Fact Checking Donald Trump at the Third Presidential Debate

Fact Check: Donald Trump Lies About Not Supporting More Countries Getting Nuclear Weapons

TRUMP’S LIE:

CLINTON: “Well, I’m just quoting you when you were asked about a potential nuclear competition in Asia. You said, go ahead, enjoy yourself, folks.”

TRUMP: “And defend yourselves. And defend yourselves, I didn’t say nuclear.”

[Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

Donald Trump said he was “prepared” to allow “Japan and South Korea to become nuclear powers” if they continued to not “take care of us properly.”  BLITZER: “But — but you’re ready to let Japan and South Korea become nuclear powers?” TRUMP: “I am prepared to — if they’re not going to take care of us properly, we cannot afford to be the military and the police for the world. We are, right now, the police for the entire world. We are policing the entire world. You know, when people look at our military and they say, ‘Oh, wow, that’s fantastic,’ they have many, many times — you know, we spend many times what any other country spends on the military. But it’s not really for us. We’re defending other countries. So all I’m saying is this: they have to pay. And you know what? I’m prepared to walk, and if they have to defend themselves against North Korea, where you have a maniac over there, in my opinion, if they don’t — if they don’t take care of us properly, if they don’t respect us enough to take care of us properly, then you know what’s going to have to happen, Wolf? It’s very simple. They’re going to have to defend themselves.”  [CNN, 5/4/16]

Donald Trump said he’s okay with Japan and North Korea engaging in nuclear war:

Donald Trump on a war between a nuclear armed North Korea and Japan: “[Japan would] probably wipe [North Korea] out pretty quick. If they fight, you know what, that’d be a terrible thing. Terrible. Good luck, folks.  Enjoy yourselves.  If they fight that would be terrible, right? But if they do, they do.”  “So I would say to Japan you gotta help us out.  We want to help you.  And I would rather have them not arm, but I’m not going to continue to lose this tremendous amount of money. And frankly, the case could be made that let them protect themselves against North Korea. They’d probably wipe them out pretty quick. If they fight, you know what, that’d be a terrible thing. Terrible. Good luck, folks.  Enjoy yourselves.  If they fight that would be terrible, right? But if they do, they do.”  [Donald Trump rally Rothschild, WI, 4/2/16]

Donald Trump said he’s willing to allow Saudi Arabia to have nukes:

Donald Trump hedged on whether he supported Saudi Arabia developing nuclear weapons, then concluded, “It’s going to happen anyway. It’s only a question of time.”   COOPER: “Saudi Arabia, nuclear weapons?” TRUMP: “Saudi Arabia, absolutely.” COOPER: “You would be fine with them having nuclear weapons?” TRUMP: “No, not nuclear weapons, but they have to protect themselves or they have to pay us. Here’s the thing, with Japan, they have to pay us or we have to let them protect themselves.” COOPER: “So if you said, Japan, yes, it’s fine, you get nuclear weapons, South Korea, you as well, and Saudi Arabia says we want them, too?” TRUMP: “Can I be honest with you? It’s going to happen, anyway. It’s going to happen anyway. It’s only a question of time. They’re going to start having them or we have to get rid of them entirely.”  [CNN Town Hall in Milwaukee with Donald Trump, 3/29/16]

Fact Check: Donald Trump Falsely Claims He Will Bring GDP up to 4% or Higher

TRUMP’S LIE:

“We’re bringing GDP from really 1%, which is what it is now, and if she got and it will be less than zero, but we’re bringing it from 1% up to 4%, and I actually think we can go higher than 4%. I think you can go to 5% or 6%. And if we do, you don’t have to bother asking your question, because we have a tremendous machine..” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

