitting alongside such a huge economy, that is Israel. When you begin to factor in other benefits – tranquility, civility in the region, you can see how the benefits would begin to spread. That would happen on the strength of having some serious partnerships here.”
Donald Trump did a mitzvah at the first (maybe only) presidential debate, which was held at Hofstra University on September 26. He brought his true self – not a studied, rehearsed character who could recite the positions scripted for him by Kellyanne Conway.
Instead, he dared to say in mixed company what he has been saying to his rabble, letting his words hang in the air alongside the reasonable, practical, solid policy solutions that Hillary Clinton has been proposing for more than a year.
He showed his true colors – and they were a nasty mishmash of clash that didn’t make sense.
He was incoherent, hysterical. With bloodshot eyes, sniffling, guzzling water (recalling his attacks on Marco Rubio) he looked reptilian (is he hiding a health issue, I wonder?).
Hillary Clinton had to be perfect – not a single inappropriate word or phrase or misplaced comma or gesture or glance. She had to strike just the perfect tone between showing that a woman could be powerful, professional and command authority, but also be “likable,” “pleasing.” And authentic – she elucidated the positions (on investing in infrastructure, keeping the nation safe, attacking ISIS) she has long advocated, and did it with passion, fully immersed in knowing all the parameters of the issues and seeing the long view. She had to show she could stand up to his attacks, send them back without appearing shrill or shrewish, and still present her own positive solutions that will help this country achieve “broad-based, inclusive growth” which, she said, “is what we need in America, not more advantages for people at the very top.” And do it in two minutes.
And she was perfect. Indeed, pundit Howard Feinman said it was like an elementary school teacher schooling an unruly child (yet another sexist remark – remember when they criticized Obama for being like a “college professor”?).
With every answer, Trump’s credibility was shot (as were his surrogates who declared him the winner after), he was exposed as the ridiculous Reality TV buffoon he is, and his Swift Boating tactic which Republicans have been exploiting since Bush v. Kerry, where he accuses his opponent of the very thing he is guilty of (ie. pay-to-play) boomeranged so perfectly when he accused Clinton of not having the “temperament,” judgment, or the “look” to be President.
“I think my strongest asset, maybe by far, is my temperament. I have a winning temperament. I know how to win. She does not have a…” he said, as the audience could not contain its snickering.
The ultimate was when he attacked Clinton on her stamina – a woman who even with pneumonia soldiered on the campaign trail and ran rings around him in the Commander-in-Chief forum – saying, “She doesn’t have the look. She doesn’t have the stamina. I said she doesn’t have the stamina. And I don’t believe she does have the stamina. To be president of this country, you need tremendous stamina” – which all at once reinforced his misogyny and ridiculousness, and exposed him to her withering rejoinder:
“Well, as soon as he travels to 112 countries and negotiates a peace deal, a cease-fire, a release of dissidents, an opening of new opportunities in nations around the world, or even spends 11 hours testifying in front of a congressional committee, he can talk to me about stamina,” she retorted.
On the other hand, she used his own words to attack him – he basically admitted he pays zero tax (“That makes me smart.”); that he did in fact stiff contractors (“Maybe he didn’t do a good job and I was unsatisfied with his work” …“But on occasion, four times, we used certain laws that are there. And when Secretary Clinton talks about people that didn’t get paid, first of all, they did get paid a lot, but taken advantage of the laws of the nation”) and turned it into an advertorial for his new hotel; that he did insult women (“Rosie O’Donnell deserved it”), or how his business was sued for housing discrimination (“We settled the suit with zero — with no admission of guilt. It was very easy to do.”).
Stop and frisk unconstitutional? (the answer he offered when asked about how to deal with rising racial tensions, especially with police shootings of unarmed black men). “No, you’re wrong. It went before a judge, who was a very against-police judge,” he said lamely.
She didn’t just parry his attacks – on her record as Secretary of State, in which he tried to blame her for everything that has gone wrong in the world for the past 30 years – she sent them boomeranging back, making a strong case for the Iran nuclear deal, for supporting NATO, for her plan to defeat ISIS, (the list goes on and on).
When he said, “The single greatest problem the world has is nuclear armament, nuclear weapons, not global warming, like you think and your — your president thinks,” he not only reminded voters that he is advocating countries like Japan, South Korea and Saudi Arabia get their own nuclear weapons), but that he has called climate change “a hoax” perpetrated by China (then lied that he hadn’t said that), and, finally, his pejorative use of “your” president, should have not only had progressives, anti-nuclear activists, environmentalists but also African-Americans throwing shoes at the TV (they surely screamed at the watch party at The Space in Westbury).
When he tried to attack her saying, “For 30 years, you’ve been doing it, and now you’re just starting to think of solutions,” he did her the favor of reminding people that she has had a stunning array of accomplishments on behalf of women, girls, families, working people (not to mention her work as Senator and Secretary of State) over the past 30 years – what has he accomplished for anyone but his own self interest, using bankruptcies, stiffing contractors, outsourcing jobs overseas, hiring undocumented workers.
And she managed to both present her argument for an economy that benefits for all, that invests in the middle class, in infrastructure, in education, and paying for it by having the wealthy and corporations pay their fair share, while at the same time throwing back the question of trust and transparency back on him using how he has failed to disclose his taxes, saying, “So if he’s paid zero, that means zero for troops, zero for vets, zero for schools or health. And I think probably he’s not all that enthusiastic about having the rest of our country see what the real reasons are, because it must be something really important, even terrible, that he’s trying to hide.”
I disagree with the pundits insistence that the debate did not provide enough “policy.” If they actually listened, they would have realized how Clinton managed to get in her policy points on a score of key issues (go back and read the transcript). This was a contest of Substance versus Nonsense.
And finally, when he tried to criticize her for not being on the campaign trail for a few days before the debate, she came back with the line that sums up this contest:
“I think Donald just criticized me for preparing for this debate. And, yes, I did. And you know what else I prepared for? I prepared to be president. And I think that’s a good thing.”
The Hillary for America campaign has issued 19 pages of Donald Trump’s lies, including the seven the Republican presidential candidate uses most often, as a guide to be used in the upcoming debate at Hofstra University, Long Island, on Monday, September 26.
The campaign is calling out the moderator, Lester Holt, of the first Presidential Election debate, as well as reporters and viewers to hold Trump to account.
For his part, Trump has warned the moderator will be “afraid” to attack Hillary Clinton and that if he is attacked, it is only proof that the system is “rigged” against him.
Expectations are so skewed that the fear is Trump only has to appear calm, even if ill-informed or shallow and lacking in any real understanding of policies, while Hillary Clinton has to be perfectly in command but also “attractive” and not too “studied” or scripted. In this, Hillary, a trail-blazer for women’s rights, will experience the same kind of gender-bias as when she became Arkansas’ First Lady and wanted to be known as Hillary Rodham, instead of Mrs. Clinton, and when in 1992, campaigning for her husband, Bill Clinton, she said she didn’t want to back cookies and stand by her man like Tammy Wynette.
A misplaced comma in a phrase could cost her the debate while the big question for Trump is whether he will be able to resist his verbal tick of calling her “Crooked” Hillary.
But Donald Trump’s, who has used his background as a Realty TV star as his strongest advantage in the campaign so far has won PolitiFact’s “Liar of the Year” award, after it rated 70 percent of his claims as “four Pinnochios” or “Pants on Fire.”
“Debates are about each candidate laying out their vision for America, not making things up. Donald Trump has shown a clear pattern of repeating provably false lies and hoping no one corrects him. Voters and viewers should keep track: any candidate who tells this many lies clearly can’t win the debate on the merits,” said HFA Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri.
The campaign issued a handy guide to Trump’s Seven Deadly Lies
1. FALSE: Trump opposed the Iraq War.
Washington Post:Trump: “I was totally against the war in Iraq.” // Four Pinocchios.”
As our timeline shows, Trump was not ‘totally’ against the Iraq War. Trump expressed lukewarm support the first time he was asked about it on Sept. 11, 2002, and was not clearly against it until he was quoted in the August 2004 Esquire cover story. (We even made a video documenting how this is a bogus claim.) Yet he repeatedly claims he opposed the war from the beginning — and thus, earns Four Pinocchios.”
