Archive for the ‘Donald Trump’ Category

This new poll has all kinds of bad news for Donald Trump …

President-elect Donald Trump made a brief appearance in front of media cameras alongside Alibaba founder Jack Ma, but deflected questions about his meeting with U.S. intelligence officials about Russian interference in the 2016 election, on Jan. 9 at Trump Tower in New York. (The Washington Post)

As honeymoons go, Donald Trumps wasnt much to write home about. He was voted in as the most unpopular president-elect in modern history and got slightly less unpopular in the weeks that followed, as the goodwill flowed. Even then, though, he clearly remained the most unpopular president-elect in modern history. Again, that was the honeymoon.

And nowits over.

A new poll from Quinnipiac University suggests that Trump has reverted to his pre-election standing, with Americans having major concerns about his temperament and thedirection in which his presidency will lead the country. Trumps continued controversies seem to have put him right back where he was before he won the election.

Quinnipiac is the first high-quality pollster to poll on Trump twice since the election. And while its poll in late Novembershowed his favorable rating rising from 34 percent to 44 percent, that number hasdropped back to 37 percent, which is about where it stood for much of the campaign. Thats tied for Trumps worst favorable rating in a poll since his election. And a majority 51 percent now have an unfavorable view of him.

Likewise, the Quinnipiac poll shows a drop in confidence in Trump across the board. Although59 percent were optimistic about the next four years under Trump in November, today that number is 52 percent. While 41 percent thought he would be a better leaderthan President Obama, its now 34 percent. While 52 percent thought hewould help the nation's economy, its now 47 percent. While 40 percent thought his policies would help their personal financial situation, its now 27 percent. While 53 percent thought hed take the country in the right direction, its now 45 percent.

You get the idea. There are similar drops in views of his honesty (42 percent to 39 percent), his leadership skills (56 percent to 49 percent), his compassion for average Americans (51 percent to 44 percent), his levelheadedness (38 percent to 33 percent) and his ability to unite the country (47 percent to 40 percent).

And then it gets worse. Toward the bottom, Quinnipiac asked respondents whether they thought Trumps behavior since the election made them feel better or worse about him. Althoughbetter won out in late November, 36 percent to 14 percent who said they felt worse, that showinghas been flipped. Today, 28 percent say they feel worse about Trump since Election Day; just 23 percent feel better.

And clearly people still arent enamored of Trumps social-media habits and fight-picking; by a 2-to-1 margin (64 percent to 32 percent), they think he should give up his personal Twitter account as president bigger than the 59-to-35 margin in November.

Trump won the election, which in his mind and in the minds of many analysts would seem to have vindicated his brand of politics and many of the decisions he made on the campaign trail. He got elected, so it all must have been secret political genius!

Thats not really how things work, though. Trump squeaked his way into the White House with a very narrow win in which he got 46 percent of the vote, won the states he needed to by less than a point, and lost the national popular vote, asvoterstold pollsters said they hadhuge reservations about him.

People set aside those reservations a little after he was elected. This poll suggests that those concernshave returned, as real as ever. And thats bad news for Trumps political mandate 10 days before hes sworn in.

Further reading:

Donald Trump is rekindling one of his favorite conspiracy theories: Vaccine safety

9 questions reporters want to ask Donald Trump at his news conference

Donald Trumps first attempt to ignore the law

Why Donald Trumps selection of his son-in-law for a top White House job is a dicey decision

The Post's Ed O'Keefe explains how confirmation hearings in the Senate work. (Bastien Inzaurralde/The Washington Post)

Read more here:
This new poll has all kinds of bad news for Donald Trump ...

Donald Trump Jr. – Wikipedia

"Don Trump" redirects here. For his father, see Donald Trump.

Donald John "Don" Trump Jr. (born December 31, 1977) is an American businessman and former reality TV personality. He is the eldest child of real estate developer and President-elect of the United States, Donald Trump, and his first wife, Czech model Ivana Trump. He currently works alongside his brother Eric as a trustee of The Trump Organization. A longtime company Executive VP, in his trustee role he and his brother will run the company during his father's presidency.