CRFB blog: Donald Trump’s promise of 3.5 percent economic growth is “unrealistic” and “likely unachievable.” “Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump announced significant revisions to his tax plan that would reduce its cost by about half, a change CRFB president Maya MacGuineas described as ‘moving in the right direction.’ Unfortunately, to pay for his plan, Trump relies largely on unrealistic levels of economic growth, while ruling out changes to large portions of the budget to pay for his tax plan. Trump’s campaign estimates the new tax plan will cost $4.4 trillion, about half of the $9.25 trillion that we had estimated his old plan would cost. The new plan would be paid for in part with reductions in non-defense spending but mostly by increasing economic growth to 3.5 percent annually. This rate of economic growth is likely unachievable, and unfortunately Trump has taken many alternative offsets off the table that he could use to make up the difference.” [Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, 9/16/16]

Fact Check: Trump Once Again Lies About His Opposition to Iraq War from the Beginning

During tonight’s debate, Donald Trump falsely claimed he opposed Iraq War—for the umpteenth time—and Hillary Clinton called out his blatant lying:

CLINTON: Once again, Donald is implying that he didn’t support the invasion of Iraq. I said it was a mistake, I said that years ago. He has consistently denied what is –

TRUMP: Wrong.

CLINTON: – a very clear fact, that before the invasion he supported it. And, you know, I just want everybody to go Google it, Google “Donald Trump Iraq,” and you will see the dozens of sources which verify that he was for the invasion of Iraq –

TRUMP: Wrong.

CLINTON: And you can actually hear the audio of him saying that.

TRUMP’S LIE:

“Wrong.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

On the record, Trump was initially supportive and later ambivalent

2002: Donald Trump on whether he supported the Iraq War: “Yeah, I guess so.” “For months, Donald Trump has claimed that he opposed the Iraq War before the invasion began — as an example of his great judgment on foreign policy issues. But in a 2002 interview with Howard Stern, Donald Trump said he supported an Iraq invasion. In the interview, which took place on Sept. 11, 2002, Stern asked Trump directly if he was for invading Iraq. ‘Yeah, I guess so,’ Trump responded. ‘I wish the first time it was done correctly.’” [Buzzfeed, 2/18/16]

2003: Donald Trump on the Iraq War: “We have to – you know, it’s sort like either do it or don’t do it.” CAVUTO: “If you had to sort of breakdown for the president, if you were advising him, how much time do you commit to Iraq versus how much time you commit to the economy, what would you say?” TRUMP: “Well, I’m starting to think that people are much more focused now on the economy. They are getting a little bit tired of hearing, we’re going in, we’re not going in, the – you know, whatever happened to the days of the Douglas MacArthur. He would go and attack. He wouldn’t talk. We have to – you know, it’s sort like either do it or don’t do it.” [Fox Business, 1/28/03]

2003: Donald Trump: The Iraq War “looks like a tremendous success from a military standpoint.” TRUMP: “Well, I think Wall Street’s waiting to see what happens, but even before the fact there, obviously taking a little bit for granted, and it looks like a tremendous success from a military standpoint and I think this is really nothing compared to what you will going to see after the war is over.” [Fox Business, 3/21/03]

2003: Donald Trump: “It wasn’t a mistake to fight terrorism and fight it hard.” “Sept. 11, 2003: It wasn’t a mistake to fight terrorism and fight it hard, and I guess maybe if I had to do it, I would have fought terrorism but not necessarily Iraq.” [FactCheck.org, 2/19/16]

2003: “The question is whether or not we should have been in Iraq in the first place.” TRUMP: “I don’t think he is going to. He is a very committed guy, he’s committed to that whole situation and I don’t think he will really reconsider. I don’t think he probably can at this point. Other people will, and you are going to find out at the polls whether or not those other people are right. I mean, you see more and more doves, if you call them doves. The question is whether or not we should have been in Iraq in the first place. I don’t think that this president can do anything about that. He is really — he is on a course that has to stay.” [MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews, 11/4/03]