FALSE: Trump opposed intervention in Libya.
Factcheck.org: Donald Trump on Libya, May 20 interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe”: I would have stayed out of Libya.” // False.
“Trump’s claim that he ‘would have stayed out of Libya’ doesn’t square with his comments at the time. In February 2011, Trump, referring to Gadhafi, said that the U.S. should go into Libya ‘on a humanitarian basis’ and ‘knock this guy out very quickly, very surgically, very effectively and save the lives.’”
FALSE: Clinton supports open borders.
PolitiFact: Trump says Clinton wants to create ‘totally open borders.’ // False
“This is a huge distortion of Clinton’s proposals. Clinton has praised work already done to secure the border, and she said she supported a 2013 bill that would have invested billions more in border security while creating a path to citizenship for some undocumented immigrants. Her plan calls for protecting the border and targeting deportation to criminals and security threats.”
FALSE: Clinton wants to get rid of the Second Amendment.
ABC News: “Claim: Hillary Clinton wants to abolish the Second Amendment” // False.
“When Trump made this same claim earlier in the cycle, Politifact rated the claim false after finding no evidence of Clinton ever advocating for the abolishment of the Second Amendment… Bottom line: there’s no evidence to support Trump’s claim.
PolitiFact: “Donald Trump falsely claims Hillary Clinton ‘wants to abolish the 2nd Amendment,’” // False.
“We found no evidence of Clinton ever saying verbatim or suggesting explicitly that she wants to abolish the Second Amendment, and the bulk of Clinton’s comments suggest the opposite. She has repeatedly said she wants to protect the right to bear arms while enacting measures to prevent gun violence.”
“Absolutely not. It’s like saying that Ronald Reagan is the founder of al-Qaeda because the arms he sent to the mujahideen in Afghanistan after the Soviet invasion led to the creation of al-Qaeda. It’s a ludicrous claim.”
Washington Post: “Trump also claims Hillary Clinton was a “co-founder” of ISIS. Does that make sense?” // No.
“No. Within the administration, Clinton was one of the loudest forces for keeping a residual force in Iraq and for intervening in Syria, such as arming the rebels. So the criticism especially does not apply to her, since she advocated a more hawkish policy than was undertaken by Obama.”
FALSE: Clinton would allow 620,000 refugees into the U.S. with no vetting.
Washington Post: Trump: “This includes her plan to bring in 620,000 new refugees from Syria and that region over a short period of time.” // This is an “invented figure.”
“Trump has used this number before, but it stems from the unverified assumption that Clinton, who has called for 55,000 additional refugees from Syria, would continue at that pace for every year of her first term, on top of the Obama administration’s proposal for 100,000 refugees for fiscal year 2017. Trump then multiplies 155,000 times four years to reach 620,000 refugees. Clinton has never proposed such a “plan,” so this is an invented figure.”
Washington Post: Trump: “Under the Clinton plan, you’d be admitting hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Middle East with no system to vet them, or to prevent the radicalization of the children and their children.” // “It’s false…”
“Trump has repeatedly made this “hundreds of thousands” claim, usually referring to Syria, but it’s false… Trump also falsely claims there is “no system to vet” refugees. The process actually takes two more years, after vetting that starts with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and then continues with checks by U.S. intelligence and security agencies.”
FALSE: Trump will make Mexico pay for the wall.
NPR Fact Check: Trump: “And Mexico will pay for the wall. 100 percent.” // Mexican President “would not pay” for the wall.
“After his meeting with Donald Trump today, Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto reiterated his insistence that Mexico would not pay for construction of a border wall. Peña Nieto said he made that clear to Trump during their meeting, although Trump told reporters that the issue of payment was not discussed. — Scott Horsley”
For the rest of the18 pages of Trump’s lies see The Briefing here.
“Our concern about Trump’s record of lying is what that means for how the debate unfolds and how viewers should judge,” Jennifer Palmieri said on a press call.
Trump should be expected to present his solutions – explain what his solutions are, demonstrate the knowledge and judgment. But so far, Trump has shown clear pattern of lying, expecting no one to correct them, she said.
“We have provided 19 pages of lies Trump has told during the campaign,” she said. Politifact has rated 70% of his claims as untrue; Factchecker gave him 47 ‘Four Pinnochios’ and rated 47 ‘Pants on Fire.’ He beat out all modern presidential candidates for fact checking – he was awarded the Lie of the Year and Trump was named the Liar of the Year.
“We think this warrants particular focus because his level of lying is unprecedented in American politics – reporters should keep this in mind,”
“Trump is a very unconventional, unusual, challenging candidate – recognize it’s true for press and moderators. It’s unprecedented in modern times to hold a conference to talk about special precautions because the opponent is a habitual liar, but we think it is necessary.
“When Trump has been chosen as Politifact’s Liar of the Year, for the moderator to let lies go unchallenged, gives Trump an unfair advantage. It is the role of moderator, particularly in this case, to call out those lies, and do so in real time.
“Clinton has a responsibility to defend herself – her own record. But given the historic record of how much Trump lies, it can’t be only on her to call him out if the moderator isn’t willing to stand up and challenge lies. We’ve provided 19 pages of them for helpful reference, plus the 7 he uses most often. This is unusual, but that’s the year we are in, that’s the campaign Trump is running, and it requires that kind of role for the moderator.”
Palmieri said that Trump would probably do what he could to “get under her skin,” but “good luck. We’ve all seen her endure tough questions – 11 hours during the Benghazi hearings. Trump may think he will be the first to get under her skin, but I doubt it.”
As for expectations of how Trump might perform, We had a dry run during the Commander-in-Chief forum which demonstrated that Trump could control his demeanor, and the concern is that will be the sole criteria for handing him the “win” in the debate.
“But maintaining demeanor and not becoming unhinged is not the standard for being considered President of the United States.” What should be the standard is that you demonstrate that you understand problems, have solutions, that you can explain them, that you have adequate knowledge, judgment to do the job “and that’s certainly what she is coming to the debate to do, and that’s what voters should judge Trump on as well.”
How Trump behaves and whether or not he maintains a calm demeanor is up to him, and we think that is within his power – I wouldn’t describe that as what we are pending a lot of time on. A good deal of our prep is thinking through the argument she would put forward that she would do – it is a useful exercise at debate as well as what closing arguments for last few weeks of campaign will be as well.
The 10th Annual Clinton Global Citizen Awards, held during a special ceremony during the 12th and last Clinton Global Initiative to honor outstanding individuals for their exemplary leadership and groundbreaking work which has effected positive social change.
This year’s ceremony honored Jon Bon Jovi in recognition of the 10-year anniversary of the Jon Bon Jovi Soul Foundation which focuses on the issues of affordable housing and hunger in the U.S. through community development initiatives. Bon Jovi also entertained.
Additional honorees include President Juan Manuel Santos of Colombia for his commitment to establish peace in Colombia following a 50 year civil war; Dr.Hawa Abdi for her work to provide refuge, quality healthcare, education and entrepreneurship opportunities to all Somalis; Adi Godrej for transforming his family’s multinational company into a leader of social and environmental value creation; and Nadia Mura, a Yazidi woman captured and enslaved by ISIS, for the courage to tell her story and be a voice for the thousands of women and children who have been trafficked in situations of conflict.
In addition to Bon Jovi’s performance, there was a special appearance of Andrea Bocelli who performed with the Voices of Haiti Choir.
Presenters were themselves noteworthy humanitarians and activists: Sister Mary Scullion, executive director of Project HOME in Philadelphia, who presented the award to Jon Bon Jovi; Iman who presented the award to Dr. Doqo Mohamed who accepted on behalf of her mother, Dr. Hawa Abdi; Luis A. Moreno, President of the Inter-American Development Bank, who presented the award to President Santos; Advija Ibrahimovic, a survivor of the Srebrenica massacre in Bosnia in 1992, presented the award to Nadia Murad, and Hikmet Ersek President & CEO of The Western Union Company, presented the award to Adi Godrej.
