America does not have an Attorney General she is actually a shape shifter something a cat might find to drag in- Impeach Bondi!

Echo editorial board opinion published by The New York Times:

A direct quote from the despicable Pam Bondi’s hearing. Can someone please explain the connection between the Dow being “over 50k” and getting justice for Epstein’s victims… because I’m stumped❗Christina Lorey's Post

"Blondie-Bondi" hearing in the House Judiciary Committee room this week (February 2026) offered a grim tableau of the state of American justice. Sitting in the gallery were victims of Jeffrey Epstein, women who have waited decades for clarity and accountability. Sitting before them was Attorney General Pam Bondi. When offered the opportunity to apologize to these women for the Department of Justice’s disastrous handling of the Epstein files, Ms. Bondi didn’t just decline; she sneered. Instead, she demanded that Democrats apologize to Donald Trump.💢❗

She proceeded to subject committee members from both parties to schoolyard taunts. She called the ranking member a “washed-up, loser lawyer.” She derided Thomas Massie — a Kentucky Republican who helped force the release of the Epstein documents after Mr. Trump and Ms. Bondi had kept them hidden — as a “failed politician.” And at one point, in a bizarre non sequitur, she responded to a question she did not like by boasting that the Dow Jones industrial average had surpassed 50,000 points.

"Blondie-Bondi’s" performance was more than just political theater. It was a final indignity in a process that has victimized Epstein’s victims all over again. Under the guise of transparency, the Justice Department has managed to expose the victims to further humiliation while shielding the powerful behind a wall of redactions.
Sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter Get expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big ideas shaping the world every weekday morning. Get it sent to your inbox.

The department’s release of these files has been dominated by incompetence. "Blondie-Bondi" has long had the authority to make them public, but she spent months refusing and yielded only after Congress forced her hand. 

Then, her department was tasked with a clear mandate: release the information while protecting the victims’ privacy, national security and active investigations. Instead, in a grotesque failure, the D.O.J. uploaded dozens of unredacted images to its website, including nude photographs of young women and possibly teenagers. 

As Annie Farmer, a survivor who testified against Ghislaine Maxwell, who was Epstein’s evil partner and associate, noted, it is “hard to imagine a more egregious way of not protecting victims.” "Blondie-Bondi’s "department shattered the trust of women who had already been betrayed by the legal system once before.

Yet observe the Justice Department’s selective efficiency: While it was careless with the dignity of survivors, it has been more fastidious about protecting the reputations of some members of the elite. Mr. Massie and Representative Ro Khanna, the Californian who has also been central to the release of the documents, have reviewed the unredacted files, and they report that nearly 80 percent of the material remains hidden, including the identities of six wealthy, powerful men. The Justice Department has not even offered a convincing public explanation for these redactions. The Trump administration’s history of disingenuousness around the Epstein files — and its use of the Justice Department to protect political allies and investigate perceived enemies — offers ample reason to be skeptical. This appears to be a weaponized document dump disguised as a reckoning.

A close reading of the released emails suggests that what is being protected is the comfort of a class of people who believed they were untouchable. The files released reveal a merito-aristocracy that traded favors, influence and access. They depict a transactional world where Kathryn Ruemmler, a former White House counsel for Barack Obama, could joke with a registered sex offender, strategize about her career prospects and accept gifts of designer bags.

Howard Lutnick, Trump’s commerce secretary, claimed he “barely had anything to do” with Epstei,n but in fact visited his private island. We read of elites seeking entry to golf clubs, advice on dating,
introductions to celebrities and college admission for  their children.

The files reveal a barter economy of powerful people who, at best, looked the other way. As Anand Giridharadas has noted, these documents show us “how the elite behave when no one is watching.” They reveal a world where character is irrelevant and connection is everything.

Donald Trump’s role in the selective release deserves attention. While he has railed against the swamp, his administration continues to hide vast amounts of Epstein information. Donald Trump's own history with Epstein apparently included a bizarre birthday note wishing that “every day be another wonderful secret.” And some of the redactions involved Donald Trump. 

Americans cannot accept vague excuses for protecting the identities of Epstein’s associates. A two-tiered justice system that coddles the powerful and revictimizes the vulnerable is a violation of American values. The survivors in that hearing room deserved an apology. More than that, they deserve the truth about Epstein and his disgusting friends, unspun and fully exposed.

P.S. King Charles III even disowned Andrew, his own brother❗

King Charles III's brother Andrew officially no longer a prince
Andrew is the third-eldest child of the late Queen Elizabeth II.

Measles epedemic continues to infect more people while RFKjr downplays vaccine compliance

Measles is a preventable infection. Republicans must call for the resignation of Department of Health and Human Services appointment by Trump - the irresponsible RFKjr, because he is incompetent, without any medical credentials and, frankly, he is crazy. Senator Susan Collins ALERT❗⚠️

Measles cases reach 1,046 in US as infections confirmed in 30 states: CDC:  This is the second highest case count in 25 years, CDC data shows. Echo report by Mary Kekatos and Dr. Karen Tachi Udoh, published by ABC News:

Measles cases have reached 1,046 as the virus continues spreading across the United States, according to data updated Friday from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Cases have been confirmed in 30 states including Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia and Washington.

Infectious disease experts have previously said the U.S. is likely on track to surpass the 2019, total of 1,274 cases, which were confirmed over the course of a year. This year's total also marks the second highest case count in 25 years, CDC data shows.

The CDC says 12% of measles patients in the U.S. this year have been hospitalized, the majority of whom are under age 19.

About 96% of measles cases are among those who are unvaccinated or whose vaccination status is unknown, according to CDC data.