2003: Donald Trump: “I mean, you have Mr. [Howard] Dean, that’s going to say we shouldn’t have been there regardless. And you have others that are saying, well, we are there and we have to do the best.” TRUMP: “Well, look, you have a lot of questions and a lot of people questioning the whole concept of going in, in the first place, Neil. But we are in, we went in, you had to find him. If he was alive, you had to find him. And you know, they fulfilled the pledge of finding Saddam Hussein.” CAVUTO: “If you are the president’s opponents, what do you do?” TRUMP: “Well, you have two mixed bags. I mean, you have Mr. [Howard] Dean, that’s going to say we shouldn’t have been there regardless. And you have others that are saying, well, we are there and we have to do the best. I mean, we are there, regardless of what should have been done. Some people agree and some people don’t agree, but we are there. And if we are there, you have to take down Saddam Hussein. And they have done that, and they did it maybe not as quickly as they thought in terms of finding him, but they found him. And that is a huge day for this country.” [Fox Business, 12/15/03]

• Associated Press: Donald Trump “stopped short of saying that he was among those opponents” of the Iraq War in December 2003. “As 2003 went on, Trump’s opinions started to shift slightly. That September, he said on MSNBC that he ‘would have fought terrorism, but not necessarily Iraq.’ In December, he told Fox News that ‘a lot of people (are) questioning the whole concept of going in in the first place.’ But he stopped short of saying that he was among those opponents.” [Associated Press, 9/10/16]

Fact checkers rejected Trump’s claim to have opposed the Iraq war

PolitiFact: “Trump said he was ‘totally against the war in Iraq.’ While he came to that position when the war became difficult, earlier on he was more accepting of military action.” “Trump said he was ‘totally against the war in Iraq.’ While he came to that position when the war became difficult, earlier on he was more accepting of military action. In 2002, asked if America should go to war, he said, ‘I guess so.’ Less than three months before the invasion, Trump said the president should be more focused on the economy, but he didn’t speak against launching an attack. Trump didn’t speak often about the Iraq War before it happened, but what he said did not add up to the sort of opposition he describes today. We rate this claim False.” [PolitiFact, 9/7/16]

PolitiFact gave Donald Trump’s claim that he “was among the earliest to criticize the rush to war, and yes, even before the war ever started” a rating of “False.” “On the Iraq War, Trump said, ‘I was among the earliest to criticize the rush to war, and yes, even before the war ever started.’ The record just doesn’t support this. We could only find one example of Trump commenting on the Iraq War before the invasion where he seemed apprehensive but not vehemently opposed to the operation. In another interview, Trump said he supported the invasion. This claim rates False.” [PolitiFact, 6/22/16]

• PolitiFact: “We didn’t find any examples of Trump unequivocally denouncing the war until a year after the war began.” “Trump is correct that Clinton supported the war in Iraq. But Trump is wrong to suggest he opposed the war before it started. We searched newspaper articles and television transcripts from 2002 and 2003 amid the debate leading up to the Iraq War. We didn’t find any examples of Trump unequivocally denouncing the war until a year after the war began.” [PolitiFact, 6/22/16]

• PolitiFact: “There’s no evidence…that he advocated against the war in the first place, or that he was among the earliest to criticize the rush to war.” “Clearly Trump opposed the Iraq War in its early years. There’s no evidence, though, that he advocated against the war in the first place, or that he was among the earliest to criticize the rush to war.” [PolitiFact, 6/22/16]

PolitiFact gave Donald Trump’s claim that he “was totally against the war in Iraq, saying for many years that it would destabilize the Middle East” a rating of “False.” “Trump said, ‘I was totally against the war in Iraq, saying for many years that it would destabilize the Middle East.’ The record shows at best some early reservations about the war that evolved into opposition about a year after the war began. However, we find no evidence of Trump warning about regional destabilization before or after the war started. We rate this statement False.” [PolitiFact, 4/27/16]

FactCheck.org: Donald Trump “has yet to provide any evidence” of his early opposition to the Iraq war, despite his claim that he could provide “25 different stories” proving it. “As we have said before, there is no evidence that Trump opposed the war before it started. We wrote a timeline of all Trump’s public comments that we could find in 2002 and 2003, and found no instances of Trump voicing his opposition before the war started on March 19, 2003. Trump has stated during primary debates that his opposition was ‘loud and clear’ and well covered by newspapers, claiming erroneously that he could provide ‘25 different stories’ to prove his opposition. He has yet to provide any evidence.” [FactCheck.org, 6/22/16]