Trump was born on December 31, 1977 in Manhattan, New York City, to Ivana Marie (neZelnkov) and Donald John Trump. He has two younger siblings, Ivanka and Eric. He also has two half siblings, Tiffany, from his father's marriage to Marla Maples, and Barron, from his father's current marriage to Melania Trump. Trump was particularly close to his maternal grandfather and is fluent in Czech.[2]

His parents' widely publicized divorce affected Trump, who as a child encountered reporters asking about his father's affair with Maples. To protect them, Ivana Trump sent her children to boarding school.[3] Trump was educated at The Hill School, a university-preparatory boarding school in Pottstown, Pennsylvania, followed by the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, where he gained a B.S. degree in Economics.[4]

After college graduation, Trump moved to Aspen, Colorado. While briefly estranged from his father, for a year he hunted, fished, skied, lived in a truck, and worked as a bartender before returning to New York and joining the Trump Organization. Trump supervises building projects, including 40 Wall Street, Trump International Hotel and Tower, and Trump Park Avenue.[3] Trump appeared as a guest adviser and judge on many episodes of his father's reality television show The Apprentice, from season 5 in 2006 to his father's last season.

Trump married model Vanessa Kay Haydon (born December 18, 1977) on November 12, 2005, at the Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida; the service was officiated by Trump's aunt, Judge Maryanne Trump Barry.[5] Haydon is the daughter of Bonnie and Charles Haydon,[6] and is of Jewish and Danish descent.[7][8] She is an alumna of the Dwight School[9] and studied psychology at New York's Marymount Manhattan College.[6] They have five children: daughters Kai Madison (born May 12, 2007) and Chloe Sophia (born June 16, 2014)[10] and sons[11] Donald John III (born February 18, 2009),[12] Tristan Milos (born October 2, 2011),[13][14] and Spencer Frederick (born October 21, 2012).[15]

Visit link:
Donald Trump Jr. - Wikipedia

Donald Trump: The unauthorized database of false things …

Republican candidate Donald Trump has been found to say false things. ( Raffi Anderian illustration )

Sure, all politicians lie. But Donald Trump is in a class by himself.

He lies strategically. He lies pointlessly. He lies about important things and meaningless things. Above all, he lies frequently. Since he began his campaign last June, the Republican presidential candidate has subjected America to a daily barrage of inaccuracy and mendacity.

His rival, Hillary Clinton, has her own reputation for dishonesty. Some of it is no doubt earned: she has made false claims this campaign about her email scandal, about her flip-flop on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and about assorted other things. But our scrutiny shows there is just no comparison in their level of accuracy on the campaign trail. At the three presidential debates, for example, we counted 104 false claims for Trump to 13 for Clinton.

The extreme, unprecedented quantity of Trump falsehoods is why we started fact-checking everything he said. From mid-September through Sunday, we did 28 #TrumpCheck analyses of every word he uttered or tweeted in a given day.

The total: 560 false claims, or a neat 20 per day.

Below, find the complete list of the false statements Dale has found.

After that (very long) list, Tanya Talaga examines the errors, exaggerations and lies for patterns. Some remain hard to explain. Click here to jump directly to this analysis.

1. The electoral system is rigged

There is tremendous voter fraud. Oct. 17

After plummeting in the polls after the first two debates, Trump began to repeatedly question the fairness of the election. Rigged became his catchword.

He claimed Hillary Clinton campaign workers hired thugs to cause violence at his rallies, twisting the evidence from an undercover video to unfairly disparage Clinton. He claimed there was widespread voter fraud in Philadelphia, Chicago and St. Louis cities with large black populations that heavily favour Democrats.

In Greeley, Colo., Trump told his supporters if they dont trust mail-in ballots, they should vote again in person. So, one did. Trump supporter Terri Lynn Rote, a 55-year-old from Iowa, was charged by police for suspicion of voting twice.

-

2. Inner cities are dangerous hellholes

You get shot walking to the store. They have no education. They have no jobs. Oct. 19

African Americans do not like Trump. A summer poll showed Trumps support among blacks in swing states Ohio and Pennsylvania was 0 per cent. So, in an apparent effort to broaden his appeal, Trump vowed to rebuild Americas inner cities.

Trump made many of those promises in speeches to practically all-white audiences. And his broad generalizations were seen by many blacks as insulting and racist. Economic data show that many U.S. inner cities are enjoying a resurgence and that many black Americans are educated and live in the suburbs.

Trump also regularly stated that Americas murder rate is the highest in 45 years. Actually, the U.S. murder rate is among the lowest it has been in 45 years. It did rise 10 per cent from 2014 to 2015, but the rate is still historically low at 4.9 out of every 100,000 people. In 1970, it was 7.9 out of every 100,000 people.