Jon Bon Jovi, Leadership in Philanthropy
Sister Mary Scullion, who heads Project HOME, focused on breaking the cycle of homelessness and poverty, presented the Global Citizen Award for Leadership in Philanthropy to Jon Bon Jovi, saying, “He refused to let his fame and fortune shield him from the pain and suffering in society.
Ten years ago, he established the Jon Bon Jovi Soul Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to bringing about positive change and helping the lives of those in need, “one SOUL at a time.” The Soul Foundation funds partnerships that address the issues of hunger and shelter, benefiting temporary shelters, transitional housing for teens, permanent supportive housing—including housing for veterans and special needs populations—as well as providing home ownership opportunities. In October 2011, the foundation opened the first JBJ Soul Kitchen in Red Bank, New Jersey to address issues of food insecurity. Staying true to Bon Jovi’s roots, the foundation aided in local recovery efforts in the days following Hurricane Sandy in 2012. The following year, Bon Jovi donated $1 million to the Hurricane Sandy New Jersey Relief Fund.
Over the past 10 years, it has served over 1000 families, veterans and youth; served 55,000 meals at the Soul Kitchen in Red Bank, where millionaires sit at tables with homeless, paying what they can or if they don’t have the cash, volunteering their time. A second restaurant has opened in Toms River.
“It is testament to the fundamental dignity of every person, what our world can and should be: a place where everyone is served with dignity, given an opportunity to work, and create more just and welcoming society.”
Bon Jovi, who said he was inspired by Clinton, reflected, “In 2005, I saw a homeless person sleeping on a grate in front of City Hall. I realized homelessness could affect any one. Most people are just one catastrophe away from financial ruin.
“In 2008, I saw food insecurity. In the most powerful country in the world, 1 in 7 don’t have enough food, one in five children are food insecure. It’s a matter of access and opportunity, so when we started the restaurant, we had a pay-it-forward concept.
“This is the 10th anniversary of our foundation. I humbly accept this recognition on behalf of our staff, volunteers, and 55,000 supporters who have dined with us.”
“President Clinton is fond of saying, ‘There is nothing wrong with America that can’t be cured by what is right with America’.”
Nadia Murad, Leadership in Civil Society
Advija Ibrahimovic, who presented the Global Citizen award to Nadia Murad, was herself a survivor of genocidal atrocity, orphaned when she was just 11 in the Srebrenica massacre in Bosnia in 1992.
“I was 11 when I lost both my parents in the Bosnian genocide. Like Nadia, I experienced violence and deep loss. Everything can be taken from a person except freedom to decide what you will do with your heart and mind. She dedicated herself to raising awareness of these women.”
She shared the story of Nadia Murad, who was born and raised in the quiet agricultural village of Kocho, Iraq. A member of the Yazidi community, Nadia and her family lived a peaceful, happy life. On August 3, 2014 her village was attacked by ISIS, marking the beginning of its savage genocidal campaign against the Yazidi people. Six of her nine brothers were executed on the spot. In all, she lost 18 family members that day; in all, 1000 Yazidi men were massacred.
Murad, along with her two sisters and thousands of other men, women, and children were taken captive and subjected to unspeakable crimes. Murad was initially held hostage in a building with thousands of families. She witnessed young children given to ISIS soldiers as sexual “gifts.” She was raped and tortured on a daily basis. But after facing unimaginable brutality, she was able to escape.
Murad immigrated to Germany where she received medical attention and was reunited with other survivors. In total, she lost 18 family members. With the assistance of Yazda, a non-profit organization dedicated to helping Yazidi survivors and defending the rights of marginalized ethnic and religious minorities, Murad has been able to tell her story on the world stage, forcing world leaders to listen to the horrors of the ongoing genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.
Just 23 years old now, Murad, a human rights activist, was named a UN Goodwill Ambassador on Friday and has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Dr. Hawa Abdi, Leadership in Civil Society
Iman presented the Global Citizen Award for Leadership in Civil Society to Dr. Hawa Abdi, known as the Mother Theresa of Somalia, because of her life-saving work on behalf of Somalis displaced by war.
“She became a doctor, Somalia’s first female gynecologist, and opened a rural health clinic, organized on ancestral land. During the civil war, the government collapsed, famine was widespread, and she opened her land to refugees. By 2012, she was providing sanctuary for 90,000 displaced people.
She opened a 400 bed hospital, a school, organized a fishing and farming program and her land is the only source of fresh water in region.
“Today, Abdi continues to fight for the women, children, and elderly people of the Hawa Abdi Village. With the help of her daughters, Deqo and Amina, both of whom are doctors, Abdi continues to keep a candle of light lit for the people of the Afgooye Corridor.” Abdi has won numerous distinctions and awards, including the John Jay Justice Award, Vital Voices’ Women of the Year Award, and a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012.”
President Juan Manuel Santosof Colombia, Leadership in Public Service
“After 50 years of war, most people had never lived with peace – 6 million fled homes,” said Luis A. Moreno, current President of the Inter-American Development Bank, introducing President Juan Manuel Santos of Colombia. “Today, we are on the threshold of concluding a historic agreement to bring a permanent end to the conflict.”
He said the seeds were sown when Moreno was serving as Colombia’s Ambassador to US when President Bill Clinton was in the White House, and credited Clinton’s “visionary aid program that allowed my country to achieve stability, attract investment, and set the conditions for peace. President Clinton made peace in Colombia his priority and brought Republicans and Democrats together.”
Clinton’s successors, George W. Bush and Barack Obama “followed Clinton’s example and supported” his policy.
Meanwhile, the Colombian President Santos put his presidency on the line during difficult negotiations with the FARC that dragged on for four long years.
“There were many setbacks but on August 24, the hope of millions was fulfilled when FARC and the government announced a final settlement. It is now up to the people, who will vote in plebiscite on Oct. 22.
“President Santos wanted a fully democratic process – a plebecite marks the beginning of a new, more complex chapter in our history. Every day, every Colombian will need to make personal decision – for lasting peace won’t be easy. Remembering is easy for those who have memory. Forgetting is hard for those who have heart.”
Convinced Colombia can be reunited together, write new chapter in history of beloved nation.
Accepting the award for Leadership in Public Service, President Santos said, “Peace is a right. It is in the constitution. To be a normal country, we had to stop war. I approached negotiations in a different way: Victims should be placed at the center of a solution – a human rights perspective was the key to success.
“One week from today, we will sign an agreement with FARC – 297 pages long, no detail was left out – and we will start to build a new history.
“War lasted three generations. It robbed us of compassion, the ability to feel suffering of others.
“I thank you in the name of 8 million victims of war over 50 years. The victims were most generous, willing to forgive – they don’t want others to suffer what we have.”
Juan Manuel Santos has been the president of the Republic of Colombia since 2010. Previously, President Santos was minister of defense, minister of finance, minister of foreign trade, designate to the presidency, and chief of the Colombian delegation before the International Coffee Organization. He created the Good Government Foundation (Fundación Buen Gobierno) and founded Colombia’s largest political party, Partido de la U. President Santos was awarded the King of Spain Prize and was president of the Freedom of Expression Commission for the Inter American Press Association. He has published several books, including “The Third Way,” co-written with former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and “Check on Terror” (Jaque al Terror). President Santos is a graduate of the London School of Economics, Harvard University, and the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.
Adi Godrej, Leadership in the Private Sector
Adi Godrej, Chairman of Godrej Group, Godrej Industries Limited, was presented with the Global Citizen Award for Leadership in the Private Sector by Hikmet Ersek President & CEO of The Western Union Company.
Godrej is the vanguard of green development, committed to alleviating poverty, preserving natural resources, and holding 24% of its revenues in a trust for philanthropic purpose, and a motto that “The business of business is goodness. Let’s make Goodness.”
“It’s important to remain a good company,” he said. “We have always actively supported social responsibility. 24% of the corporate funds is in trust that invests in environment and education.”
He said that the company has set three goals for 2020 – train 1 million youth in skills to enhance earnings, build a greener India, generate one-third of potential revenue in products that are environmentally sustainable.