Washington Post: “There is far more evidence that [Donald Trump] supported the invasion” of Iraq. “Trump has repeatedly and falsely claimed he was against the Iraq war. There is no evidence that is the case. Instead, there is far more evidence that he supported the invasion. There is nothing in the public record that shows he opposed the war until more than a year after the war started — and the U.S. occupation started to run into trouble.” [Washington Post, 6/23/16]

CNN: “There’s no indication he said anything along the lines of ‘Do not attack Iraq’ before the invasion began.” “But these statements were made after the war began, mostly in 2004. There’s no indication he said anything along the lines of ‘Do not attack Iraq’ before the invasion began, as he has previously claimed.” [CNN, 6/22/16]

PolitiFact rated Donald Trump’s claim that he “said it loud and clear” that the Iraq war would destabilize the Middle East “False.” “On the Iraq war, Trump said, ‘I said it loud and clear, ‘You’ll destabilize the Middle East.’ ‘ Maybe Trump felt this way privately, but he made no publicly reported comments in the lead-up to the Iraq War that reflect this sentiment. He certainly did not say it ‘loud and clear.’ We could only find one example of Trump commenting on the Iraq War before the invasion, and he seemed apprehensive but not vehemently opposed to the operation. He only started publicly denouncing the war after it started. Because he far overstated how loudly he declared his position on the Iraq War, we’re cranking the rating on this statement up to False.” [PolitiFact, 2/14/16]

PolitiFact rated Donald Trump’s claim that he said the Iraq War would “destabilize the Middle East” before the invasion “Mostly False.” “Regarding the Iraq War, ‘I was the one that said, ‘Don’t go, don’t do it, you’re going to destabilize the Middle East.’ ‘ Maybe Trump felt this way privately, but he made no publicly reported comments in the lead up to the Iraq War that reflect this sentiment. We could only find one example of Trump commenting on the Iraq War before the invasion, and he seemed apprehensive but not vehemently opposed to the operation. He only started publicly denouncing the war after it started. Trump makes it sound like he stood on a railroad to try to stop the Iraq War train in its tracks. In reality, by the time he got around to forcefully criticizing the war, that train had already left the station. We rate his statement Mostly False.” [PolitiFact, 2/6/16]

The Washington Post Fact Checker said that “the evidence is slim” to back up Donald Trump’s claim that he warned against the war in Iraq. “‘I’m the only one up here, when the War in Iraq, I was the one who said, don’t go, don’t do it, you’re going to destabilize the Middle East. So I’m not the one with the trigger.’ –Donald Trump Trump continues to say he opposed the Iraq War ahead of the invasion. But the evidence is slim he warned against it prior to the invasion on March 20, 2003.” [Washington Post, 2/7/16]

Washington Post Fact Checker gave Donald Trump’s claim that the Bush Administration wanted to “silence” his criticism of the Iraq War a rating of “Four Pinocchios.” “‘We should have never gone into Iraq. I’ve said it loud and clear. I was visited by people from the White House asking me to sort of, could I be silenced because I seem to get a disproportionate amount of publicity. I mean, I was very strong, though: ‘You’re going to destabilize the Middle East.’’ — Businessman Donald Trump, interview on Fox News, Oct. 6, 2015 […] The burden of proof is on Trump, and he has not followed through. He earns Four Pinocchios.” [Washington Post, 10/21/15]

PolitiFact: “The record does not support Trump’s repeated assertions that he opposed the war prior to the 2003 invasion.” “Trump said, ‘I did not support the war in Iraq … The record shows that I’m right.’ The record does not support Trump’s repeated assertions that he opposed the war prior to the 2003 invasion. Around the time of the invasion, Trump’s comments were few and far between, not to mention vague. In 2002, asked if America should go to war, he said, ‘I guess so.’ Less than three months before the invasion, Trump said the president should be more focused on the economy, but he didn’t specifically speak against launching an attack. He didn’t voice full-throated opposition until almost a year and a half after the invasion. We rate this claim False.” [PolitiFact, 9/26/16]