In sum, his statements about blacks and inner cities seem directed at white fears, not black need.

-

3. Hillary Clinton created Daesh

She gave us ISIS as sure as you are sitting there. Oct. 19

Clinton served as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013, at a time when the U.S. was following up on Republican president George W. Bushs pledge to pull troops out of Iraq. That move left a power vacuum in northern Iraq that was filled by Daesh, also known as ISIS and ISIL.

Perhaps thats why Trump repeatedly stated Clinton and Barack Obama founded the terror group.

But that claim is ridiculous: Daesh was already active and notorious by 2004, when it was known as Al Qaeda in Iraq. And it adopted the Islamic State moniker in 2006, while Bush was still president and Clinton was a senator representing New York.

Trump has also falsely disparaged the U.S.-led fight against Daesh, calling the offensive to retake Mosul in Iraq a total disaster, without providing evidence.

With terrorism fears front of mind for many Americans, Trumps false claims seem aimed at making Clinton a scapegoat for the U.S.s failings in Iraq and Syria.

-

4. Muslims are risky

Hundreds of thousands of people (are) coming in from Syria when we know nothing about them. Oct. 9

This is another of Trumps direct appeals to the xenophobic vote.

At the beginning of the campaign he notoriously promised to erect a wall on the southern border to keep out Mexican rapists and drug dealers. He built on that pledge by vowing to bar Muslims them from the United States. He later mused about listing all Muslims in a government database, a move reminiscent of what Adolf Hitler did to Jews in Nazi Germany.

His claims that Syrian refugees 99 per cent are Muslim are terrorists plays to the fears of the other, even though they are extensively vetted and are predominantly women and children. And their numbers is nowhere near Trumps claims about 13,000 have been admitted to the United States in 2016.

Still, Trumps stance has endeared him to fringe, racist groups. This week, a newspaper affiliated with the Ku Klux Klan formally endorsed him.

-

5. Clinton plans a big tax increase

Shes going to raise your taxes big league, by the way. Oct. 23

It seems rich that a billionaire who may not have paid income tax for 18 years would say his Democratic rival plans to raise taxes on regular Americans.

She doesnt. The Tax Policy Center says Clintons plan would only increase taxes on the wealthiest Americans people like Trump and the Clintons. Most outside the top 1 per cent would receive minor tax cuts under her plan.

Equally rich is Trumps repeated claim that the U.S. taxes are the highest in the world. Theyre below-average compared with the rest of the industrialized world.

Trumps promise to ensure the wealthy pay their fair share but not too much that they cant create jobs is another whopper. An analysis by The Tax Foundation concluded that a typical American earning $5 million would see her or his tax bill fall by as much as $800,000 under Trumps plan.

-

6. Polls favour Trump

Were leading Ohio by five or six points, were even in Florida, were leading North Carolina. Oct. 24

The day he said this, Trump was wrong on all three counts.

It seems clear Trump manipulates, exaggerates or makes up polls that make it sound as if he is doing better than he actually is. This poll denialism gives his supporters licence to dismiss negative polling data, suggests CNN.

His false claims cast doubt on the legitimacy of mainstream polling and perhaps even the vote itself. If supporters feel Trump should be doing better, then the idea of a rigged election seems more credible.

On Oct. 24, he said I won the last two debates, and every poll showed it. In fact, every scientific poll showed that he lost.

Of course, when unscientific online polls came out in his favour, Trump was quick to promote and exaggerate those numbers.

-

7. Groping allegations

Many of them have now already been debunked. Oct. 18

Nothing could be further from the truth. None of the allegations against Trump have been definitely disproven, although Trump and his surrogates have offered rebuttals. (One of Trumps favourites: questioning the attractiveness of the accuser.)

Yet allegations that he has sexually imposed himself on women have been around for decades, as has his history of misogynistic comments.

His former wife Ivana once accused him of marital rape, though she said she did not mean it in a literal or criminal sense after their divorce was settled.

The allegations came out after the release of a 2005 video in which Trump bragged it was easy to grope women Grab them by the p---y. You can do anything.

Two women came forward to the New York Times the day after the second presidential debate when Trump insisted he absolutely does not touch women inappropriately to say they were both groped by Trump.