Adi Godrej is chairman of the Godrej Group, a more than 100-year-old family conglomerate, with operations in India and several other countries. Godrej is chairman of the board of the Indian School of Business and former president of the Confederation of Indian Industry. He has been a member of the Dean’s Advisory Council of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Sloan School of Management and a member of the Wharton Asian Executive Board. Godrej is the recipient of several awards and recognitions, including the Rajiv Gandhi Award (2002), the American India Foundation Leadership in Philanthropy Award (2010), The Entrepreneur of the Year for the Asia Pacific Entrepreneurship Awards (2010), Chemexcil’s Lifetime Achievement Award (2010), AIMA-JRD Tata Corporate Leadership Award (2010), Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year (2012), Padma Bhushan (2012), and All India Management Association-Business Leader of the Year (2015). Godrej holds a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree from MIT.
On a press call led by HFA Chair John Podesta, Hillary for America called on Donald Trump to disclose all information related to his foreign investments and business dealings, divest his holdings in the Trump Organization to remove troubling conflicts of interest, and release his tax returns to meet the basic threshold for transparency. This week, Newsweek published a new bombshell report, “How The Trump Organization’s Foreign Business Ties Could Upend U.S. National Security.” The report offers a disturbing preview of the foreign entanglements that could influence Donald Trump, should voters make the grave mistake of electing him president. We now know that over the course of decades, The Trump Organization has been financially involved in more than a dozen countries on five continents — including Russia, Ukraine, Libya, Turkey, China, and Brazil. These new revelations also bring greater urgency to the need for Trump to release his tax returns, so the American people can see his sources of income, and what influences he might be subject to as president.
HFA also launched a new webpage, “Full Disclosure: Comparing the Two Candidates”, a one-stop shop to access each candidate’s financial records or lack thereof, medical information, professional correspondence – including emails – and other personal and professional records. Voters can compare Hillary Clinton’s sizable record of disclosure to that of Donald Trump, the least transparent candidate for president in modern history.
“We already knew that Donald Trump is the least transparent presidential candidate in modern history,” HFA Chair John Podesta said, “Now we’re learning that Trump is tied up in a web of personal and business relationships with countries that play key roles in our foreign policy decisions. Until Trump discloses his foreign business ties, divests from the Trump Organization, and releases his tax returns, there should be serious concern about who a President Trump would serve: the American people, or Trump’s bank account.”
In case you missed it, Newsweek’s upcoming cover story detailed a sample of the various foreign influences circling around Trump and the Trump Organization. Key excerpts, and the full story, can be found below:
The Newsweek article stated, “Never before has an American candidate for president had so many financial ties with American allies and enemies, and never before has a business posed such a threat to the United States. If Donald Trump wins this election and his company is not immediately shut down or forever severed from the Trump family, the foreign policy of the United States of America could well be for sale.”
ON TRUMP IN LIBYA: “But for the Trump Organization, Qaddafi was not a murdering terrorist; he was a prospect who might bring the company financing and the opportunity to build a resort on the Mediterranean coast of Libya.”
ON TRUMP IN TURKEY: “In other words, Trump would be in direct financial and political conflict with Turkey from the moment he was sworn into office. Once again, all his dealings with Turkey would be suspect: Would Trump act in the interests of the United States or his wallet?”
ON TRUMP IN UKRAINE: “The potential financial conflicts here for a President Trump are enormous.”
ON TRUMP IN SOUTH KOREA: “This relationship puts Trump’s foreign policies in conflict with his financial interests…. One of the primary South Korean companies involved in nuclear energy, a key component in weapons development, is Trump’s partner—Daewoo Engineering and Construction. It would potentially get an economic windfall if the United States adopted policies advocated by Trump.”
ON TRUMP IN INDIA: “In India, the conflicts between the interests of the Trump Organization and American foreign policy are starker… No doubt, few Indian political groups hoping to establish close ties to a possible future American president could have missed the recent statements from the Trump family that its company wanted to do more deals in their country.”
ON TRUMP IN UAE: “With Middle Eastern business partners and American allies turning on him, Trump lashed out… Once again, Trump’s personal and financial interests are in conflict with critical national security issues for the United States.”
ON TRUMP IN AZERBAIJAN: “If American intelligence concludes, or has already concluded, that his business partner’s father has been aiding Iran by laundering money for the military, will Trump’s foreign policy decisions on Iran and Azerbaijan be based on the national security of the United States or the financial security of Donald Trump?”
NEWSWEEK: “The dealings of the Trump Organization reach into so many countries that it is impossible to detail all the conflicts they present in a single issue of this magazine, but a Newsweek examination of the company has also found deep connections in China, Brazil, Bulgaria, Argentina, Canada, France, Germany and other countries.”
Zika is a small label from a tiny source that has world-shattering implications for families, for communities, for society and the economy.
It is also shorthand for everything that has been so absolutely wrong with the Republican-controlled Congress. It is no longer sufficient to describe it as “Do Nothing.” It is more appropriate to describe how their dysfunction, inaction, their idolatry to ideology has become destructive. Rather than a government with “limited power,” the right-wing ideology has intruded into our personal lives in such devastating.
Rather than treat Zika – a neurotropic virus that grows in target brain cells, literally destroying the fetal brain as it develops – as the public health crisis that it is, the Right Wingers who control Congress have wrapped it up with abortion as an excuse to derail a vote.
The party that purports to hold a lock on family values? Pregnancy is stressful enough, but instead of being excited and happy at a pregnancy, a woman would be consumed by anxiety, and even hatred for the fetus and the baby that emerges.
When Zika first came to the world’s attention in Brazil, I was thinking that Americans were luckier than the hapless Brazilian women, who were being told to defer child-bearing for four years, because while abortion is illegal in that Catholic country, it is a Constitutionally protected right here in the US – except that the Right Wingers have found ways to throw up so many obstacles to a woman’s reproductive freedom, even declaring that a mother is a mere “vessel” to incubate the fetus, rather than a person with the same rights of self-determination as men.
Meanwhile, there are now approximately 18,000 confirmed case of the Zika Virus in the United States and territories, including 1,751 pregnant women infected, and that number is rising daily.
Earlier this year, the Senate overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan Zika funding measure by a vote of 89-8. Even Marco Rubio, now running for reelection to the Senate he demeaned during his run for the Presidency, who has said that birth defects should not be an “exemption” for an abortion, told his colleagues that Zika warranted setting ideology aside, but that was because of the harm it was having to Florida’s tourism industry.
But then Republicans changed course, packing the bill full of partisan political riders — like demanding a ban on funding to Planned Parenthood, undermining key provisions of the Clean Water Act, even allowing Confederate flags in cemeteries— and shut Democrats out of the debate.
Now, the money that had been available to the CDC, $292 million “ is out the door already and there are things we wish we could do but can’t because we don’t have the resources,” Dr. Tom Frieden, Director of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) said on “The Takeaway” on NPR. “The decisions made today, or not made, will have implications for decades to come.”
There is so much that is not known about Zika – funding is needed for research for a vaccine, to diagnose, on better ways to control its spread, to understand the impacts of development for infants that do not manifest microcephaly immediately (Hearing loss? Learning disability?) and whether there are latent impacts that could impact even adults (a connection to Alzheimer’s has been raised).
“We need the dollars and the legal authorities so that when there is an emergency, we can treat it as emergency.
“If get in early, can avoid problems – with an earthquake or flood you are providing assistance and picking up the pieces. But with an epidemic, if we can get there early enough, we can do the equivalent of stopping an earthquake…
“The long delay in providing additional supplemental funding makes it difficult to have robust response, and makes it more important to have an infectious disease rapid response fund so we can spend money quickly and effectively. Republicans and Democrats in the House and Senate are on board with creating such a fund,” he said.
“Zika will be around for years to come, so it is important to invest now in better ways to stop it. The sooner we get the funding, we can embark on those projects,” he said.
The failure to act on Zika is part and parcel of the right wingers’ continued assault on abortion rights –– essentially a woman’s right to choose, to control her own body and her own destiny, a family’s right to protect itself and create the best environment for its children. They have gone so far as to block the use of an abortion pill that is safer and easier to use than surgical procedure, and even preventing doctors from using a safer regimen of the medication.
This is not about “life” – as we now see in Texas where their anti-woman, anti-choice ideological crusade has resulted in closure of dozens of Planned Parenthood clinics, with the result that the rate of maternal mortality has exploded.