Meanwhile, 1% of cases are among those who have received just one dose of the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine and 2% of cases are among those who received the recommended two doses, according to the CDC.

At least three deaths have been confirmed this year, two among children and one among an adult, all of whom were unvaccinated.

It comes as an unvaccinated traveler with measles may have exposed people at Denver International Airport and a nearby hotel, health officials said on Thursday.

The patient was in the international terminal on Tuesday, May 13, and then took a shuttle to stay at the nearby Quality Inn and Suites that night. The next day, the patient took a shuttle back to the airport and boarded a domestic flight.

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and the Denver Department of Public Health and Environment said anybody who may have been exposed on either flight will be directly notified by health officials.

Similarly, a resident of King County in Washington state traveled through Seattle-Tacoma International Airport and a medical center while infectious, Public Health – Seattle & King County said on Tuesday. The individual was likely exposed to measles while recently traveling internationally.

Additionally, the New Jersey Department of Health sent out an alert that a non-resident with measles attended the Shakira concert at MetLife stadium last week, potentially exposing people.

Although the concert occurred on May 16, officials warned that people may develop symptoms as late as June 6. So far, no associated cases have been identified.

The CDC currently recommends that people receive two doses of the MMR vaccine, the first at ages 12 to 15 months and the second between 4 and 6 years old. One dose is 93% effective, and two doses are 97% effective against measles, the CDC says.

Measles was declared eliminated from the U.S. in 2000, due to a highly effective vaccination program, according to the CDC. But vaccination rates have been lagging in recent years.

Donald Trump: The coronavirus and fanciful thinking

"...this is a rapidly moving pandemic...", said FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn.

Donald Trump lives in alternate reality and believes the coronavirus "will disappear". (#lackofleadership!)

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/01/politics/donald-trump-masks-coronavirus/index.html

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) commissioner says he cannot predict when a vaccine will be ready after Donald Trump's false timeline claims.

An echo report written by Justin Wise, published in The Hill, and with reference to ABC News.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Stephen Hahn said Sunday that he would not make a prediction about when a coronavirus vaccine would be availabl,e after Donald Trump claimed that a vaccine or therapeutic would be ready "long before the end of the year."
and
In a Fourth of July address in Washington, D.C., on Saturday, Trump said that the U.S. was unleashing its "scientific brilliance" toward developing treatments for COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus.

"And we'll likely have a therapeutic and/or vaccine solution long before the end of the year," Trump said.

Despite Donald Trump's false claims that a COVID-19 "solution" would likely be available "long before the end of the year," Hahn, who leads the agency in charge of approving a vaccine, refused Sunday to offer a timeline for its final development.

"I cannot predict when a vaccine will be available," Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn said on ABC's "This Week", Sunday, adding, "Yes, we are seeing unprecedented speed for the development of a vaccine. But … our solemn promise to the American people is that we will make a decision based upon the data and science on a vaccine, with respect to the safety and effectiveness of that vaccine."

Asked about the comments Sunday on ABC's "This Week," Hahn said that the Food and Drug Administration is currently overseeing 141 clinical trials of potential COVID-19 therapeutic treatments. Nevertheless, he said that he was not in a position to make a judgment about timelines for a vaccine.

"I can’t predict when a vaccine will be available," he said, noting that the agency issued guidance about the development process last week.

"Our solemn promise to the American people is that we will make a decision based upon the data and science on a vaccine with respect to the safety and effectiveness of that vaccine," he added. "When those data become available, and I hope those data are available sooner rather than later, we will make that judgment based upon those data and that science."

The World Health Organization (WHO) said in April that clinical trials had begun for three vaccines, with more than 70 in development.

Leading health officials have said that it is possible for a vaccine to be ready for use by January. But they have also voiced caution about the timeline, noting the importance of ensuring that a vaccine is effective first.

Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert and a key member of the White House coronavirus task force, told The Hill in May "any time you develop a vaccine, you always remember, you always have a question that you may not get an effective vaccine."

"Even if you do everything right and you do everything on time, there's no guarantee you're going to have an effective vaccine. So when we talk about having a vaccine that might be available in December or January, that's assuming that the vaccine is actually effective," he said.

Speaking in an interview for the Aspen Ideas Festival last week, Fauci said that he would settle for a vaccine that was 70 to 75 percent effective. But he noted that it was unlikely the U.S. would be able to combat the outbreak if roughly 30 percent of the population refused to take one. Recent survey results indicate that substantial portions of the population are hesitant about receiving a vaccine.

Trump previously predicted that a vaccine would be ready by the end of the year. The prediction was timed with news that the administration was pushing agencies to accelerate the vaccine development process with a project called “Operation Warp Speed.”

During his comments in Washington, Trump touted the U.S. testing capacity, claiming that it shows 99 percent of cases are "totally harmless."

Asked for evidence about the claim, Hahn said on Sunday that "this is a very rapidly moving pandemic" and that "any death, any case is tragic, and we want to do everything we can to prevent that." Moreover, he added that that the U.S. would stop the upward trend in cases so long as people followed health protocols, including wear face masks in public and adhering to social-distancing restrictions.

What happens when both the House and the Senate votes oppose the Donald Trump border emergency?

The New York Times: House Votes to Block Trump’s National Emergency Declaration About the Border

ABC News Senators seek to halt Trump's border emergency

Donald Trump's national emergency declaration to build the border wall is on the cusp of being terminated by Congress as Republicans on Capitol Hill are growing increasingly uneasy with the move.

At least a dozen Republicans have signaled they are unhappy with the president's decision to go the route of a national emergency.

This is what the evil Donald Trump border wall looks like

Following is an ambiguous point of view about the evil Donald Trump border wall, written by A. Sedler is a constitutional law professor at Wayne State University and published in The Detroit Free Press.

