Of course, Trump won’t do anything about this since he benefits from it. Sad!
Month: April 2019
Trump makes up a story about Mexico
The U.S. military says the incident "was an honest mistake by the Mexican soldiers." Trump says the Mexican soldiers were probably trying to create a diversion to help drug smugglers. https://t.co/FBoXNJBvrw
— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) April 24, 2019
Trump’s false statements – update from Daniel Dale
I call them lies.
Dale does a great job tracking them.
This omission, in both local and national news, is the reason I started listing his lies in 2016. And it persists. Most of the rally coverage is still “Trump speaks to big excited crowd, insults X and Y, talks policy Z.” “Trump says 24 untrue things” goes entirely unmentioned. https://t.co/uPtJjCEIv0
— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) April 28, 2019
Here's the updated database of all of Trump's false claims as president, fact-checked and sorted by subject: https://t.co/tUlVsaIQoY
— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) April 24, 2019
From Star editor @EdTubb, here's the updated chart of Trump's false claims by week: pic.twitter.com/R4seuBYfpC
— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) April 24, 2019
Trump is up to 4,913 false claims for his presidency, 6.0 per day. Breakdown:
— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) April 24, 2019
2017: 2.9 per day
2018: 8.3 per day
2019 to date: 7.8 per day
Trump lies again about the VA
He has told this lie over and over.
You're claiming credit for the Veterans Choice and Accountability Act of … 2014? https://t.co/xfkSpJ8dRm
— Kevin M. Kruse (@KevinMKruse) April 24, 2019
As always: Trump did not pass or sign the Choice bill. Obama did, in 2014. Trump signed the VA MISSION Act, which modified the Choice program. This is the 65th time he has made this claim.
— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) April 24, 2019
Conservative media outlets roundly mocked Ocasio-Cortez for saying the VA isn’t broken. Trump just said she was right (so he could take credit for the non-brokenness). pic.twitter.com/1RH0TIcdxa
— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) April 24, 2019
It sounds like the Supreme Court will cave in on the census citizenship question
This sounds bad based on reports from yesterday’s court hearing. The Republican-selected judges will support Trump and damage Democrats. Ross has lied about the reason for the question. It will result in damage to the court’s credibility, too. Sad!
If #SCOTUS makes a habit of upholding Trump Administration policies on the basis of ostentatiously false explanations, it will encourage profound cynicism about the rule of law and justified doubt about its own legitimacy.#Census2020
— Joshua Matz (@JoshuaMatz8) April 23, 2019
Some quick thoughts on the Supreme Court conservative majority seeming inclined in oral arguments to support the Trump administration's addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census, as it pertains to Mitch McConnell:
— Alec MacGillis (@AlecMacGillis) April 25, 2019
Attempting court packing may be the only sensible response if the census case goes the direction it looks like it’s going to go. https://t.co/MA9iQOCgly
— Slate (@Slate) April 24, 2019
They put a citizenship question in the census to chill participation among immigrant communities – this is something Bannon and Miller and anti immigrant forces were pushing, and if you think the Trump DOJ wanted more data to better enforce the Voting Rights Act you are nuts.
— Brian Schatz (@brianschatz) April 24, 2019
NEW: John Gore, head of the DOJ Civil Rights division, will not show up for a deposition tomorrow with Cummings' committee because they won't let him bring in DOJ lawyers. They want to ask him about the 2020 census citizenship question.
— Betsy Woodruff (@woodruffbets) April 24, 2019
Story TK
How the citizenship question could break the census
I expected this from Roberts. Utterly disingenuous, and a part of his ongoing efforts to deny voting rights to minorities. We saw it in Shelby County. https://t.co/VQM170wSk5
— Norman Ornstein (@NormOrnstein) April 23, 2019
With citizenship question on census, "California would probably lose a (House) seat, and other states with large immigrant populations, such as New York and Texas, could lose seats as well." https://t.co/hnItr3t0t6
— Dana Milbank (@Milbank) April 22, 2019
At Supreme Court argument Tuesday on Census citizenship question, 9 justices and 4 Pinocchios: https://t.co/QbtjuOUmLr
— Dana Milbank (@Milbank) April 22, 2019
The Trump administration and Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices Tuesday held a legal seminar on how to preserve white hegemony in four easy steps. https://t.co/Zzf0tvtwfi
— Dana Milbank (@Milbank) April 23, 2019
Why are they asking that? A guide to the 2020 census via @PRBdatahttps://t.co/zIWbX7cEQ0
— All Things Census (@allthingscensus) April 24, 2019
At SCOTUS this morning, Justice Sotomayor was not buying the Trump administration's representation that the census has been asking about citizenship for decades. She cut into the SG's argument almost immediately and noted it hasn't been asked on decennial census since 1950
— Sam Levine (@srl) April 23, 2019
Supreme Court appears likely to uphold Trump’s push to add census citizenship question https://t.co/HoqdGzhwtc
— David Savage (@DavidGSavage) April 23, 2019
According to this early oral argument report, Chief Justice Roberts says getting citizenship question on census is essential to enforcing the Voting Rights Act.