Fact Check: Trump Falsely Claims that Aleppo has Fallen

TRUMP’S LIE:

“Aleppo is a disaster. It is a humanitarian nightmare. But it has fallen, from any standpoint.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

Aleppo has not fallen. “The fight for Aleppo is currently ongoing, where the Russian and Syrian air forces are bombarding the eastern half of the city, which remains in rebel control. Some 275,000 civilians are still in place inside Aleppo and casualties are going untreated thanks to the targeting of hospitals and other health centers.” [Buzzfeed, 10/9/16]

Fact Check: Donald Trump Lies About 100% of His Foundation Money Going to Charity

TRUMP’S LIE:

“I would like to mention one thing. The Trump Foundation, small foundation, people contribute, I contribute. The money goes 100%, 100% goes to different charities, including a lot of military. I don’t get anything. I don’t buy boats, I don’t buy planes.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

Donald Trump’s foundation made a $25,000 donation to a political organization supporting Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, who at the time was weighing whether to bring a lawsuit against Trump University. “And in 2013, the Trump Foundation donated $25,000 to a political organization supporting Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi—an action the foundation is prohibited from taking, and which it failed to report on its disclosures. The Trump campaign blamed this failure on clerical mistakes, but legal experts are sounding the alarm because at the time Bondi was reviewing complaints surrounding the businessman’s controversial Trump University project.” [Daily Beast,6/16/16]

Donald Trump used $258,000 from the Trump Foundation to settle lawsuits involving Trump’s for-profit businesses. “Donald Trump spent more than a quarter-million dollars from his charitable foundation to settle lawsuits that involved the billionaire’s for-profit businesses, according to interviews and a review of legal documents. Those cases, which together used $258,000 from Trump’s charity, were among four newly documented expenditures in which Trump may have violated laws against ‘self-dealing’ — which prohibit nonprofit leaders from using charity money to benefit themselves or their businesses.” [Washington Post, 9/20/16]

Donald Trump spent $20,000 of Trump Foundation money earmarked for charitable purposes to buy a six foot tall painting of himself. “In two cases, he has used money from his charity to buy himself a gift. In one of those cases — not previously reported — Trump spent $20,000 of money earmarked for charitable purposes to buy a six-foot-tall painting of himself.” [Washington Post, 9/10/16]

Donald Trump spent $10,000 of Trump Foundation money to purchase a second painting of himself. “The last of the four newly documented expenditures involves the second painting of Trump, which he bought with charity money. It happened in 2014, during a gala at Mar-a-Lago that raised money for Unicorn Children’s Foundation — a Florida charity that helps children with developmental and learning disorders. The gala’s main event was a concert by Jon Secada. But there was also an auction of paintings by Havi Schanz, a Miami Beach-based artist. One was of Marilyn Monroe. The other was a four foot-tall portrait of Trump: a younger-looking, mid-’90s Trump, painted in acrylic on top of an old architectural drawing. Trump bought it for $10,000…A few days later, the charity said, a check came from the Trump Foundation. Trump himself gave nothing, according to Sharon Alexander, the executive director of the charity.” [Washington Post, 9/20/16]

Donald Trump used his charitable foundation’s money to buy himself a Tim Tebow-signed football helmet. “Did Donald Trump violate IRS rules, by using a charity’s money to buy himself a signed football helmet? Four years ago, at a charity fundraiser in Palm Beach, Donald Trump got into a bidding war at the evening’s live auction. The items up for sale: A Denver Broncos helmet, autographed by then-star quarterback Tim Tebow, and a Tebow jersey. Trump won, eventually, with a bid of $12,000. Afterward, he posed with the helmet. His purchase made gossip-column news: a flourish of generosity, by a mogul with money to burn. ‘The Donald giveth, and The Donald payeth,’ wrote the Palm Beach Daily News. ‘Blessed be the name of The Donald.’ But Trump didn’t actually pay with his own money. Instead, the Susan G. Komen organization — the breast-cancer nonprofit that hosted the party — got a $12,000 payment from another nonprofit, the Donald J. Trump Foundation.”  [Washington Post, 7/1/16]