“From 2000 to the end of 2010, Texas’s estimated maternal mortality rate hovered between 17.7 and 18.6 per 100,000 births. But after 2010, that rate had leaped to 33 deaths per 100,000, and in 2014 it was 35.8. Between 2010 and 2014, more than 600 women died for reasons related to their pregnancies.
“No other state saw a comparable increase,” writes Molly Redden in The Guardian. Those rates put Texas on par with the Third World, where having a baby is the most dangerous thing a woman can do.
This is further proof that the right-wingers who control Congress do not care about “life” they care about control. This is about modern-day enslavement of women. They see a woman as a vessel, a vassal, not as a free person with the rights to make their own life’s choices. While they say they want individuals to be able to care for themselves, producing a generation born with microcephaly means they and their families will have to be dependent upon the state.
This cavalier attitude to life – particularly children – is also manifest in Congress’ failure to act on lead in the drinking water in Flint and other urban areas, likely impairing their normal brain development, contributing to learning and behavioral problems and lowering their IQ’s—and poor and minority children are unfairly at the greatest risk of lead poisoning. Half a million kids in the US already have elevated levels of lead in their blood and millions more are at risk.
The consequences for local school budgets – just as one example – to have to accommodate the special needs of children impacted by lead and now Zika-caused microcephaly – is mindboggling, making the challenge for school districts to keep Mylan’s overpriced Epipens on hand seem like small potatoes.
The Republican controlled Congress’ refusal to come to consensus and treat Zika as the public health emergency it is – no different than a terror attack – but instead, to hamstring it with poison pills that make it unpalatable to pass is not like the Do-Nothing-But-Harm Congress hasn’t been doing mischief since its return from a 7-week vacation. This includes three bills designed to overturn Dodd-Frank protections of the financial system, a bill to neuter Obamacare, a possible impeachment of the IRS Commissioner, and a yet a new investigation, investigating the FBI investigators into Hillary Clinton’s emails (is that the 9th or 10th Congressional investigation?).
But let’s look at what the Do-Nothing-But-Harm Congress has done nothing about: gun violence prevention (No Fly, No Buy), the Flint water crisis, confirming Merritt Garland to the Supreme Court, and they are even dragging feet about adopting a Continuing Resolution in order to avoid yet another Republican government shutdown.
Congress needs to fund Zika programs and create an infectious disease emergency response fund, which, apparently is actually supported (at least with lip service) by Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate.
After his meeting with Congressional leaders on Monday, Obama expressed confidence there would be no government shut down and there would be funding for Zika.
Ah, President Obama, ever the optimist. We’ll see.
WASHINGTON, DC – Jason Furman, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers; Sandra Black, Member of the Council of Economic Advisers; and Matt Fielder, Chief Economist of the Council of Economic Advisers; issued the following statement today on the Census Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Data. You can view the statement HERE.
Summary: In 2015, household income grew at the fastest rate on record, the poverty rate fell faster than at any point since 1968, and the uninsured rate continued to fall.
Today’s report from the Census Bureau shows the remarkable progress that American families have made as the recovery continues to strengthen. Real median household income grew 5.2 percent from 2014 to 2015, the fastest annual growth on record. Income grew for households across the income distribution, with the fastest growth among lower- and middle-income households. The number of people in poverty fell by 3.5 million, leading the poverty rate to fall from 14.8 percent to 13.5 percent, the largest one-year drop since 1968, with even larger improvements for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and children. Meanwhile, the ratio of earnings for women working full-time, full-year to earnings for men working full-time, full-year increased to 80 percent in 2015, the highest on record. Every State has seen declines in its uninsured rate since 2013 as the major coverage provisions of the Affordable Care Act have taken effect. Solid employment growth and robust real wage growth so far this year suggest that incomes are continuing to rise in 2016, and, building on the progress shown in today’s Census report, the President will continue to call on Congress to take steps to invest in job creation, wage growth, and equal pay for equal work.
SIX KEY POINTS IN TODAY’S REPORT FROM THE CENSUS BUREAU
1. Real median household income rose by 5.2 percent in 2015, the fastest growth on record. Median household income grew $2,798 to $56,516 in 2015, the first time that annual real income growth exceeded 5 percent since the Census Bureau began reporting data on household income in 1967. Data from 2016 so far point to further strong gains in real household incomes, which depend on employment, nominal wages, and inflation. As of August, total nonfarm job growth has averaged a solid 182,000 jobs a month so far in 2016, and hourly earnings for private-sector workers have increased at an annual rate of 2.8 percent, much faster than the pace of inflation (1.3 percent as of July, the latest data available).
2. The total number of Americans below the poverty line fell by 3.5 million from 2014 to 2015, and the official poverty rate fell to 13.5 percent due to the largest one-year drop since 1968. The poverty rate for children under age 18 fell by 1.4 percentage point (p.p.) from 2014 to 2015, equivalent to more than 1 million children lifted out of poverty. Meanwhile, the poverty rate for those ages 18 to 64 saw its largest one-year decline on record (-1.1 p.p.), and poverty fell 1.1 p.p. for those ages 65 and older. As noted below (see point 5), the official poverty rate does not reflect the full effect of antipoverty policies because it includes only pre-tax income and excludes the direct effect of key policies like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). The Supplemental Poverty Measure, which is designed to include the effects of these programs but also takes into the cost of basic needs when setting the poverty threshold, decreased 1.0 percentage point in 2015, from 15.3 percent to 14.3 percent.
3. Households at all income percentiles reported by the Census Bureau saw gains in income, with the largest gains among households at the bottom of the income distribution. While real median household income increased 5.2 percent, gains were even larger in the lower half of the income distribution, ranging from an increase of 5.5 percent for households at the 40th percentile to an increase of nearly 8 percent for households at the 10th percentile. While households at the top half of the income distribution also saw increases, their gains were smaller, with an increase of 2.9 percent in the 90th percentile of household income. 2015 marked the first time real household income grew at all percentiles reported by the Census Bureau since 2006, and real income growth in 2015 was the fastest since 1969 for the 10th, 20th, 40th, 50th, and 60thpercentiles. Although the level of income inequality remains high, multiple measures of inequality—including the Gini coefficient, the ratio of the 90th percentile of income to the 10th percentile, and the share of income going to households at the top of the income distribution—fell modestly in 2015 as a result of this pattern of income growth.
4. All racial and ethnic groups saw increases in household incomes and decreases in poverty in 2015. As shown in the chart below, all racial and ethnic groups saw gains in real median household income and reductions in their respective poverty rates. Hispanic Americans saw both the largest gains in median income (6.1 percent), while Black Americans and Hispanic Americans saw the largest reductions in poverty (-2.1 p.p. and -2.2 p.p., respectively). The Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), which includes the effects of a number of important antipoverty programs (see point 5 below), shows a similar pattern, with all racial and ethnic groups seeing reductions in poverty.
5. In 2015, refundable tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Child Tax Credit (CTC) lifted 4.8 million children out of poverty. The Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), which includes the effects of a large number of antipoverty programs, is widely acknowledged to measure poverty more accurately than the official measure. Unlike the official poverty measure, the SPM measures post-tax and post-transfer resources, combining earnings with assistance from government programs—including in-kind transfers like food assistance—minus net tax liabilities and necessary expenditures on work, child care, and health care. The measure also bases the poverty line on the cost of meeting basic expenses. Together, in 2015, 9.2 million Americans, including 4.8 million children, were lifted above the poverty line by refundable tax credits, including the EITC and the CTC, illustrating their critical importance to the social safety net. Additionally, research has shown that helping low-income working families through the EITC and CTC not only reduces poverty, but also has positive longer-term effects on children, including improved health, educational outcomes, and labor force participation and earnings in adulthood. Expansions to the EITC and CTC signed into law by President Obama as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 lifted 1.0 million children out of poverty in 2013 according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities; these provisions were made permanent under the bipartisan agreement at the end of 2015. The President’s Fiscal Year 2017 Budget includes a number of provisions to further strengthen tax credits for working families, including an expansion of the EITC to workers without qualifying children. (Note that some of these estimates rely on survey data, which research has shown tend to underreport household use of certain programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, leading to underestimates of the poverty-reducing effects of these programs.)
