Trump lies update – year end review

I call them lies instead of false statements. He knows what he’s doing.

Opinion: Trump’s agenda is dependent on provable falsehoods https://t.co/svQoW13Yjo

— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) January 1, 2019

Polling objectively shows:

1. The lying doesn’t work
2. The wall is unpopular
3. His anti-immigration has backfired
4. Obamacare is more popular than ever
5. Barack and Michelle Obama are 2018 most admired Americans
6. Republicans had the worst midterm results since Watergate https://t.co/gRwapQUBrB

— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) December 30, 2018

Sensible ideas from @ThePlumLineGS. One suggestion: have GAO do the study of the border, or at least a parallel one to CRS. GAO has far more resources. https://t.co/fmUhDXgUHv

— Norman Ornstein (@NormOrnstein) January 1, 2019

ICYMI –> A year of unprecedented deception: Trump averaged 15 false claims a day in 2018 https://t.co/Gk2MPpx5XW

— Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) January 1, 2019

Trump's lies sometimes seem strategic. But polls shows that most Americans see right through it & realize he's untrustworthy. pic.twitter.com/8jpwnIYlET

— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) December 29, 2018

1) As Trump ends the year with a flood of lies about his wall, we need to recapture a core truth about this presidency.

Trump isn't “twisting the truth” or “stubbornly refusing to admit error.”

Trump is engaged in *disinformation.*

This is a different thing entirely.

*THREAD*

— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) December 30, 2018

It’s so cool when Trump misrepresents how other people feel in order to make his point. Federal workers want the shutdown. Dems want open borders. Everybody knows walls always work. Trump lies about what he thinks and about what you think. Fun!

— Touré (@Toure) December 28, 2018

Fact checks: A look back at President Trump's 10 biggest falsehoods of 2018. https://t.co/T9v6tfFjDd

— NBC News (@NBCNews) December 27, 2018

NEW –> President Trump has made 7,546 false or misleading claims over 700 days https://t.co/wW711Mxj49

— Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) December 21, 2018

Donald Trump has made 7,546 false or misleading claims as president, according to the @washingtonpost. That means our gumball count is back. See how many jars we’ve filled now. pic.twitter.com/7JntPUOVuL

— Victor Blackwell CNN (@VictorBlackwell) December 29, 2018

In summer, President Trump blamed “bad environmental laws” for worsening California's wildfires and diverting water to the ocean. No one knew what he was talking about. https://t.co/P9PR4CQ9qb @CAPolitiFact

— PolitiFact (@PolitiFact) December 23, 2018

Trump is the mis-leader in chief. Here's a specific example involving his anti-immigration claims. pic.twitter.com/kuPwquwOFQ

— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) December 23, 2018

There is no border crisis

Trump has made this up to excite his white nationalist base.

Dear @realDonaldTrump: I've been told you respond to visuals. Here's a chart that shows there is no big crisis at the border.

But there is a big crisis in healthcare, infrastructure & education. Democrats are not going to appropriate US taxpayer funds for your wasteful wall. pic.twitter.com/DxdkB7bAtZ

— Ted Lieu (@tedlieu) December 23, 2018

McGurk, top US envoy in fight against ISIS, resigns

Another departure based on Trump’s new Syria and Afghanistan policies.

Of course, Trump trashes him on the way out. Why would anybody work for Trump?

The fact that you say you don’t know @brett_mcgurk speaks volumes about your commitment to fighting ISIS @realDonaldTrump. Why don’t you know the man who has done more than any civilian to degrade ISIS? I can assure you @BarackObama knows him well. https://t.co/OzvKRrmVF5

— Susan Rice (@AmbassadorRice) December 23, 2018

Uhhhh…you don’t know your own coordinator of the anti-ISIS campaign?

Over the past 5 years, no one has done more to put ISIS on its heels than Brett. We all know and rely on him. The fact that our President has no clue who Brett is should scare the hell out of every American. https://t.co/m7SNU1SA7z

— Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) December 23, 2018

Trump tonight tweeted that he doesn't know who Brett McGurk is, the U.S. envoy to the coalition fighting the Islamic State.

McGurk has literally been the American leading the fight against ISIS.