— Rick Hasen (@rickhasen) April 23, 2019
But experts have said it is not. And the evidence shows this was not the reason that Ross wanted to add the question. https://t.co/MoLL4y6tuJ
JUST IN: You can listen to the Supreme Court oral arguments over the #2020Census #CitizenshipQuestion here👇https://t.co/LF6Zpn4fYi
— Hansi Lo Wang (@hansilowang) April 26, 2019
Trump is permanently damaging our foreign policies
News of Trump's illness another blow to U.S. prestige on the global stage, say experts https://t.co/KUNjRgBOST pic.twitter.com/5WKo6voaiW
— Yahoo News (@YahooNews) October 2, 2020
Opinion: Trump Isn’t Just Reversing Obama’s Foreign Policies. He’s Killing Them for Goodhttps://t.co/PQDxmgW5jx
— POLITICO (@politico) April 23, 2019
Trump’s stalling tactics may force the Democrats to impeach him
That may be the only way to get the testimony and information. Trump is going to try to block everything. He’s obviously hiding something.
If Trump chokes off all oversight, while escalating pressure on DOJ to prosecute his critics, it will create an increasingly unstable situation.
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) April 26, 2019
In sum: Trump may end up forcing Dems to choose between total confrontation and total capitulation.
My piece: https://t.co/NKiAYJCBhj
Let's boil this down.
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) April 24, 2019
1) Pelosis says there are alternate routes to the truth and accountability, other than impeachment inquiry
2) Trump is closing off those routes
3) Thus, Trump is forcing Dems to choose between impeachment and total self-neuteringhttps://t.co/cLSk8jHUnq
There is a practical consequence of not launching an impeachment inquiry and that is increasing the chances that White House efforts to stonewall will succeed. Congress' powers to investigate the executive are at their apex during impeachment. https://t.co/Yzo4lOXHJ3
— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) April 23, 2019
Trump is laying down the gauntlet on impeachment by taking this outlandish position. He is all but telling Congress that, as president, he’s free to disregard its existence. It’s like saying 2 > 1 so the Art. II Branch Trumps the Art. I Branch. Insane. https://t.co/LcV66jcixR
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) April 24, 2019
such a well-reported article by bob costa and team https://t.co/nxdAekDIeb
— Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) April 24, 2019
Trump is resisting every Congressional request for testimony and documents related to our oversight responsibility.
— Adam Schiff (@AdamSchiff) April 24, 2019
Like an aspiring autocrat, he doesn’t recognize the co-equal branches of our government.
He has lived his entire life without accountability.
That ends now. https://t.co/QixgD7zGBs
Donald Trump seems to be daring the House of Representatives to copy, and then vote for, the Contempt of Congress Article of Impeachment approved decades ago against Richard Nixon (Art. III).https://t.co/LcV66jcixR
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) April 24, 2019
One problem with the "hearings but not impeachment" plan is that Trump can effectively nullify Democratic hearings. It's appalling, but he probably has the gall to nullify lesser, non-impeachment hearings. But nullifying impeachment hearings would be another thing altogether. https://t.co/HJWygjikPb
— Adam Jentleson 🎈 (@AJentleson) April 23, 2019
The we-don’t-want-to-play-anymore “privilege.” Sorry, that one’s not in the books. https://t.co/vLpLxHFKng
— George Conway (@gtconway3d) April 24, 2019
BREAKING: Cummings plans to schedule a contempt vote for Carl Kline for defying subpoena to testify on security clearances. pic.twitter.com/ojuYQM4AUp
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) April 23, 2019
BREAKING: Cummings plans to schedule a contempt vote for Carl Kline for defying subpoena to testify on security clearances. pic.twitter.com/ojuYQM4AUp
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) April 23, 2019
The President of the United States is ignoring a lawful request submitted by a congressional oversight committee…and it's barely news.
— Robert Reich (@RBReich) April 23, 2019
We must not become desensitized to this flagrant flaunting of the law. https://t.co/Axr6kH3E7o
This is a delay tactic that will ultimately fail. Executive privilege has already been waived, given Don McGahn's extensive statements to Mueller. Even if it was not, I expect courts would not permit executive privilege to be used to block McGahn's testimony in this context. https://t.co/7jMN4PWQ2H
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) April 23, 2019
Two things about executive privilege: one, it exists to protect confidentiality, and McGahn’s account of events is already public. Two, it can never be used to cover up wrongdoing. Trump’s assertion is incredibly weak.
— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) April 23, 2019
Some press accounts frame Trump's refusal to cooperate w/ Congress as a partisan dispute. It's really a dispute over our system of checks & balances. As @seungminkim reports, Trump also has refused Senate Rs when he hasn't liked their requests https://t.co/FOGW06fvu4 pic.twitter.com/qMwb5ACKr9
— Nick Schwellenbach (@schwellenbach) April 25, 2019
Should Congress move ahead with impeachment? @YAppelbaum and @ezraklein debate, with @IsaacDovere moderating, on #RadioAtlantic. Listen @ApplePodcasts: https://t.co/S5iKpMvUDt
— The Atlantic (@TheAtlantic) April 29, 2019
Trump is concerned about losing Twitter followers
They’re bots, not people. Trump is just whining and making up another conspiracy. How do people fall for his phony “they’re all against us” routine? He’s the most powerful person in the world, not a victim.