6. In 2015, the share of people without health insurance declined in almost every State, and all States have seen gains since 2013, reflecting continued progress under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Today’s new data from the American Community Survey (ACS) show that 49 States and the District of Columbia saw their uninsured rates decline in 2015. The uninsured rate has fallen in every State (as well as in the District of Columbia) since 2013. While the ACS is not the firstsurvey to report estimates of State-level insurance coverage in 2015, the survey’s extremely large sample size allows it to provide particularly reliable estimates.
While all States have seen increases in insurance coverage since the ACA’s major coverage provisions took effect in the beginning of 2014, the extent of those gains have varied widely by State. Notably, States that have expanded Medicaid under the ACA have seen larger coverage gains on average, particularly if they started with a larger uninsured population. If Medicaid non-expansion States had seen coverage gains comparable to those seen by Medicaid expansion states with similar uninsured rates, the uninsured rate in these states would have been nearly 3 percentage points lower in 2015, increasing the magnitude of these states’ coverage gains since 2013 by almost two-thirds.
Today’s Census release also included an estimate of the national change in the uninsured rate based on the Current Population Survey (CPS). According to the CPS, the national uninsured rate dropped by 1.3 percentage points from 10.4 percent in 2014 to 9.1 percent in 2015, bringing the cumulative gain since 2013 to 4.3 percentage points. The new data from the CPS are broadly consistent with evidence from other Federal and private surveys showing that coverage gains continued during 2015; those surveys show that gains have continued into early2016. The cumulative coverage gains since 2013 have put the uninsured rate at its lowest level ever.
Jason Furman is Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. Sandra Black is a Member of the Council of Economic Advisers. Matt Fiedler is Chief Economist of the Council of Economic Advisers.
I’m disappointed that Hillary Clinton issued a statement pulling back on her statement that half of Donald Trump’s supporters are in a basket of “deplorable” and the other half are people who feel they have been left out and left behind by government. Her statement is founded in fact – surveys of Trump supporters that show solid percentages who favor building a wall, banning Muslims, even saying the Emancipation Proclamation was a bad idea. Nonetheless, hoping to have the same success as an attack on Hillary Clinton as Mitt Romney’s 47% comment (47% of Americans would not vote for him because they were “takers” which presumably included seniors on Social Security and veterans, and Barack Obama’s comment about “guns and God” and taking a tiny phrase out of context, “You didn’t build it”), Trump created a new ad.
Hopefully it will backfire because instead of coming back against Clinton, it will highlight who, indeed, is inspired by his campaign of hatred, bigotry and fear.
In response to Donald Trump’s new ad, HFA Deputy Communications Director Christina Reynolds offered the following statement:
“As we’ve come to expect, Donald Trump gets quite a bit wrong in his new TV ad, ignoring Hillary Clinton’s comments that she did not mean half of his supporters were deplorable and her reference to the economic concerns of many of his supporters. That said, if he’d like to argue against Hillary’s claim that people who are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic or Islamophobic are deplorable, we are happy to have that debate. Trump has spent the entire campaign offering divisive views that have given rise to far too much hatred and bigotry—Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine will continue to call that out.”
VOICEOVER:Speaking to wealthy donors, Hillary Clinton called tens of millions of Americans “deplorable”
CLINTON CLARIFIED REMARKS
Clinton Said She Regretted Being “Grossly Generalistic” In Her Comments. “Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that’s never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ — that was wrong. But let’s be clear, what’s really ‘deplorable’ is that Donald Trump hired a major advocate for the so-called ‘alt-right’ movement to run his campaign and that David Duke and other white supremacists see him as a champion of their values. It’s deplorable that Trump has built his campaign largely on prejudice and paranoia and given a national platform to hateful views and voices, including by retweeting fringe bigots with a few dozen followers and spreading their message to 11 million people. It’s deplorable that he’s attacked a federal judge for his ‘Mexican heritage,’ bullied a Gold Star family because of their Muslim faith, and promoted the lie that our first black president is not a true American. So I won’t stop calling out bigotry and racist rhetoric in this campaign.” [Hillary for America, Statement, 9/10/16]
IN THE FULL CONTEXT OF HER REMARKS, CLINTON SAID THANKFULLY, THE HATEFUL TRUMP SUPPORTERS “ARE NOT AMERICA”
Clinton Said We Have To “Understand And Empathize With” Trump Supporters Who Feel “The Government Has Let Them Down” And Who Are “Desperate For Change.” “…thankfully they are not America. But the other basket, the other basket, and I know because I see friends from all over America here. I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas, as well as you know New York and California. But that other basket of people who are people who feel that government has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they are just desperate for change. It doesn’t really even matter where it comes from. They don’t buy everything he says but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won’t wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroine, feel like they’re in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.’” [Transcript via NPR, 9/10/16]
CLINTON HAS REPEATEDLY SAID THE VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS REJECT TRUMP’S BIGOTRY
Clinton: “As I Said, Many Of Trump’s Supporters Are Hard-Working Americans Who Just Don’t Feel Like The Economy Or Our Political System Are Working For Them.” “I also meant what I said last night about empathy, and the very real challenges we face as a country where so many people have been left out and left behind. As I said, many of Trump’s supporters are hard-working Americans who just don’t feel like the economy or our political system are working for them. I’m determined to bring our country together and make our economy work for everyone, not just those at the top. Because we really are ‘stronger together.’” [Hillary for America, Statement, 9/10/16]
Clinton: “So There May Be Some Folks Who Buy Into His Dark, Negative Vision, And Think He Maybe Could Be Their Voice, But I Don’t Think That Represents The Vast Majority Of Americans.” “And you know, the other thing that struck me about his speech was when he said, ‘I am your voice.’ Now, look, I will admit, maybe he does speak for some people, but I think it’s kind of hard to imagine him speaking for immigrants, for people with disabilities, for African Americans, for Latinos, for women, or even for working people who he has a history of stiffing, not supporting. So there may be some folks who buy into his dark, negative vision, and think he maybe could be their voice, but I don’t think that represents the vast majority of Americans.” [Voter Registration Event in Charlotte, NC, 7/25/16]
Asked If Americans Are Becoming Desensitized To Trump’s Rhetoric, Clinton Said “The Vast Majority Of Americans Are People Who Are Decent And Caring And Looking For Ways That We Can Come Together, Not To Be Divided By Fear And Hatred.” “QUESTION: Do you worry that Americans are becoming desensitized to this kind of rhetoric? HILLARY CLINTON: I think the uproar from Americans across our country in response to a number of the comments that Trump has made, but in particular to his derogatory comments about the Khans shows to the contrary, that the vast majority of Americans are people who are decent and caring and looking for ways that we can come together, not to be divided by fear and hatred.” [Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine at Press Avail in Ashland, OH, 7/31/16]
Clinton On Trump Supporters: “I Think That The Core Of His Support Really Centers On The Disappointment In The Economy That So Many Americans Feel.” “YAMICHE ALCINDOR: My question is you’ve accused Donald Trump of using racist and sexist language, what does it say about the electorate that so many Americans are supporting him? HILLARY CLINTON: Well, I really believe that the core of his support — I’m not going to speak for everyone who supports him because I think there have been some quite distressing statements coming out of his rallies and his supporters and who has aligned themselves with him. But I think that the core of his support really centers on the disappointment in the economy that so many Americans feel. And what I have been saying is, you know, I want to bring this country together. I think we have three overarching goals: we need more economic opportunity; we need to protect our national security; and we have got to work toward American unity.” [Q&A at NABJ & NAHJ Convention in Washington, D.C., 8/5/16]
CLINTON GAVE AN ENTIRE SPEECH ABOUT HOW THE ALT-RIGHT USES TRUMP’S CAMPAIGN TO PROMOTE THEIR HATE MOVEMENT
Clinton: “Trump Is Reinforcing Harmful Stereotypes And Offering A Dog Whistle To His Most Hateful Supporters.” “Now, Trump’s lack of knowledge or experience or solutions would be bad enough. But what he’s doing here is more sinister. Trump is reinforcing harmful stereotypes and offering a dog whistle to his most hateful supporters. It’s a disturbing preview of what kind of President he’d be.” [Remarks on Trump’s Prejudice and Paranoia in Reno, NV, 8/25/16]
Clinton: “This Is A Moment Of Reckoning For Every Republican Dismayed That The Party Of Lincoln Has Become The Party Of Trump. It’s A Moment Of Reckoning For All Of Us Who Love Our Country.” “We wouldn’t tolerate this kind of behavior before and we wouldn’t tolerate it in our own homes. And we shouldn’t stand for it in a presidential candidate. My friends, this is a moment of reckoning for every Republican dismayed that the Party of Lincoln has become the Party of Trump. It’s a moment of reckoning for all of us who love our country and believe that America is better than this.” [Remarks on Trump’s Prejudice and Paranoia in Reno, NV, 8/25/16]
Clinton On Trump: “Every Day, More Americans Are Standing Up And Saying ‘Enough Is Enough’ – Including A Lot Of Republicans. And I Am Honored To Have Their Support In This Campaign.” “We can have our disagreements, and believe me, I understand that. I think that’s healthy. We need good debates, but we need to do it in a respectful way, not finger pointing and blaming, and stirring up this bigotry and prejudice. Every day, more Americans are standing up and saying ‘enough is enough’ – including a lot of Republicans. And I am honored to have their support in this campaign.” [Remarks on Trump’s Prejudice and Paranoia in Reno, NV, 8/25/16]
HILLARY CLINTON: You could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. The racists, sexists, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it.