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) December 23, 2018

Brett McGurk clerked for Rehnquist, worked in the Bush Administration, and once co-authored a @FedSoc white paper with Trump's 5th Circuit appointee Jim Ho and other young conservative lawyers. Thanks for your public service, Brett, in all administrations. https://t.co/DyXm2aXB6L

— Orin Kerr (@OrinKerr) December 23, 2018

And McGurk’s departure is equally major. https://t.co/wfq3nea1q1

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) December 23, 2018

As an American Citizen directly impacted by @brett_mcgurk’s work as a diplomat, I thank him deeply for his years of dedicated service. Without his relentless efforts @YeganehSalehi and I would not be here. That’s a fact. https://t.co/Ba0d9M8WVJ

— Jason Rezaian (@jrezaian) December 22, 2018

This is a very big deal. And if President Trump doesn’t know Brent McGurk that’s not a demonstration that McGurk’s departure is a nothing burger, it’s a demonstration the president has a stunning disinterest in the foreign policy of his country. https://t.co/yNxx1PqNNJ

— Brianna Keilar (@brikeilarcnn) December 23, 2018

Actually, after he clerked for Chief Justice Rehnquist in 2001, McGurk was appointed by George W. Bush to be special assistant to the president and senior director at the NSC for Iraq & Afghanistan. He served under both Bush and Obama. Like Bob Gates. https://t.co/yDcZefGaxA

— Jay Carney (@JayCarney) December 23, 2018

Tweeting that you don’t know the head of the government’s effort to combat ISIS is an amazing self own https://t.co/NdNG5H5tsY

— Chris Cillizza (@CillizzaCNN) December 23, 2018

Mattis departure

Mattis planned to stay until February but Trump wants him out on 1/1/19.

Let's see how many Republicans step up now to defend Secretary Mattis now that Trump has decided to un-person him.

— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) December 23, 2018

Mattis resignation could be the "beginning of the functional end" of Trump's presidency, Meet the Press host says https://t.co/iEi7Rf6vsR pic.twitter.com/ynYFmK6fLL

— Newsweek (@Newsweek) December 23, 2018

Active duty military approval ratings:

Mattis- 84% and just 4% disapproval
Trump- 44% approval
Trump approval with military women- 26%
Trump approval with military minorities- 29% https://t.co/JGus62EHJV pic.twitter.com/Ofit2CZH4t

— Evan Siegfried (@evansiegfried) December 23, 2018

UPDATE: Deputy Secretary of Defense, Patrick Shanahan, will assume the title of Acting Secretary of Defense starting 1/1/2019. Defense Secretary James Mattis announced his resignation last week in protest of Trump's decision to withdraw U.S. forces from Syria. pic.twitter.com/w9O8yc0QHi

— Ben Kennedy (@BenKennedyTV) December 23, 2018

Who is Patrick Shanahan? Trump forces James Mattis out early amid frustration over resignation https://t.co/16Q62cfLKv pic.twitter.com/2tIsaSDX7t

— Newsweek (@Newsweek) December 23, 2018

Amazing. “One aide said although Trump had already seen the resignation letter when he praised Mattis, the president did not understand just how forceful a rejection of his strategy Mattis had issued.” https://t.co/vYyaF9oq3N

— Mark Dubowitz (@mdubowitz) December 23, 2018

Sen. Dick Durbin said he is heartbroken that Defense Secretary Jim Mattis is leaving the Cabinet and worried for the next two years of the Trump administrationhttps://t.co/KboS4MOtCv

— POLITICO (@politico) December 23, 2018

One effect of Trump pushing Mattis now: It cuts down opportunities for the secretary to speak in an official capacity.

Mattis was due to testify before both armed services committees in January, and planned to make one last visit to meet with NATO.https://t.co/2qBd3cOGra

— Dan Lamothe (@DanLamothe) December 23, 2018

"The chaos that finally cemented Mattis’s decision to leave…confirms the worst fears of Trump’s most dire critics."

This @RadioFreeTom is what i NEEDED this morning.https://t.co/zL1rlbRbkv

— Dennis Herring (@dcherring) December 23, 2018

In light of this hour's Mattis news, reupping this from today's paper –> "A rogue presidency": The era of containing Trump is over https://t.co/vGEfWLdBMr

— Philip Rucker (@PhilipRucker) December 23, 2018

This is an important essay:

It’s not often I call something a “must read.” This is one of those rare times. You must read this.https://t.co/ovTCSg7w7T

— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) December 23, 2018

Trump wants to fire Jerome Powell

Trump makes everything political and about him. The Federal Reserve should not be subject to politics. He should shut up and leave it alone.

BREAKING: Trump has discussed firing Federal Reserve chief Jerome Powell as his frustration has intensified after this week’s interest-rate increase and months of stock-market losses.

Advisers close to Trump aren’t convinced he will try to do it, but say he wants to.

— Jennifer Jacobs (@JenniferJJacobs) December 22, 2018

Exasperated over the market plunge, Trump asks advisers whether he can fire Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. https://t.co/kgymiS7FPl

— Shane Harris (@shaneharris) December 23, 2018

Trump blames Mnuchin for Powell pick https://t.co/ePCZTYqYt1

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) December 23, 2018

Trump reportedly wants to fire Fed head Powell, a move that could wreak havoc on the financial markets https://t.co/gxGYdck8go

— Ali Velshi (@AliVelshi) December 22, 2018

Is Trump criticizing the Fed because of the impact of rate increases on his own finances?