Fact Check: Donald Trump Lies About Being a Gentleman

TRUMP LIE:

“Nobody has more respect for women than I do. Nobody. Nobody has more respect.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

Donald Trump: “I think that putting a wife to work is a very dangerous thing.” “But Donald did seem to have some limits when it came to which women he wanted in the workplace. ‘I think that putting a wife to work is a very dangerous thing,’ Donald told a television interviewer. ‘There was a great softness to Ivana, and she still has that softness, but during this period of time, she became an executive, not a wife … you know, I don’t want to sound too much like a chauvinist, but when I come home and dinner’s not ready, I’ll go through the roof, okay?’” [TrumpNation, 1/1/05]

Donald Trump said a lawyer who requested a medical break to pump breast milk for her infant daughter was “disgusting.” “Donald J. Trump seemed irritated. He had been grilled for two hours in a lawsuit over a failed Florida real estate project, and he told the lawyer that her questions were ‘very stupid.’ When the lawyer, Elizabeth Beck, asked for a medical break, Mr. Trump and his lawyers objected, demanding that the deposition continue. Ms. Beck said it was urgent — she needed to pump breast milk for her 3-month-old daughter, and she took the pump out to make her point. Mr. Trump erupted. ‘You’re disgusting,’ he told Ms. Beck, in a remark that is not disputed by either side. He then walked out of the room, ending the testimony for the day.” [New York Times, 7/28/15]

Donald Trump on working women: “I have days when I think it’s great, and then I have days where if I come home…and dinner’s not ready, I go through the roof, okay?” “I think I’m probably mixed. I have days when I think it’s great, and then I have days where if I come home — you know, I don’t want to sound too much like a chauvinist, but when I come home and dinner’s not ready, I go through the roof, okay?” [ABC’s Primetime Live, 3/10/94]

Donald Trump: “The women get it better than we do folks. They get it better than we do.” “‘I mean. All of the men, we’re petrified to speak to women anymore. We may raise our voice,’ he said. ‘You know what? The women get it better than we do folks. They get it better than we do. If she didn’t play that card, she has nothing.’” [RealClearPolitics, 5/8/16]

Donald Trump: “I mean, the women, some of the women, happen to be very attractive. And they have used their sexuality to win certain tasks, as we call them. And hey, that’s part of life, I guess.” KING: “Do you think that some complaining about women use their gender to advantage in this, or is that also part of life?” TRUMP: “Women? I mean, do women use sex? Absolutely not. You’ve never known a woman to use sex, right? On my show, I get criticized when they use sex. The rest of the world, nobody gets criticized. You know, amazingly, these people were chosen. They’re young people, and they were chosen for their brain, but they happen to be attractive. I mean, the women, some of the women, happen to be very attractive. And they have used their sexuality to win certain tasks, as we call them. And hey, that’s part of life, I guess. In real life, that happens, too. I’ve known it. I’ve seen it happen. It’s actually happened to me a couple of times, Larry.” [CNN’s Larry King Live, 2/27/04]

Donald Trump said pregnancy was “certainly an inconvenience for a business.” “Donald Trump has said that pregnancy is ‘wonderful’ – unless you’re an employer. In an October 2004 interview with NBC’s Dateline, Trump said pregnancy is ‘a wonderful thing for the woman, it’s a wonderful thing for the husband, it’s certainly an inconvenience for a business. And whether people want to say that or not, the fact is it is an inconvenience for a person that is running a business.’” [NBC News, 5/26/16]

Fact Check: Trump Falsely Claims He Contributes to the Trump Foundation

TRUMP’S LIE:

“The Trump Foundation, small foundation, people contribute, I contribute.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