Trump has never shied away from his glorification of the female form. He has even objectified his daughter Ivankas physique on Howard Sterns radio show.

-

8. Clinton is corrupt

She put the office of secretary of state up for sale. Sept. 28

Calling Clinton corrupt takes the focus off Trumps own businesses and finances.

There is no evidence Clinton ever put her office up for sale. Neither is there any evidence that Clinton lost $6 billion worth of taxpayers funds when she was secretary of state another frequent Trump falsehood.

The U.S. Inspector General sent a letter to the Washington Post saying the $6 billion had not actually gone missing. There were simply paperwork problems in the failure to adequately maintain contract files in Iraq, Afghanistan and Africa, the Post reported. But its all corruption to Trump.

He often describes the Clinton Foundation, a leader in providing life-saving medication to the poor in the developing world, as a criminal enterprise. The foundation has consistently been given good ratings from watchdog organizations.

Conversely, Trump used his own charitable foundation to pay personal debts, made an illegal donation to Floridas attorney general and stiffed hundreds of small businesses who did work for his Atlantic City casinos, sending some into bankruptcy.

Attacking the honesty of the Clintons deflects from all that.

-

9. Trump lies about Trump

I was against going into Iraq. And its so well-documented. Sept. 27

This is one of the original Trump falsifications, one that he used to help defeat Republican opponents vying for the leadership of the party. But there is no evidence he was ever against the war from the start.

In 2002, on the Howard Stern radio show, Trump grudgingly said he supported the war effort.

He now denies he was for the war, saying that he used to privately tell Fox Newss Sean Hannity that he opposed it. It was much later when Trump started complained about the cost of the Iraq War, likely as a way of demonstrating his cleverness in foreign affairs. He repeatedly pointed to his quotes in a 2004 Esquire article, but that came 17 months after the war started.

This is one of Trumps more curious kind of lies ones that are easily identified.

Another example is when he claimed he did not tell people to check out a sex tape of Miss Universe Alicia Machado.

He did. On Sept. 30, a Trump tweet included, verbatim, Check out sex tape.

-

10. WTF

Palm Beach, Fla., is probably the wealthiest community there is in the world. Sept. 26

Palm Beach, Fla., is probably the wealthiest community there is in the world. Sept. 26

Trumps Mar-a-Lago club is in Palm Beach, and it is undoubtedly an ornate, exclusive place. But Palm Beach is nowhere near the wealthiest community in the world its not even the wealthiest in the United States (its No. 3).

This is easy to dismiss as simple hyperbole, but it fits in an unusual category of Trump falsehoods: Ones that are ridiculous, and ridiculously obvious.

A week earlier he falsely said of a pastor who interrupted his criticism of Clinton: Hes not allowed to talk politics. If he does, they take away his tax exemption. (Pastors are permitted to talk politics as much as they want, although they are prohibited from endorsing or opposing candidates.)

Perhaps Trump was simply displaying his thin skin here. Or perhaps his ignorance.

Sign up

Continue reading here:
Donald Trump: The unauthorized database of false things ...

Donald Trump urges "good relationship" with Russia in tweets

Last Updated Jan 7, 2017 3:05 PM EST

President-elect Donald Trump advocated Saturday for better relations with Russia, less than 24 hours after receiving an intelligence briefing about Kremlin-led cyberattacks to influence the U.S. election.

Having a good relationship with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing, Mr. Trump tweeted Saturday morning. Only stupid people, or fools, would think that it is bad!

In his series of tweets, he promised that during his presidency, Russia will respect us far more than they do now and that the two nations could work together together to solve the problems and issues of the WORLD!

The social media missives follow a Friday briefing at Trump Tower in New York, which Mr. Trump said in a statement was a constructive meeting and conversation. The president-elect had been briefed on a report, prepared by the CIA, FBI and NSA, on Russias hacking activities, which showed that President Vladimir Putin and the Kremlin had attempted to undermine the democratic elections in the U.S.

According to the 15-page declassified version, the cyberattacks were also targeted to denigrate Secretary Clinton and harm her electability and potential presidency. The assessment also found that Moscow had developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.

Play Video

A recent report from U.S. intelligence says that Russian president Vladimir Putin ordered the hacking during the 2016 presidential election. Form...

After meeting with intelligence officials, including Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, CIA Director John Brennan and FBI Director James Comey, Mr. Trump said in a statement Friday that the hacks had no effect on the results of Nov. 8.

While Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our governmental institutions, businesses and organizations including the Democrat National Committee, there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election including the fact that there was no tampering whatsoever with voting machines, Mr. Trump said.

Hours before the president-elect tweeted his pro-Russian sentiments, Mr. Trump also officially nominated his own director of national intelligence, retired Indiana Sen. Dan Coats.

Unlike Mr. Trump, Coats has shown little love for the foreign power and has been a fierce critic of the former KGB agent.

When Coats served on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Coats pushed President Obama to impose stricter sanctions on Russia after it annexed Crimea in 2013. After calling for these punitive measures, Coats, along with several other lawmakers, was banned by Russia.

2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Read more here:
Donald Trump urges "good relationship" with Russia in tweets

Donald Trump Makes False Claims About Intel Report on Russian …

The president-election says the intelligence communitys report found absolutely no evidence that foreign hacking affected the election outcome. That claim rates Mostly False.

By Louis Jacobson and Linda Qiu

President-elect Donald Trump has suggested the U.S. intelligence community found no evidence of foreign influence on the 2016 election, but thats a misleading description of what the evidence shows.

Trump was briefed Friday on the probe into allegations of Russian influence, including possible connections to electronic hacking and public releases of private communications by senior Democrats.

A declassified version of the report found that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S. presidential election. Russias goals were to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate (Trumps opponent, Hillary) Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency.

Following the intelligence briefing, Trumps office released a statement. After noting the constructive meeting and the tremendous respect he had for the intelligence communitys work, Trump said:

While Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our governmental institutions, businesses and organizations including the Democrat (sic) National Committee, there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election including the fact that there was no tampering whatsoever with voting machines. There were attempts to hack the Republican National Committee, but the RNC had strong hacking defenses and the hackers were unsuccessful.

The phrase that caught our eye was there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election.

Thats a pretty definitive statement. And Trump echoed that argument in a Jan. 7 tweet: Intelligence stated very strongly there was absolutely no evidence that hacking affected the election results. Voting machines not touched!

The argument that there was no impact of any kind on the election outcome is not backed up by the intelligence communitys report. The report specifically stated it didnt look at that question. Trumps statement rates Mostly False.

Heres what the report actually said:

We did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election. The U.S. Intelligence Community is charged with monitoring and assessing the intentions, capabilities, and actions of foreign actors; it does not analyze U.S. political processes or U.S. public opinion.

So if the Trump campaign is using the intelligence communitys report to back up its assertion that there was no Russian influence on the outcome, its doing so without justification.

When we contacted the Trump transition media office, we did not receive a response. Heres our review of the publicly available evidence.

The Trump camp has a point on one issue: Despite some concern among security experts going into the election that Russia might hack into state and local vote-counting systems and tamper with the tallies, the intelligence communitys report found that any such efforts by Russia were not successful in changing any votes.

Thank You!

You are now subscribed to the Daily Digest and Cheat Sheet. We will not share your email with anyone for any reason

The report says that while Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of multiple U.S. state or local electoral boards, the Department of Homeland Security assesses that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, conceded that point in an interview with the PBS NewsHour on Jan. 6.

It is true there is no evidence that the tampering with voter machines or tampering with voter registrations or any of like that affected the counting of the votes. Thats true, Schiff told PBSs Judy Woodruff.

Some observers might be concerned that Russia did manage to breach at least some election authorities computer networks, and they might also be concerned that Russia and Putin, according to the report, tried to influence the election, even if its less clear whether they succeeded.

Still, Trump has a point that Russia didnt change votes electronically.

Ballot tampering vs. other types of Russian influence

Members of the Trump camp have portrayed the reports clean bill of health on the question of Russian ballot-tampering as proof that Russia had no impact at all on the election.

For instance, on the Jan. 8 edition of CNNs State of the Union, incoming White House counselor Kellyanne Conway told Jake Tapper that if you read the full report, they make very clear, [Director of National Intelligence James] Clapper in his testimony [to the Senate Armed Services Committee] made very clear on Thursday under oath that that any attempt, any aspiration to influence our elections failed. They were not successful in doing that.

On Fox News Sunday, incoming White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus echoed Conways invocation of Clappers testimony, saying Clapper had testified to the Senate panel that there is no evidence in the report that any of this changed the outcome of the election.

Neither assertion is accurate.