TRUMP’S CANDIDACY HAS GIVEN THE ALT-RIGHT “LEGITIMACY THEY HAVE CRAVED FOR YEARS.”
HEADLINE: “Donald Trump’s Alt-Right Brain” [Editorial, New York Times, 9/5/16]
New York Times Editorial Board: Trump’s Candidacy Granted The Alternative-Right “The Legitimacy They Have Craved For Years.” “Mr. Trump says he isn’t signaling the alt-right when he says of immigrants, as he did again on Wednesday: ‘We have no idea who these people are, where they come from. I always say Trojan Horse. Watch what’s going to happen, folks. It’s not going to be pretty.’ Or when he said — in a line widely quoted on alt-right websites — ‘There is only one core issue in the immigration debate and it is this: the well-being of the American people.’ Mr. Trump’s white supremacist followers don’t take his disavowals too seriously. After all, he has enthusiastically retweeted bogus crime statistics and incendiary imagery from these websites and hired one of their biggest lights, Stephen Bannon of Breitbart News, to manage his campaign. There aren’t enough of these people to put Mr. Trump in the White House. But his candidacy has granted them the legitimacy they have craved for years. For the first time, a candidate is using a major-party megaphone to shout the ideas they once could only mutter among themselves in the shadowy fringes of national debate.” [Editorial, New York Times, 9/5/16]
THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN FORTIFIED THE WHITE SUPREMACIST MOVEMENT
Donald Trump Was A Boon For White Supremacists, Who Used His Candidacy As A Tool To Expand Their Movement. “The Ku Klux Klan is using Donald Trump as a talking point in its outreach efforts. Stormfront, the most prominent American white supremacist website, is upgrading its servers in part to cope with a Trump traffic spike. And former Louisiana Rep. David Duke reports that the businessman has given more Americans cover to speak out loud about white nationalism than at any time since his own political campaigns in the 1990s. As hate group monitors at the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League warn that Trump’s rhetoric is conducive to anti-Muslim violence, white nationalist leaders are capitalizing on his candidacy to invigorate and expand their movement.” [Politico, 12/10/15]
Politico: “The Ku Klux Klan Is Using Donald Trump As A Talking Point In Its Outreach Efforts.” [Politico, 12/10/15]
Politico: “Stormfront, The Most Prominent American White Supremacist Website, Is Upgrading Its Servers In Part To Cope With A Trump Traffic Spike.” [Politico, 12/10/15]
Stormfront Founder Don Black: “Demoralization Has Been The Biggest Enemy And Trump Is Changing All That.” “As hate group monitors at the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League warn that Trump’s rhetoric is conducive to anti-Muslim violence, white nationalist leaders are capitalizing on his candidacy to invigorate and expand their movement. ‘Demoralization has been the biggest enemy and Trump is changing all that,’ said Stormfront founder Don Black, who reports additional listeners and call volume to his phone-in radio show, in addition to the site’s traffic bump.” [Politico, 12/10/15]
VOICEOVER:People like you, you, and you
TRUMP DESCRIBED THE AFRICAN AMERICAN AND HISPANIC COMMUNITIES AS IMPOVERISHED AND CRIME-RIDDEN
Trump On The African-American Community: “You Have So Many In Poverty And The Crime Is Horrible And The Education Is Terrible And They Live Terribly.” TRUMP: “But you have tremendous numbers of African-Americans that have really had a hard time. I mean, beyond belief. And, you know, I read the numbers where you have so many in poverty and the crime is horrible and the education is terrible and they live terribly. And I say, what do you have to lose? I say to them, what do you have to lose? Give it to me. I’m going to fix them. And a lot of people are agreeing with me. What do you have to lose. The Democrats and the Hillary Clintons of the world have done a terrible job. She has been there for 35 years. She has done a terrible job. But the Hillary Clintons of the world have done a terrible job, Eric, and I say, what do you have to lose? I will fix it and you know what? A lot of people are agreeing.” [O’Reilly Factor, Fox News, 9/1/16]
TRUMP HAS DESCRIBED AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITIES IN INSULTING AND IGNORANT TERMS
HEADLINE: “Donald Trump’s Description Of Black America Is Offending Those Living In It”[New York Times, 8/24/16]
New York Times: “The Unrelievedly Dire Picture He Has Painted Of Black America Has Left Many Black Voters Angry, Dumbfounded Or Both. Interviews With Roughly A Dozen Blacks Here Turned Up No One Who Found Any Appeal In Mr. Trump’s Remarks.” “But the unrelievedly dire picture he has painted of black America has left many black voters angry, dumbfounded or both. Interviews with roughly a dozen blacks here turned up no one who found any appeal in Mr. Trump’s remarks. More common was the suggestion that Mr. Trump was trying to appeal to whites who might support him.” [New York Times, 8/24/16]
TRUMP CRITICIZED A FEDERAL JUDGE’S ABILITY TO DO HIS JOB BECAUSE OF HIS HERITAGE
Trump Claimed Federal Judge Gonzalo Curiel Could Not Preside Over His Case Without A Conflict Of Interest Because He Was “Of Mexican Heritage.” “Trump said U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel had ‘an absolute conflict’ in presiding over the litigation given that he was ‘of Mexican heritage’ and a member of a Latino lawyers’ association. Mr. Trump said the background of the judge, who was born in Indiana to Mexican immigrants, was relevant because of his campaign stance against illegal immigration and his pledge to seal the southern U.S. border.” [Wall Street Journal, 6/2/16]
TRUMP CALLED TO BAN AN ENTIRE GROUP OF PEOPLE BASED ON THEIR RELIGION
12/7/15: Trump Called For A “Total And Complete Shutdown Of Muslims Entering The United States,” Citing “Great Hatred Towards Americans By Large Segments Of The Muslim Populations.” “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on. According to Pew Research, among others, there is great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim populations.” [Press Release, Donald Trump for President, 12/7/15]
Trump Said He Was Not Rolling Back His Ban On Muslims: “In Fact, You Could Say It’s An Expansion.” “Donald Trump made clear this weekend that he has not rolled back his proposal to ban Muslims from entering the United States, despite top allies insisting that he had… ‘I don’t think so. I actually don’t think it’s a rollback. In fact, you could say it’s an expansion,’ Trump said. ‘I’m looking now at territory. People were so upset when I used the word ‘Muslim’: ‘Oh, you can’t use the word ‘Muslim.’ Remember this. And I’m okay with that, because I’m talking territory instead of Muslim.’” [Washington Post, 7/24/16; Meet the Press, 7/24/16]
TRUMP CALLED IMMIGRANTS CRIMINALS AND RAPISTS
Trump: “When Mexico Sends Its People, They’re Not Sending Their Best… They’re Bringing Drugs. They’re Bringing Crime. They’re Rapists.”TRUMP: “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” [Trump Presidential Campaign Announcement, New York NY, 6/16/15]
TRUMP REPEATEDLY MADE SEXIST ATTACKS