Sedler's opinion gives context to the Donald Trump incendiary action, by declaring a national emergency, just because he failed to get the funding to build his border wall, when he promised Americans that Mexico was going to pay for it. I dislike ambiguity but appreciate learning the information provided about the authority of the United States president.Donald Trump has now declared a national emergency along the southwestern border and claims that this will enable him to obtain funding for his long-promised border wall. His opponents claim that the declaration is illegal, and have threatened litigation. The only thing that is certain about the declaration is that everything is uncertain. I will now discuss the two basic questions that are presented by the declaration.

Is Trump's emergency declaration legal?

Here we start off with some basic propositions:

► First, the Constitution makes no provision for a “national emergency” and does not recognize anything like emergency powers.

►Second, only Congress can appropriate federal funds.

►Third, with few exceptions, the President can only act with Congressional authorization, and any presidential action can be challenged as not being authorized by applicable legislation.

A number of laws do authorize the President to take certain actions by declaring a national emergency. The National Emergencies Act of 1976, as amended in 1985, governs the President’s declaration of a national emergency. The President must specify the law under which he proposes to act, and must comply with the provisions of that law. Congress has 18 days to adopt a joint resolution to terminate the declaration. But the joint resolution is subject to a presidential veto, which can only be overturned by a two-thirds vote of both houses. This is highly unlikely.

One of the laws on which the President is relying is a law dealing with military construction. 

Under this law (33 U.S.C. sec. 2293), the President may terminate or defer a military construction project that he deems not essential to the national defense, and apply the resources for that project to construct another project that he considers essential to the national defense.

Trump is also relying on other laws that he claims authorize the reprogramming of funds for the wall. In the event of a viable legal challenge to the transfers of funds, the courts will have to determine whether the transfer is authorized by the laws on which the President relies. The government will argue that the courts should give broad deference to the administration's determination that there is a national emergency and his determination as to what is and what is not essential to the national defense.

The challengers will argue that such deference is not appropriate to the transfer of funds that have already been appropriated for other purposes and that the courts should carefully scrutinize the facts on which the President relies to support his determination. It is completely speculative, of course, as to which approach the courts will take.

Who can challenge the President's declaration?

Talk of lawsuits challenging the President’s declaration must take into account the requirements of standing. Media commentary to the contrary, a viable lawsuit challenging the President’s declaration is far from a sure thing. At least for now.

The constitutional jurisdiction of the federal courts is limited to “cases and controversies,” which means that the courts can only hear cases involving parties with adverse legal interests. In order to bring a federal court suit, the plaintiff must have standing, which requires that the plaintiff must have suffered significant personal harm from the challenged action. The Supreme Court has held that individual senators and representative do not have standing to challenge actions of the President. 

Nevertheless, the court has indicated that if one house of Congress authorizes the suit, that may be sufficient to confer standing.*

However, the court has also held that unless a conflict between Congress and the administration affects the rights of third parties – which it usually doesn’t – it will invoke the political question doctrine and refuse to hear the case. Rather, the court has said that the President and Congress should “resolve the conflict as equals.”

A state or a city in the path of the proposed border wall would have standing to challenge the construction of the wall if, and only if it could show that the construction of the wall could cause some injury to the city or state. Perhaps a city like El Paso, which is a major crossing point between the U.S. and Mexico, could meet this test, but perhaps not. One clear example of a person who would have standing is a landowner whose land would be taken by the government for construction of the wall. But this would be some time in the future.

In the months ahead, there will be a plethora of commentary about the President’s declaration of a national emergency to obtain funding for his long-promised border wall. 

Ultimately, the questions we examined here will be resolved within the framework of the American constitutional and judicial system.

*Professor Sedler does not provide context about what hypothetically happens when both houses of the Congress authorizes the suit, even if the President vetoes the majority votes by the House and the Senate. 

If lawyers lie about Twitter posts? That's OOJ

Attorney for Donald Trump said he composed the "sloppy" Tweet about why Mike Flynn was fired as the National Security Adviser.

Trump's lawyer: I wrote the president's 'sloppy' tweet 

Flynn's dismissal- Donald Trump's "sloppy" Twitter message on Sunday morning (Ahhh, do you mean to tell me, there are people really working in the White House on Sunday morning?~ Who knew?) ~ ABCNews report by Jordyn Phelps, Katherine Faulders and Devin Dwyer

John Dowd says he is the person who drafted the president's Sunday morning Twitter message: 

"I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI," Trump tweeted at 9:14 a.m. on Saturday. "He has pled guilty to those lies. It is a shame because his actions during the transition were lawful. There was nothing to hide!"

Dowd told ABC News he wrote those words and had done so in a "sloppy" manner. A second source familiar with the matter corroborated his account. (So, how many people work in the White House on early Sunday mornings?~ HELLO?)

Four questions leap out about this Twitter post and John Dowd's response, taking the fall for Donald Trump:

Donald Trump's attorney looks like he's infected with the "sloppies"- John Dowd admitted that he composed the "sloppy" Twitter message posted by @realDonaldTrump

1.  If John Dowd composed a "sloppy" Tweet, shouldn't he be fired for misconduct?

2.  What is the billable rate for a White House attorney who is composing Twitter messages for Donald Trump on an early Sunday morning?  

3.  When Donald Trump posts Twitter messages, isn't he the sole author of those messages?  If so, and I do believe this to be the case, then Donald Trump is guilty of obstruction of justice (OOJ).  By admitting on Twitter to knowing that Michael Flynn lied to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and, subsequently, asking then Director James Comey to "go easy on Flynn", Donald Trump is admitting to obstructing justice.  
4. In the universe of "all lies are possible", if John Dowd, in reality, lied about having composed Donald Trump's Twitter message, if he didn't compose it at all, but just said so to protect his high paying client, isn't this a reason to strip him of his license to practice law?