Trump should not be criticizing Jerome Powell, who he appointed to lead the Federal Reserve. One issue is how much of his criticism is motivated by the impact on his own finances.

Every time the Fed raises rates, Trump’s payments on some $340 million in variable-rate loans go up https://t.co/j8pHHlADCB

— Bloomberg Politics (@bpolitics) December 22, 2018

Trump is obstructing justice again

Trump is angry at Whitaker for not controlling prosecutors investigating his businesses. This is an even more obvious case of obstruction of justice than when Trump wanted Comey to stop the Flynn investigation. At least, Trump and Whitaker haven’t ordered the investigation to stop. That would really be bad. I hope Trump gets indicted if he is guilty (which I think he clearly is).

Exactly right, @renato_mariotti. The bright red lines Trump crossed in telling Whitaker he needs to be more loyal to POTUS in the SDNY vis-a-vis Michael Cohen make the impropriety of Clinton’s silly chat with Lynch turn pale pink by comparison @JRubinBlogger https://t.co/5E4eabG8NQ

— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) December 23, 2018

This is Trump yelling at the acting Attorney General for not doing enough to obstruct justice https://t.co/gV4QEdlTxw

— Dan Pfeiffer (@danpfeiffer) December 22, 2018

Does anybody really believe that President Trump wasn’t trying to influence an ongoing criminal investigation when he vented his frustration to acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker? pic.twitter.com/oGD3e2RCvn

— Josh Campbell (@joshscampbell) December 22, 2018

On the one hand, it’s appalling that Trump is trying to influence the acting AG. On the other hand, it seems encouraging that despite this pressure, even a toady like Whitaker hasn’t hampered investigations into the president. https://t.co/5PLY5Gqrm7

— Daniel W. Drezner (@dandrezner) December 22, 2018

Remember when the #GOP went berserk because Hillary's spouse had a casual conversation with AG Lynch at the airport?

Waiting for GOP to go berserk again because @POTUS is now having direct conversations to influence acting AG Whitaker on investigations that implicate him …. https://t.co/q6WD9dZ4Lo

— Ted Lieu (@tedlieu) December 22, 2018

When @realDonaldTrump reportedly discussed the Cohen investigation with the acting Attorney General and pushed him to control New York prosecutors, was he trying to “work out a deal?” Is the system “totally rigged & corrupt?” pic.twitter.com/PL8zWhCppG

— Josh Campbell (@joshscampbell) December 22, 2018

This is crossing the red line again, worse than his conversations with Comey: “Trump pressed Whitaker on why more wasn't being done to control prosecutors in New York who brought the charges in the first place.” https://t.co/8KKOT3gVTN

— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) December 22, 2018

Folks concerned about Bill Clinton talking to Loretta Lynch on the tarmac during HRC probe may want to look at this https://t.co/W6Igz1nZha

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) December 22, 2018

Trump makes Putin happy by withdrawing troops from Syria

update 12/29/18

Russia, Turkey discuss coordination in Syria after U.S. withdrawal https://t.co/cZL6yPYoYH pic.twitter.com/jHuzNrinav

— Reuters Top News (@Reuters) December 29, 2018

update 12/23/18

Trump’s abrupt decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria defied the warnings of his senior advisers — including Bolton, Mattis and Pompeo — while blindsiding U.S. allies, from @missy_ryan and @jdawsey1 https://t.co/jPvqVYdf3Z

— Alan Sipress (@AlanSipress) December 20, 2018

more stuff since yesterday:

Vladimir Putin Welcomes U.S. Withdrawal From Syria https://t.co/HJwk43BYxj

— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) December 20, 2018

Trump gave Putin a big Christmas present this year: Syria.

— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) December 19, 2018

This is ghastly. https://t.co/lW77oA7K7h

— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) December 19, 2018

This giveaway to Russia must be evaluated in the context of the emerging evidence of Trump's quid pro quo with Putin. Trump & his team clearly asked for and got Russian business and election help. Did he & they signal policy concessions in exchange–& is this another example? https://t.co/nVr6lE7yyU

— Norm Eisen (@NormEisen) December 19, 2018

Trump abruptly announces withdrawal of troops from Syria against the advice of General Mattis and the Pentagon.

Three questions:

1. Why is Trump doing this?

2. Why is Trump doing this now against the advice of his own Generals?

3. Who does this benefit and who does this hurt?

— Don Winslow (@donwinslow) December 20, 2018

So, Trump talked to Erdogan, and Netanyahu…
…but not the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Tell me more about how anthem kneeling disrespects the military. https://t.co/OxiujTvmwq

— Kevin Baron (@DefenseBaron) December 20, 2018

Putin applauded Trump's decision to begin pulling U.S. forces out of Syria https://t.co/TV1dsg2vDS

— POLITICO (@politico) December 20, 2018

It is not FAKE NEWS that Russia, Iran, and Assad are unhappy about our decision to withdraw from Syria.