Trump On Megyn Kelly: “You Could See There Was Blood Coming Out Of Her Eyes, Blood Coming Out Of Her Wherever.”“Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said Friday night that Fox News Channel anchor Megyn Kelly ‘had blood coming out of her eyes’ when she aggressively questioned him during Thursday’s presidential debate. ‘She gets out and she starts asking me all sorts of ridiculous questions,’ Trump said in a CNN interview. ‘You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever. In my opinion, she was off base.’” [Washington Post, 8/8/15]
Trump On Fiorina: “Look At That Face! Would Anyone Vote For That? Can You Imagine That, The Face Of Our Next President?”“When the anchor throws to Carly Fiorina for her reaction to Trump’s momentum, Trump’s expression sours in schoolboy disgust as the camera bores in on Fiorina. ‘Look at that face!’ he cries. ‘Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?!’ The laughter grows halting and faint behind him. ‘I mean, she’s a woman, and I’m not s’posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?’ And there, in a nutshell, is Trump’s blessing and his curse: He can’t seem to quit while he’s ahead.” [Rolling Stone, 9/9/15]
Trump On Hillary Clinton: “Do You Think She Looks Presidential? I Don’t Think So.” “GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump went after Hillary Clinton Tuesday for the way she looks, saying she just doesn’t seem presidential. ‘Do you think she looks presidential? I don’t think so,’ Trump said to his crowd at a rally in Ashburn, Virginia.” [Huffington Post, 8/2/16; Trump Campaign Rally, Ashburn VA, 8/2/16]
TRUMP DEFENDED HIS SUGGESTION THAT SEXUAL ASSAULTS SHOULD BE EXPECTED IF WOMEN ARE ALLOWED TO SERVE IN THE MILITARY WITH MEN
Trump Defended His 2013 Tweet Suggesting Sexual Assault Was Inevitable “When They Put Men And Women Together” In The Military: “It Is A Correct Tweet. There Are Many People Think That’s Absolutely Correct.” LAUER: “In 2013, on this subject, you tweeted this. Quote, 26,000 unreported sexual assaults in the military. Only 238 convictions. What did these geniuses expect when they put men and women together? End quote.” TRUMP: “Well, it is a correct tweet. There are many people think that’s absolutely correct. We need to have a –“ [Commander In Chief Forum, MSNBC, 9/7/16]
TRUMP SAID HE WAS PROUD TO BE A BIRTHER
USA Today: Trump “Was Perhaps The Most Prominent Voice Of The ‘Birther’ Movement.”“Trump has been an outspoken critic of President Obama and was perhaps the most prominent voice of the ‘birther’ movement, which asserted, erroneously, that Obama was not a natural-born U.S. citizen. On Monday, he took a shot at the newest entrant to the 2016 Republican field, Jeb Bush, tweeting: ‘Do we really need another Bush in the White House — we have had enough of them.’ If there’s one thing Trump brings to the 2016 campaign, it’s confidence. ‘I’m the most successful person ever to run for the presidency, by far,’ he told The Des Moines Register in a recent interview.” [USA Today, 6/16/15]
March 2011: Trump: “I’m Proud To Be” A Birther. “Well I thought he was very nice to me, though. I mean, I understand that. And he doesn’t want to be labeled as a birther, probably. I’m proud to be. I mean, I’m very proud of it. I don’t like the term. I think it’s a demeaning term to the people that believe that he should have a birth certificate. .” [Laura Ingraham Show,AUDIO 06:30-07:00, 3/30/11]
VOICEOVER: You know what’s deplorable?
TRUMP ATTACKED A GOLD STAR FAMILY WHO LOST THEIR SON IN IRAQ
HEADLINE: “Donald Trump Criticizes Muslim Family Of Slain U.S. Soldier, Drawing Ire” [New York Times, 7/30/16]
HEADLINE: “Donald Trump’s Slander Of Captain Humayun Khan’s Family Is Horrifying, Even For Trump” [Vox, 7/30/16]
Trump Claimed The Mother Of A Fallen Muslim Soldier Did Not Speak At The Democratic Nation Convention Because “Maybe She Wasn’t Allowed To Have Anything To Say, You Tell Me.” “Donald J. Trump belittled the parents of a slain Muslim soldier who had strongly denounced Mr. Trump during the Democratic National Convention, saying that the soldier’s father had delivered the entire speech because his mother was not ‘allowed’ to speak…But, he added, ‘If you look at his wife, she was standing there, she had nothing to say, she probably — maybe she wasn’t allowed to have anything to say, you tell me.’” [New York Times,7/30/16; This Week, ABC, 7/31/16]
Trump Suggested His Business Career Was A Sacrifice Comparable To The Loss Of Khizr Khan’s Son: “I Think I Have Made A Lot Of Sacrifices.” STEPHANOPOULOS: “How would you answer that father [Khan]? What sacrifice have you made for your country?” TRUMP: “I think I have made a lot of sacrifices. I’ve work very, very hard. I’ve created thousands and thousands of jobs, tens of thousands of jobs, built great structures. I’ve done — I’ve had tremendous success.” STEPHANOPOULOS: “Those are sacrifices?” TRUMP: “Oh, sure. I think they’re sacrifices.” [This Week, ABC, 7/31/16]
VOICEOVER:Hillary Clinton viciously demonizing hard working people like you.
TRUMP QUESTIONED HOW STUPID THE PEOPLE OF IOWA AND THE COUNTRY WERE
Donald Trump: “How Stupid Are The People Of Iowa? How Stupid Are The People Of The Country To Believe This Crap?” “With his voice growing louder and louder, Trump questioned what sort of person would attack his mother. He questioned how a belt buckle could stop a blade, stepping away from the podium to demonstration how such an attack might happen and how his own belt buckle wouldn’t stay in place long enough to stop a knife. ‘Anybody have a knife?’ Trump asked the audience, which was screened by Secret Service agents who began protecting him this week. ‘You want to try it on me?’ Trump was flabbergast: ‘How stupid are the people of Iowa? How stupid are the people of the country to believe this crap?’” [Washington Post, 11/13/15; Donald Trump Campaign Rally, Fort Dodge Iowa, 11/12/15]
TRUMP SAID HE LOVES THE “POORLY EDUCATED,” BRAGGING HE WON THAT GROUP OF VOTERS
Trump: “We Won With Poorly Educated — I Love The Poorly Educated.” TRUMP: “We won the evangelicals. We won with young. We won with old. We won with highly educated. We won with poorly educated — I love the poorly educated. We’re the smartest people, we’re the most loyal people.’” [Trump Campaign Rally, Las Vegas NV, 2/23/16]
TRUMP MOCKED A DISABLED REPORTER
HEADLINE: “Trump Mocks New York Times Reporter With Disability” [Chicago Tribune,11/25/15]
Chicago Tribune: “Trump Appeared To Mock Kovaleski’s Physical Condition; The Reporter Has Arthrogryposis, Which Visibly Limits Flexibility In His Arms. ‘Now, The Poor Guy — You’ve Got To See This Guy, “Ah, I Don’t Know What I Said! I Don’t Remember!”’ Trump Said As He Jerked His Arms In Front Of His Body.” “On stage Tuesday, Trump berated Times investigative reporter Serge Kovaleski for his recent recollection of an article he had written a few days after the attacks. Trump appeared to mock Kovaleski’s physical condition; the reporter has arthrogryposis, which visibly limits flexibility in his arms. ‘Now, the poor guy — you’ve got to see this guy, “Ah, I don’t know what I said! I don’t remember!”’ Trump said as he jerked his arms in front of his body. The gesture was all the more personal because Kovaleski covered Trump while reporting for the New York Daily News between 1987 and 1993, a tumultuous period for Trump in which he struggled through several financial setbacks.” [Chicago Tribune, 11/25/15]
DONALD J. TRUMP: I’m Donald Trump, and I approve this message.