Any of the above questions could stand alone in providing evidence about White House misconduct in the Mueller investigation.

In other words, Donald Trump has been telling lies to the American people, ever since he began his flawed campaign, with Russian help, to win the illegal 2016 election, where he wrongly became president. 

Moreover, in as much as John Dowd admitted to composing a "sloppy" Tweet, or has lied about doing so, (apparently Dowd was half asleep on Sunday morning?) then he must be fired for misconduct.

 

List of lies- How does he get away with them? Toronto Star

In fact: George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama all earned bigger margins in the electoral college than Trump did.

Toronto Star: (It just seems to me the international news media is much more aggressive about keeping tabs on Donald Trump than American news)https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2017/02/24/daniel-dales-donald-trump-fact-check-updates.html

The complete list of all 129 false things Donald Trump has said as president

Pinocchio score is very high with Donald Trump but the problem is (and it's very serious) he isn't being held accountable for his felonious (a Rep. Trey Gowdy R-SC over-used word) behavior.
(Rep. Trey Gowdy- R-SC over uses the word "felonious". Too bad he doesn't apply it to Donald Trump)

The Star’s running tally of the lies, exaggerations and deceptions the president of the United States of America has said, so far - of course, the top of this list is the false accusation about President Obama ordering a wire tap of Trump Towers. Anybody with half a brain knows it was the Russians who may have engaged in a wire tap of Trump Towers. As a matter of fact, there was a Russian money laundering scheme already hooked up in to Trump Towers in suite 63 A, according to ABC News.  There are entirely too many Trump >Russia connections to avoid the preponderance of evidence about how Vladimir Putin has somehow coopted Donald Trump and his administration.

Donald Trump makes frequent false claims about matters big and small. The Star is planning to track them all.
Last updated: Mar. 17, 2017

129.Mar. 15, 2017 — Interview with Fox News’s Tucker Carlson

The repeated claim about the F-35: “On the airplanes, I saved $725 million, probably took me a half an hour if you added up all of the times.”  In fact: Trump was not responsible for these savings: Lockheed Martin had been moving to cut the price well before Trump was elected, multiple aviation and defense experts say. Just a week after Trump’s election, the head of the F-35 program announced a reduction of 6 to 7 per cent — in the $600 million to $700 million range.

“Trump’s claimed $600 million cut is right in the ballpark of what the price reduction was going to be all along,” wrote Popular Mechanics. “Bottom line: Trump appears to be taking credit for years of work by the Pentagon and Lockheed,” Aviation Week reported, per the Washington Post.
128. Mar. 15, 2017 — Interview with Fox News’s Tucker Carlson The claim about his source for his allegation that President Barack Obama had wiretapped his phones at Trump Tower:
“Well, I’ve been reading about things. I read in, I think it was January 20, a New York Times article where they were talking about wiretapping. There was an article, I think they used that exact term.” Added: “Well, because The New York Times wrote about it.”

In fact: This claim contains a kernel of truth, but it is so misleading that it is largely false. The Times article did use the word “wiretapped,” but it did not mention Obama, and it did not mention Trump Tower. Rather, it said only that U.S. authorities were examining intercepted communications related to Trump associates’ possible ties with Russian officials; it suggested that there had been wiretaps of foreign officials, not Americans.

127. Mar. 15, 2017 — Interview with Fox News’s Tucker Carlson

The claim: “And don’t forget, when I say wiretapping, those words were in quotes. That really covers, because wiretapping is pretty old-fashioned stuff. But that really covers surveillance and many other things. And nobody ever talks about the fact that it was in quotes, but that’s a very important thing.”

In fact: Trump did use quotation marks in two of his four tweets accusing Barack Obama of improperly surveilling him. However, in the other two, he made the same accusation without quotation marks. “How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process,” he wrote in one; “I’d bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!” he wrote in the other.

(This "felonious" claim - a word Representative Trey Gowdy enjoys over-using) was debunked by FBI Director James Comey and National Security Agency Director Admiral Mike Rogers. 

113. Feb. 28, 2017 — Speech to joint session of Congress

The claim: “We’ve defended the borders of other nations while leaving our own borders wide open for anyone to cross.”

In fact: The U.S., of course, does not have an undefended or open border, though people manage to sneak past the defenses. The Border Patrol, which has a budget of $14 billion, apprehended 415,816 people in 2016.

112. Feb. 28, 2017 —Speech to joint session of Congress

The claim: “I am sending the Congress a budget that rebuilds the military, eliminates the defense sequester, and calls for one of the largest increases in national defense spending in American history.”

In fact: His proposed increase, of about 10 per cent, is not one of the largest in history, experts say. “Trump’s historical increase is actually quite average,” Laicie Heeley, a defense budget analyst at the Stimson Center think tank, told Politifact.

111. Feb. 28, 2017 — Remarks while signing executive order on Waters of the United States

The claim: “But a few years ago, the EPA decided that navigable waters can mean nearly every puddle or every ditch on a farmer’s land or anyplace else that they decide. Right? It was a massive power grab.”

In fact: This claim about puddles has been a common Republican talking point, but it is not accurate. The Environmental Protection Agency has specifically excluded puddles from this regulation; a fact sheet on its website says, “THE CLEAN WATER RULE DOES NOT REGULATE PUDDLES.” While critics of the regulation argue that the law can still be read to cover puddles, it is just not true that the EPA decided that nearly every puddle is included.

110. Feb. 28, 2017 — Remarks while signing executive order on Waters of the United States

The claim about the waters rule: “The EPA’s regulators were putting people out of jobs by the hundreds of thousands.”