They are ECSTATIC! https://t.co/7cZgEDBbdT

— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) December 20, 2018

So much for Trump’s conceit that he is the most pro-Israel president ever. A U.S. withdrawal from Syria will entrench Iran on Israel’s doorstep. That damage vastly outweighs the empty symbolism of moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem. My latest: https://t.co/0gdlRq5x7S

— Max Boot (@MaxBoot) December 19, 2018

It's almost as if abandoning allies has consequences https://t.co/cxYdqmvKd1

— Dan Byman (@dbyman) December 20, 2018

First Syria, now Afghanistan?

JUST IN: Trump administration is considering a significant reduction in U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan – two officials tell Reuters pic.twitter.com/idmC8Wslto

— Reuters Top News (@Reuters) December 20, 2018

update

"The US has about 14k troops in Afghanistan, most of which are present as part of larger NATO-led mission to train, advise and assist Afghan forces. Any withdrawal would be complicated by the fact that the U.S. is part of NATO's Resolute Support mission." https://t.co/LXg9GIo3Jz

— Kaitlan Collins (@kaitlancollins) December 20, 2018

OUR SCOOP: Trump wants to pull a significant number of troops, as many as 3k, out of Afghanistan as early as next month. me with @jessdonati @nancyayoussef https://t.co/8QMo8BDjxb

— Gordon Lubold (@glubold) December 20, 2018

JUST IN: White House has ordered the Pentagon to draw up plans for a troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, 2 defense officials and a person briefed on the matter tell @NBCNews. https://t.co/yQXYAOQJVk

— NBC News (@NBCNews) December 20, 2018

Whitaker disregarded a recommendation to recuse himself from the Russia investigation

Whitaker’s team wrongly claims no AG has ever recused to avoid an appearance of conflict. It’s actually happened at least 3 times:

1. Ashcroft in Valerie Plame leak investigation (h/t @nycsouthpaw)

2. Holder in John Edwards investigation.

3. Holder in AP leak investigation. https://t.co/4LwTSIwBBH

— Eric Columbus (@EricColumbus) December 20, 2018

Typical of Trumglodytes: ask a question of the relevant experts and follow their advice — unless you don’t like it. Remember when Trump said he’d abide by the 2016 election results — unless they said he lost. Heads I win, tails you lose. I fear for 2020.https://t.co/ZRB8L0V32C

— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) December 20, 2018

Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker will go against an ethics official's advice and will not be recusing himself from the Russia investigation. He will have final say over any of the inquiry's major developments. https://t.co/wagKEF8uAZ

— The New York Times (@nytimes) December 20, 2018

New information on Whitaker/ethics review:
– he never sought a formal recommendation on whether to recuse from Mueller, he did get guidance on the applicable rules
– ethics thought it was a close call on the *appearance* of a conflict, but found no actual legal conflict

— Laura Jarrett (@LauraAJarrett) December 20, 2018

This ethics opinion must be shared with Congress. Now.

DOJ officials must avoid not only actual impropriety but the appearance of impropriety.

Given Whitaker’s prejudicial comments about Mueller, the public can have no confidence in him. We will scrutinize his every action. https://t.co/0Jxbn1eJSP

— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) December 20, 2018

This is turning into an enormous scandal. Ethics officials told Whitaker they would recommend recusal, so he set up a different group of officials (probably political appointees, but unclear) to make a different recommendation. What in the hell is going on at DOJ? https://t.co/gYBeY3RoGP

— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) December 20, 2018

It gets better. DOJ won't even disclose the identify of the team they assembled to countermand the ethics recommendation that Whitaker recuse: "The senior official who described the Whitaker discussions refused to identify the particular Justice Department employees involved." https://t.co/6wPqm0s6Ha

— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) December 20, 2018

The unwinding of the initial backward spin on this story is (finally) making it clear what happened.

WaPo headline here is long, but gets it:

"Ethics officials said Whitaker should recuse from the Mueller probe, but his advisers told him not to"https://t.co/2Vk4gKT8fA

— Rachel Maddow MSNBC (@maddow) December 20, 2018

If it’s a “close call,” in these circumstances, Whitaker should recuse. https://t.co/CLoL70LTf5

— Preet Bharara (@PreetBharara) December 20, 2018

Trump at war with Justice. Crony refuses to follow Ethics decision that he should recuse himself. https://t.co/QnjASMYbGt

— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) December 20, 2018

This is about as outrageous as it gets. I cannot imagine any AG I have worked for or known disregarding ethics advice in this way. https://t.co/WbXE7wEUfx

— Ronald Klain (@RonaldKlain) December 20, 2018