Donald Trump, official WH photo |
PolitiFact had already parsed out the exaggerations and falsehoods that Mr. Trump dished out during his recent CPAC speech. For example:
1. Mr. Trump claimed, as he repeatedly has, that the recent Republican tax cut is the largest ever. It is a big tax cut, especially for the wealthy, but not anything close to the largest ever. The 2012 tax cut was bigger.
2. Mr. Trump claimed that "This guy came in through chain migration. And a part of the lottery system. They say 22 people came in with him. In other words, an aunt, an uncle, a grandfather, a mother, a father, whoever came in. A lot of people came in. That’s chain migration." It turns out that the driver did come in through the diversity program, so, fine, Mr. Trump had a point there. But there is no evidence that "22 people came in with him." Note that "They say" is not a source. As President, Mr. Trump has access to vast amounts of information about the federal government. There is no excuse for him to cite "they say" as a source.
3. He claimed that "I want people that are going to help and people that are going to go to work for Chrysler, who is now moving from Mexico into Michigan." Actually, the Mexican plant is still open and expects to continue employing the same number of workers. More workers are being hired in Michigan, which makes Mr. Trump's claim only partially true, and quite misleading.
And so forth.
Why do politicians exaggerate? The obvious answer is that it works. When Mr. Trump repeats, over and over, that he signed the biggest tax cut in history, he gains political points - at least among his supporters. There is power in repetition.
Note that too many people claim that PolitiFact is biased. Not true, and also not the point. Everything you say should be true and accurate. If you speak accurately, you don't need to worry about fact checkers.
My earlier post about this speech is here.
P.S.: The most reliable fact checkers are the Washington Post's Fact Checker, PolitiFact, and the original FactCheck.org. Some of the others are OK, but some are not systematic or fair enough.
No comments:
Post a Comment