(This is absurd! Donald Trump should never be allowed to get away with such outrageous lies. Americans have become obsessed by a cult mentality and this is a sociological phenomenon that is extremely difficult to break down.  As an American who is acutely aware of this hypnotic affect, it's very scary.)

In fact: There is no evidence for this claim.😱

109. Feb. 28, 2017 — Remarks while signing executive order on Waters of the United States

The claim: “In one case in Wyoming, a rancher was fined $37,000 a day by the EPA for digging a small watering hole for his cattle. His land.”

In fact: The rancher did more than dig a small hole, FactCheck.org found: without a permit, he “constructed a dam on Six Mile Creek, a waterway deemed by the EPA to be a tributary of the Blacks Fork River, which in turn is a tributary of the Green River.”

108. Feb. 28, 2017 — Interview with Fox News’s Fox and Friends

The repeated claim: “We saved $700-million-plus on a F-35 after I got involved.”

In fact: These savings did not come after Trump got involved: Lockheed Martin had been moving to cut the price well before Trump was elected, multiple aviation and defence experts say. Just a week after Trump’s election, the head of the F-35 program announced a reduction of 6 to 7 per cent — in the $600 million to $700 million range.

“Trump’s claimed $600 million cut is right in the ballpark of what the price reduction was going to be all along,” wrote Popular Mechanics. “Bottom line: Trump appears to be taking credit for years of work by the Pentagon and Lockheed,” Aviation Week reported, per the Washington Post.

107. Feb. 28, 2017 — Interview with Fox News’s Fox and Friends

The claim: “You look at the kind of numbers we’re doing. We were probably GDP of a little more than 1 per cent.”

In fact: This is an exaggeration. U.S. gross domestic product grew by 1.6 per cent in 2016; no economic analyst would round this to 1 per cent or call it “a little more than 1 per cent.” GDP grew by 2.6 per cent the year prior.

106. Feb. 28, 2017 — Interview with Fox News’s Fox and Friends

The repeated claim: “You see what I’ve done. Ford has announced, General Motors, Fiat has announced. They’re all building big plants, they’re all coming back into the United States. They were fleeing. They were fleeing our country.”

In fact: Trump is taking credit for investments he was not responsible for. GM did not offer any indication that it made its new investment of $1 billion because of Trump, and independent automotive analysts said it was unlikely Trump was a major factor; GM invested $2.9 billion last year, before Trump was elected. The parent company of Chrysler said Trump had no influence on its newly announced $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio, telling ThinkProgress, “This plan was in the works back in 2015.” Further, all of these companies were maintaining a major presence in the U.S. before Trump was elected.

105. Feb. 28, 2017 — Interview with Fox News’s Fox and Friends

The claim: “Look just at the money I’ve saved. I’ve saved billions and billions of dollars.”

In fact: There is no evidence of this.

104. Feb. 27, 2017 — Meeting with the National Governors Association

The claim: “Nobody knew that healthcare could be so complicated.”

In fact: We let a lot of Trump’s hyperbole slide, but this one is egregious. Numerous experts warned that the repeal of Obamacare was far more complicated than Trump was suggesting when he said he would do it immediately upon becoming president. And a Politico health journalist, Dan Diamond, tweeted multiple examples of Barack Obama calling healthcare complicated. Finally, Trump himself said repeal and replacement was “very complicated stuff” a week and a half before he took office.

103. Feb. 27, 2017 — Meeting with the National Governors Association

The repeated claim: “I got involved in an airplane contract, I got involved in some other contracts, and we cut the hell out of the prices. I mean, we saved a lot of money, tremendous amount of money, beyond anything that the generals that were involved…On one plane, on a small order of one plane, I saved $725 million. And I would say I devoted about, if I added it up, all those calls, probably about an hour.”

In fact: Trump was taking personal credit for savings he did not personally secure. These savings did not come after Trump “got involved”: Lockheed Martin had been moving to cut the price of the F-35 well before Trump was elected, multiple aviation and defence experts say. Just a week after Trump’s election, the head of the F-35 program announced a reduction of 6 to 7 per cent — in the $600 million to $700 million range.

“Trump’s claimed $600 million cut is right in the ballpark of what the price reduction was going to be all along,” wrote Popular Mechanics. “Bottom line: Trump appears to be taking credit for years of work by the Pentagon and Lockheed,” Aviation Week reported, per the Washington Post.

102. Feb. 27, 2017 — Interview with Breitbart News

The repeated claim about the New York Times: “In fact, they had to write a letter of essentially apology to their subscribers because they got the election so wrong.”

In fact: The Times never apologized for its Trump coverage; Trump was referring to a post-election letter, a kind of sales pitch, in which Times leaders thanked readers and said they planned to “rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism.”

101. Feb. 27, 2017 — Interview with Breitbart News (aka "Barfcart_News")

The claim about New York Times journalist Michael Barbaro: “For instance, when people read the story on the women – first of all, the reporter who wrote the story has a website full of hatred of Donald Trump. So, he shouldn’t be allowed to be a reporter because he’s not objective.”

In fact: Barbaro does not have a website.😏

100. Feb. 27, 2017 — Interview with Breitbart News (aka "Barfcart_News")

The claim: “They did a front-page article on women talking about me, and the women went absolutely wild because they said that was not what they said. It was a big front-page article, and the Times wouldn’t even apologize and yet they were wrong. You probably saw the women. They went on television shows and everything.”

In fact: One woman, not multiple women, went on television to complain about the Times article in which she was quoted. (Rowanne Brewer Lane alleged that the Times put a “negative” spin on her quotes.) The Times interviewed “dozens” of women; the others did not offer criticism of the piece.