Trump believes that he has lost some of his roughly 59 million Twitter followers in anti-Trump, anti-conservative Twitter purges, according to a source familiar with the Jack Dorsey meeting https://t.co/oD0XxjlleM
— The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) April 24, 2019
Former engineering manager at Twitter 👇 https://t.co/KxvzvnOj2l
— Charlie Warzel (@cwarzel) April 23, 2019
.@jack gently tells Trump: your ‘lost’ followers are bots and spam accounts https://t.co/Ya3k6o1Nij
— Noah Shachtman (@NoahShachtman) April 23, 2019
Trump spent a "significant portion" of his meeting with Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey complaining that he was losing followers. https://t.co/VbtnNUkOAi
— Will Sommer (@willsommer) April 23, 2019
"Two people close to Trump told The Daily Beast that Trump has repeatedly griped to associates about how President Obama had more Twitter followers than he has, even though—by Trump’s own assessment—he is so much better at Twitter than Obama is." https://t.co/GwAVXB3OxF
— Noah Shachtman (@NoahShachtman) April 23, 2019
Trump erroneously thinks the Supreme Court can prevent impeachment
1) Trump has offered no proof of crimes by people who investigated him; 2) Trump can ask all he wants, but the Supreme Court doesn't hear challenges to impeachment, a political process; 3) "High crimes and misdemeanors" don't have to be actual criminal offenses. pic.twitter.com/GkqcMRMao7
— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) April 24, 2019
This glimpse into Trump's brain proves he considers the Supreme Court in his back pocket the same way he thinks the Attorney General should be his personal fixer. https://t.co/WGRwih6Jim
— Brian Fallon (@brianefallon) April 24, 2019
Trump thinks that — having stolen one SCt seat for Gorsuch and installed as a second justice one Kavanaugh whose confirmation hearing should’ve disqualified him — he now has a “get out of jail free” card and a “stay in power forever” card in the Marble Palace. No way, Donald. https://t.co/7U6ifhcbTl
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) April 24, 2019
1. A quick thread on why the power to impeach, and then try, a president is vested in the House and Senate, and not the Supreme Court. https://t.co/KJsLCSF12e
— Yoni Appelbaum (@YAppelbaum) April 24, 2019
Yeah, so that's *not* how impeachment works.
— Joshua Matz (@JoshuaMatz8) April 24, 2019
"The House … shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."
"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."
As @tribelaw & I explain in our book, the Framers debated giving #SCOTUS this power & expressly decided not to https://t.co/amW6Ru8kiQ
Trump doesn’t want to hear about 2020 Russian interference in our elections
Before Nielsen was forced out, she tried to focus the White House on one of her highest priorities as DHS secretary: preparing for new and different Russian forms of interference in 2020. Mulvaney told her not to bring it up in front of the president. https://t.co/WDNjfC52O4
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) April 24, 2019
Don’t tell Donald Trump about Russia’s election interference!https://t.co/I0uawbktw8
— Chris Cillizza (@CillizzaCNN) April 24, 2019
Not quite a denial, but a counterattack! (After the story published.) pic.twitter.com/WNBOEoD01o
— Josh Dawsey (@jdawsey1) April 24, 2019
The fact a foreign adversary will continue efforts to interfere in our sacred elections should alarm all of us. No less alarming is the idea a senior government official can't brief the President on it because it might hurt his feelings. pic.twitter.com/mY7ixBZhI5
— Josh Campbell (@joshscampbell) April 24, 2019
I see a congressional hearing in which former Trump officials are asked how much attention @realDonaldTrump devoted to protecting the United States from another Russian attack on an American election.
— David Corn (@DavidCornDC) April 24, 2019
Just in from @RepAdamSchiff, on reports that Mick Mulvaney didn't want Kirstjen Nielsen to bring up the need to protect our political system from outside attack, because Trump would see it as denigrating the greatness of his victory: pic.twitter.com/MKIQ7gEFTN
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) April 25, 2019
What's behind President Trump's lack of engagement on Russian threat? @TiffanyDCross @amandacarpenter @ahrferrier @stefcutter discuss @TheLeadCNN https://t.co/nN4BwVlj5d pic.twitter.com/9ez2iI6iMV
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) April 24, 2019
U.S. government official: 'Like pulling teeth' to get WH to focus on Russia election interference threat @TheLeadCNN https://t.co/JhJJj2kwnz pic.twitter.com/O7poHy5yk0
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) April 24, 2019
A senior administration official tells me that while Secretary Nielsen grew frustrated with the White House‘s lack of engagement on election security, she continued to push the matter on her own, organizing two principals' meetings on her own — hosted at DHS offices in DC 1/
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) April 24, 2019
Sad! 