First, a lack of ballot tampering does not equal a lack of Russian influence on the election.

Conway and Priebus essentially defined ballot-rigging as the only way an election can be influenced, when in reality the intelligence report primarily addresses other ways Russia tried to influence the election. The Russian effort blended, in the reports words, covert intelligence operationssuch as cyber activitywith overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or trolls.

And second, Clapper in his testimony never said that any attempt, any aspiration to influence our elections failed (as Conway put it) or that there is no evidence in the report that any of this changed the outcome of the election (as Priebus put it).

Clappers most direct remark at the Senate hearing on this issue came in this exchange with the panels chairman, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ):

McCain: So really, what were talking about, is if they succeeded in changing the results of an election, of which none of us believe they were, that would have to constitute an attack on the United States of America because of the effects, if they had succeeded, would you agree with that?

Clapper: First, we cannot saythey did not change any vote tallies oror anything of that sort.

McCain: Yeah, Im just talking about

Clapper: And we have nowe have no way of gauging the impact thatcertainly the intelligence community cant gauge the impact it had on the choices the electorate made. Theres no way for us to gauge that.

Subsequently in the hearing, Clapper arguably went even further in a response to questioning by Sen. Angus King (I-ME).

King, referring to his work with Baltic states that have been grappling with Russian influence in elections for several years, said, The best defense is for our public to know whats going on, so they can take it with a grain of salt Thats why I think public hearings like this and the public discussion of this issue is so important, because were not going to be able to prevent this altogether. But we need to have our people understand that when theyre being manipulated. Would you agree with that conclusion?

Clapper responded, Absolutely. Thats why I feel so strongly about the statement in October, referencing his own statement during the campaign that the Russian government had been engaged in efforts intended to interfere with the U.S. election process.

How credible is the argument that Russia influenced the election in some fashion?

Schiff is one of many Democratic officials who believe that other types of Russian efforts may have had an impact on an election that ultimately hinged on fewer than 100,000 votes cumulatively in three statesMichigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

In his PBS interview, Schiff specifically referred to the hacking and release to websites such as WikiLeaks of personal emails written and received by Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and other top Democratsreleases that Trump prominently featured during the campaign.

The daily dumping of information that was damaging to Secretary Clinton and helpful to Donald Trump was hugely consequential, Schiff said.

But is it possible to move beyond a gut feeling and prove that Russia influenced enough voters to change the elections outcome? Not really, say political scientists.

A campaign as large-scale as a presidential race is buffeted by so many factors that its essentially impossible to know for sure that any given factor played a role in determining who won.

The presidential election, with its national constituency, is decided by multiple, interrelated causes, all of which were necessary but not sufficient, said Kyle Saunders, a Colorado State University political scientist. Referring to such factors as the candidates personalities and messages as well as the general political environment, Saunders said that no one determinate cause can be offered as the explanation, and doing so is a fools errand.

Saunders agreed that one doesnt have to believe that hacking did affect the election to say comfortably that Trump is wrong to say it absolutely didnt affect the electiontheres simply no way of knowing either way with any certainty that something affected the outcome.

He added that while a reasonable case can be made that the hacking did help Trump, thats informed speculationnot certaintyand said theres no way to know how big a factor it may have been compared to other factors.

It is difficult to argue that the barrage of damaging information released almost exclusively about Clinton and Democrats did no harm or did not create an atmosphere in which voters questioned her judgment or credibility or dampen support for her candidacy, said Costas Panagopoulos, a Fordham University political scientist.

That said, Panagopoulos added, in truth, there is no way to know with certainty what the causal impact of Russian involvement was on the outcome of the 2016 election.

Cory Booker on Senate confirmations

Another topic on the Sunday shows was the presidential transition and vetting Trumps nominees. Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) suggested on CBSs Face the Nation that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell once advocated for a thorough vetting of President Barack Obamas Cabinet nominees but now seems to have a different standard.

The Republican-controlled Senate will hold several confirmation hearings for the week of Jan. 10, frustrating Democrats like Booker who say the jam-packed schedule was a move to deflect public attention from Trumps more controversial nominees.

But back in 2009, Mitch McConnell was the person thats saying, Hey, we should have all the ethics information in before we do the hearings. I just was reviewing his letter this morning, Booker said Jan. 8, emphasizing that rigorous review is perhaps more important for Trumps nominees given their wealth, international business ties, and potential conflicts of interest.