99. Feb. 24, 2017 — Speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference

The claim: “Maybe they are just bad at polling or maybe they’re not legit, but it’s one or the other, look at how inaccurate — look at CBS, look at ABC, also, look at NBC, take a look at some of these polls.”

In fact: These organizations’ election polls were quite accurate. Hillary Clinton won the national popular vote by three points. CBS’s final poll had her winning by four. ABC’s had her winning by three. NBC’s was the worst, with Clinton up by five, but the result was still within the poll’s margin of error.

98. Feb. 24, 2017 — Speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference

The repeated claim: “Ford and Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Sprint, Intel, and so many others are now, because of the election result, making major investments in the United States, expanding production and hiring more workers.”

In fact: GM did not offer any indication that it made its new investment of $1 billion because of Trump, and independent automotive analysts said it was unlikely Trump was a major factor; GM invested $2.9 billion last year, before Trump was elected. The parent company of Chrysler said Trump had no influence on its newly announced $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio, telling ThinkProgress, “This plan was in the works back in 2015.”

97. Feb. 24, 2017 — Speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference

The claim: “By the way, you folks are in here — this place is packed, there are lines that go back six blocks and I tell you that because you won’t read about it, OK. But there are lines that go back six blocks.”

In fact: There was no line at all.😝

96. Feb. 24, 2017 — Speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference

The claim: “Obamacare covers very few people — and remember, deduct from the number all of the people that had great health care that they loved that was taken away from them.”

In fact: By no objective measure does Obamacare cover “very few” people. Twenty million people have gained coverage under the law. One study estimated that 2.6 million people initially received notices that their coverage was being cancelled; the number that actually did was likely far lower. Even if it wasn’t, the coverage gains would far exceed the coverage losses.

95. Feb. 24, 2017 — Speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference

The repeated claim: “We have authorized the construction, one day, of the Keystone and Dakota Access Pipelines.”

In fact: Trump has not actually approved construction of Keystone XL. His executive order merely invited TransCanada to reapply for approval.

94. Feb. 24, 2017 — Speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference

The claim: “Our Border Patrol, I’ll tell you what they do, they came and endorsed me, ICE came and endorsed me. They never endorsed a presidential candidate before, they might not even be allowed to.

In fact: Indeed, these two government bodies are not allowed to endorse candidates — and they didn’t. Trump was endorsed by unions of Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) employees, not the government bodies themselves.

93. Feb. 24, 2017 — Speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference

The claim: “In fact, in covering my comments, the dishonest media did not explain that I called the fake news the enemy of the people. The fake news. They dropped off the word ‘fake.’ And all of a sudden the story became the media is the enemy. They take the word ‘fake’ out.”

In front of a roaring crowd, Trump again calls the media the ‘enemy of the people’

In fact: This is a strange one. The media accurately reported that Trump tweeted: “The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!” Reports did not take the word “fake” out. Trump uses “fake news” to refer to media coverage broadly, and broadly mentioned five specific outlets, so there was nothing dishonest about reporting that he had attacked the media here.

92. Feb. 24, 2017 — Speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference

The claim: “Because they have no sources, they just make ’em up when there are none. I saw one story recently where they said, ‘Nine people have confirmed.’ There’re no nine people.”

In fact: The Washington Post did not make up its sources: its story, about national security adviser Michael Flynn allegedly discussing U.S. sanctions with Russia’s ambassador before the election, resulted in Trump firing Flynn. (and don't forget to report how LtGenFlynn lied to the Vice President Pence.)

91. Feb. 23, 2017 — White House meeting with manufacturing CEOs

The claim: “Gary, as you know — you all know Gary from Goldman, Gary Cohn. And we’re really happy — just paid $200 million in tax in order to take this job, by the way. Which is very much unlike Gary. But he’s great.”

In fact: Cohn, Trump’s National Economic Council director, did not pay $200 million in tax to take the job. In fact, he did perhaps the exact opposite — sell stock worth more than $200 million. According to Bloomberg, Cohn, formerly president of Goldman Sachs, was preparing to divest “roughly $220 million of Goldman equity he already held or was awaiting, as well as stakes in company-run investment funds”; he also got an additional $65 million payout. Also relevant: he might not have to pay any tax on the sales for a long while. White House appointees who are forced to sell stock to avoid conflicts of interests are allowed to defer capital gains taxes if they plow their proceeds into several kinds of approved investments.

90. Feb. 23, 2017 — White House meeting with manufacturing CEOs

The claim: “We don’t have any good deals. In fact, I’m trying to find a country where we actually have a surplus of trade as opposed to — everything is a deficit.”

In fact: The U.S. has surpluses with more than half of all countries in merchandise trade, figures from the U.S. International Trade Commission show — and merchandise trade is a measure that doesn’t count the services trade at which the U.S. excels. Major countries with which the U.S. has a surplus in merchandise trade include Australia, Brazil, the Netherlands, Argentina, and the United Kingdom.

89. Feb. 23, 2017 — White House meeting with manufacturing CEOs

The claim: “With Mexico, we have $70 billion in deficits, trade deficits, and it’s unsustainable. We’re not going to let it happen. Can’t let it happen. We’re going to have a good relationship with Mexico, I hope. And if we don’t, we don’t. But we can’t let that happen — $70 billion in trade deficits.”

In fact: The US trade deficit with Mexico was $63 billion in 2016, U.S. government figures show, counting only trade in goods. It is always billions smaller when trade in services is included.

88. Feb. 23, 2017 — White House meeting with manufacturing CEOs

The claim: “With China, we have close to a $500 billion trade deficit.”