Is Booker right that McConnell advocated for complete ethical review for Obamas appointees before holding confirmation hearings?

Bookers claim is accurate, though it may be a bit premature to accuse McConnell of hypocrisy. It rates Mostly True.

All Cabinet-level positions as well as scores of senior-level personnel for executive branch agencies must be confirmed by the Senate. (Those who dont have to be confirmed are positions that solely advise the president.)

First, the president or president-elect selects, vets, and submits nominations to the appropriate Senate committees. Then the committees typically hold investigations (using information provided by the White House and their own research) and hearings (for public debate over the nomination). Finally, after review, they report the nominations to the full Senate for a vote on the floor.

According to the Congressional Research Service, the clearance stage includes submitting financial disclosure forms, completing background checks, and signing ethics agreements that identify and outline ways to mitigate conflicts of interest, reviewed and certified by the Office of Government Ethics. This typically occurs before the nominations are submitted to the Senate.

The rules for confirmation vary by committee. All review a nominees biographical rsum and some set of disclosure forms. Some also consult FBI background checks. Again, this information gathering often happens before a hearing but is more often required before a vote.

In a letter released by Senate Democrats, the director of the independent Office of Government Ethics, Walter Shaub, expressed concern that several of Trumps nominees with scheduled hearings have yet to complete the ethics review process as of Jan. 6, 2017.

I am not aware of any occasion in the four decades since OGE was established when the Senate held a confirmation hearing before the nominee had completed the ethics review, Shaub wrote. In fact, OGE has not received even the initial draft financial disclosure reports for some of the nominees scheduled for hearings.

Out of the Trump picks with confirmation hearings scheduled, ethics forms have been submitted for attorney general nominee Sen. Jeff Sessions, secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson, defense secretary nominee James Mattis, and transportation secretary nominee Elaine Chao, according to the Associated Press.

Its unclear if forms have been submitted for CIA director nominee Rep. Mike Pompeo, homeland security secretary nominee Gen. John Kelly, and housing secretary nominee Ben Carson.

Forms have not been submitted for education secretary nominee Betsy DeVos or commerce secretary Wilbur Ross.

Experts agreed with Bookers characterization of McConnells letter, sent to then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid dated Feb. 12, 2009.

Prior to considering any time agreements on the floor on any nominee, McConnell wrote, ranking members expect eight ethical standards to be met.

Among them: a completed FBI background check, a completed Office of Government Ethics letter, completed financial disclosure statements (and tax returns where they apply), and a completed committee questionnaire submitted to the respective Senate committees prior to a hearing being noticed.

In laymans terms, McConnell not only required for completion of disclosures but also review prior to floor consideration, said Wayne Steger, a political science professor at DePaul University and the author of A Citizens Guide to Presidential Nominations.

The ethics review process had to be complete before he would agree to set aside the right to filibuster nominations, said Steven Smith, a political science professor at Washington University in St. Louis and expert on Senate procedure.

Bookers office also referred us to a 2009 Roll Call article on McConnells letter.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Thursday threatened to filibuster any of President Barack Obamas executive branch nominations if they do not meet what he deemed a series of standards for installment, the article reads (full version here).

McConnells office, meanwhile, argued that Booker mischaracterized the letter. McConnells communications director, David Popp, pointed out that by the time McConnell sent the letter on Feb. 12, the Senate had already held hearings for everyone Obama nominated. This is accurate, and all but one of the 13 nominees were confirmed before Feb. 12.

If you read the letter, it simply calls for continuing the best practices and precedents of the Senateit does not ask for new preconditions the way Sen. Booker and other Democrats are now doing, such as calling for the tax returns of all nominees, rather than only in those committees that regularly request returns, he said.

Appearing right before Booker on Face the Nation, McConnell dismissed concerns from Democrats as sour grapes disguised as little procedural complaints and emphasized the need to get Trumps national security team up and running on Day 1. He suggested his ethical standards hadnt changed and said there is still time to comply.

After all, we are still in the process of getting the papers in. I think at least five of the nominees have all of their papers in, he said. The real thing is the vote on the floor, and we want to have all of the records in, all of the papers completed before they are actually confirmed on the Senate floor.

Read more fact-checks at PunditFact.com.

Originally posted here:
Donald Trump Makes False Claims About Intel Report on Russian ...