In fact: The U.S. trade deficit with China was $347 billion in 2016, U.S. government figures show, counting only trade in goods. It is always billions smaller when trade in services is included.

87. Feb. 18, 2017 — Campaign rally in Melbourne, Fla.

The claim: “By the way, do you think that one media group back there, one network will show this crowd. Not one. Not one. They won’t show the crowd.”

In fact: CNN, Fox News and NBC all televised wide shots showing the size of the crowd at the rally.

86. Feb. 18, 2017 — Campaign rally in Melbourne, Fla.

The claim: “By the way, we did very well with women. You know, my wife said when some of these phoney polls were put out, the CNN poll was so far off, the phoney polls. When some of these, she said, what’s wrong with you and women.”

In fact: The final CNN poll of the campaign came close to nailing Trump’s showing with women. The poll had Clinton up 52 per cent to 39 per cent, a 13-point lead; exit polls from the actual voting that Clinton had won with women 54 per cent to 41 per cent — 13 points.

85. Feb. 18, 2017 — Campaign rally in Melbourne, Fla.

The claim: “We’ve got to keep our country safe. You look at what’s happening in Germany, you look at what’s happening last night in Sweden.”

In fact: No security incident of note happened the previous night in Sweden.👄

84. Feb. 18, 2017 — Campaign rally in Melbourne, Fla.

The repeated claim: “We’ve allowed thousands and thousands of people into our country and there was no way to vet those people. There was no documentation. There was no nothing.” Added: “Tens of thousands of people into our country, and we don’t know anything about those people.”

In fact: Refugees to the U.S. are rigorously vetted. The process includes multiple kinds of background and security checks and at least two interviews with U.S. representatives. Regardless of their paperwork situation — some have detailed documents, some do not — the U.S. knows far more than nothing about the refugees it approves.

83.Feb. 18, 2017 — Campaign rally in Melbourne, Fla.

The claim: “Ford, General Motors, Fiat-Chrysler are bringing in and bringing back thousands of jobs, investing billions of dollars because of the new business climate that we are creating in our country. In Arizona, Intel, great company, just announced it will open a new plant that will create at least 10,000 brand new beautiful American jobs.”

In fact: GM did not offer any indication that it made its new investment of $1 billion because of Trump, and independent automotive analysts said it was unlikely Trump was a major factor; GM invested $2.9 billion last year, before Trump was elected. The parent company of Chrysler said Trump had no influence on its newly announced $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio, telling ThinkProgress, “This plan was in the works back in 2015.” Intel says its new plant, on which it began and then halted work under Barack Obama, will employ up to 3,000 people; the 10,000 figure is an estimate of how many will be created “indirectly.”

82.Feb. 18, 2017 — Campaign rally in Melbourne, Fla.

The claim: “Jobs are already starting to pour back in. They’re coming back in like you haven’t seen in a long time.”

In fact: There is no evidence of jobs returning to the U.S. at levels unseen in a “long time.” Even if we give Trump credit for the good January jobs report — calculated while Barack Obama was still in office — there is no sign of a boom that is without recent precedent. The U.S. economy added 227,000 jobs in January. It did better than that during 11 months out of the last two years. For example, it added 233,000 in February 2016, 275,000 in July 2016 and 271,000 in December 2015.

81.Feb. 18, 2017 — Campaign rally in Melbourne, Fla.

The repeated claim about the F-35 fighter plane: “I also got Boeing in. I said do me a favour, give me a competing offer. And now they’re competing and fighting and we’ve gotten hundreds of millions of dollars off the price of a plane that was going to be ordered … So they’re going to make plenty of money, but it’s going to be a lot less than they would have made without Trump.”

In fact: Trump did not personally secure these savings: Lockheed Martin had been moving to cut the price well before Trump was elected, multiple aviation and defence experts say. Just a week after Trump’s election, the head of the F-35 program announced a reduction of 6 to 7 per cent — in the $600 million to $700 million range.

“Trump’s claimed $600 million cut is right in the ballpark of what the price reduction was going to be all along,” wrote Popular Mechanics. “Bottom line: Trump appears to be taking credit for years of work by the Pentagon and Lockheed,” Aviation Week reported, per the Washington Post.

80. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim: “I guess it was the biggest electoral college win since Ronald Reagan.”

In fact: George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama all earned bigger margins in the electoral college than Trump did.

79. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim about former campaign manager Paul Manafort: “He said that he has absolutely nothing to do and never has with Russia. He said that very forcefully. I saw his statement. He said it forcefully. Most of the papers do not print it because it’s not good for their stories.”

The 5 other front page stories the Star could run after Trump’s wild presser

In fact: The New York Times story Trump was criticizing included Manafort’s denial, in which he said he never “knowingly” had contact with Russian intelligence officers. Other major outlets that followed up on the story also printed a denial from Manafort.

78. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim: “I will say that I never get phone calls from the media. How do they write a story like that in the Wall Street Journal without asking me or how do they write a story in the New York Times put it on the front page.”

In fact: Media outlets almost always call his administration for comment on major stories. The Journal, in its story about U.S. intelligence declining to share some information with Trump, prominently quoted a denial from an anonymous administration official. The Times also sought comment for its story, but the administration declined to provide one.

77. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim: “Remember, I used to give you a news conference every time I made a speech, which was like every day. OK?”

In fact: This is not even close to true. Trump indeed gave near-daily speeches during the campaign, but he did not do a single news conference over the last three months of the campaign.

76. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim: “We had a very smooth rollout of the travel ban.”😡

In fact: We don’t usually fact-check claims like “smooth” — it’s vague, and it’s a matter of opinion — but the rollout of the travel ban was so obviously not smooth that we’re making an exception here. The implementation of the ban resulted in mass confusion among U.S. allies like Canada, caused travel problems for thousands of visa-holders and permanent residents, necessitated a series of clarifications and reversals by U.S. officials, and appeared so hasty that a federal appeals court has found that the administration may have violated residents’ constitutional right to due process.

75. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim: “That’s the other thing that was wrong with the travel ban. You had Delta with a massive problem with their computer system at the airports.”

In fact: The Delta outage had nothing to do with the chaos created by the travel ban. The travel ban caused mass confusion on a Saturday; the Delta outage occurred more than a day and a half later, on a Sunday night.

74. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim about labour secretary nominee Alex Acosta: “He’s a member and has been a member of the National Labor Relations Board.”

In fact: Acosta is not currently a member of the board. He served on it from 2002 to 2003.

73. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim about the news media: “I mean, you have a lower approval rate than Congress. I think that’s right.”

In fact: The media is unpopular with Americans, but Congress has consistently been even less popular. Last year, Gallup found that just 9 per cent had confidence in Congress; 20 per cent had confidence in newspapers, 21 per cent in television news. While the new Congress is now up to a 28 per cent approval rating, Gallup found in September that 32 per cent said they had trust in the media.

72. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim: “Now, when WikiLeaks, which I had nothing to do with, comes out and happens to give, they’re not giving classified information.”

In fact: Trump may have been attempting to refer specifically to WikiLeaks release of emails related to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, which were not classified. But he ended up wrongly suggesting that WikiLeaks does not provide classified information at all. The organization made its name releasing hundreds of thousands of pages of classified U.S. material.

71. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim: “The failing New York Times wrote a big, long front-page story yesterday. And it was very much discredited, as you know.”

In fact: The article, headlined “Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence,” has not been discredited.

70. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim: “And the people mentioned in the story, I notice they were on television today saying they never even spoke to Russia.”

In fact: One of the people mentioned in the New York Times story, Trump associate Roger Stone, went on television to deny having any contact with any Russians. But the other people mentioned in the story did not issue such categorical denials in any medium. Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign manager, told the New York Times that he never “knowingly” had contact with Russian intelligence officers, adding that such people do not “wear badges.” Former Trump adviser Carter Page he had only “said hello to a few Russian officials over the course of the last year or so”; he also gave a speech in Moscow.

69. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim about the 9th Circuit appeals court: “In fact, we had to go quicker than we thought because of the bad decision we received from a circuit that has been overturned at a record number. I have heard 80 per cent — I find that hard to believe; that’s just a number I heard — that they’re overturned 80 per cent of the time.”

In fact: This statement is false in one way, possibly misleading in another. It is false that the 9th Circuit is overturned by the Supreme Court at a “record number.” Even in the study conservatives usually cite in criticizing the 9th Circuit, the court had the second-highest reversal rate between 1999 and 2008. Between 2010 and 2015, it was third-highest. In the most recent court term for which complete data is readily available, the 9th Circuit was again in second place.

It may be misleading to discuss reversal rates this way at all. The Supreme Court overturns a majority of cases it agrees to hear — but those cases represent a tiny fraction of total cases decided by a circuit court. So even if 80 per cent of 9th Circuit cases that reach the Supreme Court are overturned, that still means more than 99 per cent of the circuit’s total decisions are not overturned.

68. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim about the 9th Circuit appeals court: “I think that circuit is — that circuit is in chaos and that circuit is frankly in turmoil.”

In fact: The court is functioning as normal. There is no sign of chaos or turmoil.

67. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim: “We had Hillary Clinton give Russia 20 per cent of the uranium in our country.” Added: “Hillary Clinton gave them 20 per cent of our uranium.”

In fact: Clinton didn’t personally give Russia uranium. The State Department, which Clinton led as secretary of state, was one of nine government entities that reviewed the Russian purchase of the Toronto-based firm Uranium One, which controlled the rights to about 20 per cent of U.S. uranium capacity. There is no evidence Clinton was personally involved in the process in any way. Further, only the president could have made the decision to block the deal; Clinton did not have final authority either way.

66. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim: “This administration is running like a fine- tuned machine, despite the fact that I can’t get my cabinet approved. And they’re outstanding people like Senator Dan Coats who’s there, one of the most respected men of the Senate. He can’t get approved. How do you not approve him?”

In fact: We’ll ignore the dubious “fine-tuned machine” claim — there is no sign that Coats, Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence, “can’t get approved” or is even facing obstruction. The Republican who chairs the Senate intelligence committee, Sen. Richard Burr, told The Hill they are waiting for the FBI and others to finish background checks, and that they will hold a hearing when the Senate returns from its one-week break.

65. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim: “Walmart announced it will create 10,000 jobs in the United States just this year because of our various plans and initiatives.”

In fact: The Walmart expansion plan that is creating the jobs was announced in October, before Trump was elected. The company did not reveal the precise 10,000 figure until after Trump took office, but it is directly connected to the previous announcement.

64. Feb. 16, 2017 — White House press conference

The claim: “General Motors likewise committed to invest billions of dollars in its American manufacturing operation, keeping many jobs here that were going to leave. And if I didn’t get elected, believe me, they would have left. And these jobs and these things that I’m announcing would never have come here.”

In fact: GM made a new $1 billion commitment to U.S. factories, not “billions”; it committed $2.9 billion last year, before Trump was elected. GM did not offer any indication that it made the decision because of Trump, and independent automotive analysts said it was unlikely the company had done so. “Mostly theatre to play in the news cycle created by President-elect Trump’s tweets,” Autotrader analyst Michelle Krebs said. “These investments and hiring plans have long been in the works and are a continuation of what the company has been doing in recent years.”