Fact Check: Trump Lies About What He Said About Women Who Accused Him of Assault

TRUMP’S LIE:

“I did not say that, I did not say that.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

CLINTON: “What was his response? Well, he held a number of big rallies where he said that he could not possibly have done those things to those women because they were not attractive enough for them to be assaulted. TRUMP: I did not say that, I did not say that..”  [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

Donald Trump on woman’s allegations: “Take a look. You take a look. Look at her… You tell me what you think. I don’t think so.” TRUMP: “Why wasn’t it part of the story that appeared 20, or 12, years ago? … I was one of the biggest stars on television with ‘The Apprentice,’ and it would have been one of the biggest stories of the year. Think of it. She’s doing this story on Melania, who’s pregnant at the time, and Donald Trump. Our one-year anniversary. And she said I made inappropriate advances.  And by the way, the area was a public area. People all over the place. Take a look. You take a look. Look at her. Look at her words. You tell me what you think. I don’t think so. I don’t think so.” [Trump Campaign Rally, West Palm Beach FL, 10/13/16]

Politico: Donald Trump “disparaged his accusers, seemingly suggesting that they weren’t attractive enough to warrant his alleged advances.” “And at no other point has Trump, who has habitually dismissed realities that did not comport with his own, offered such a clear and vociferous declaration of all-out war. Trump specifically blasted the ‘failing’ New York Times for printing two women’s stories in a piece that seemingly triggered Wednesday evening’s avalanche of damaging, similar reports. Trump said he was preparing a lawsuit against the Times and vowed to discredit the stories ‘in an appropriate way and at an appropriate time.’ And he disparaged his accusers, seemingly suggesting that they weren’t attractive enough to warrant his alleged advances. ‘Take a look. You take a look. Look at her,’ Trump said of one of the accusers. ‘Look at her words. You tell me what you think. I don’t think so.’” [Politico,10/13/16]

Donald Trump on one of his accusers: “Believe me, she would not be my first choice.” “Donald Trump on Friday intimated a woman who accused him of sexually assaulting her was not attractive enough to have drawn his interest, part of a broader attack on the integrity and physical appearance of multiple women who’ve come forward this week to accuse the GOP presidential nominee of sexual assault. ‘Yeah, I’m gonna go after her,’ he said sarcastically at a rally in Greensboro, North Carolina. ‘Believe me, she would not be my first choice. That I can tell you. You don’t know. That would not be my first choice.’ Story Continued Below Trump was referring to Jessica Leeds, a woman who told The New York Times on Wednesday that Trump groped her while the two were seated together on an airplane in the early 1980s.” [Politico, 10/14/16]

Donald Trump on one of his accusers: “Check out her Facebook, you’ll understand.” “Trump also called another accuser, former People Magazine reporter Natasha Stoynoff, a ‘liar’ and added, ‘Check out her Facebook, you’ll understand.’ The crowd laughed. Stoynoff accused Trump of kissing her without permission in 2005 as she prepared to interview him and his wife, Melania, for a story.” [Washington Post, 10/14/16]

Fact Check: Trump Falsely Claims that Hillary Clinton Would Approve TPP

TRUMP’S LIE:

“That was one of the worst things that’s ever been signed by our country. Now she want to sign Trans-Pacific Partnership. And she wants it — she lied when she said she didn’t call it the gold standard in one of the debates.”  [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

Hillary Clinton opposes Trans-Pacific Partnership. “Hillary Clinton said Wednesday she opposes the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership, marking a significant break with the Obama Administration as she heads into the first Democratic presidential debate.” [TIME, 10/7/15]

Fact Check: Trump Falsely Claims Hillary Clinton Created ISIS

TRUMP’S LIE:

“She gave us ISIS.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

PolitiFact rated Donald Trump’s claim that “Hillary Clinton invented ISIS with her stupid policies. She is responsible for ISIS” as “False.” ”Trump said ‘Hillary Clinton invented ISIS with her stupid policies. She is responsible for ISIS.’ There were several factors that contributed to the growing power of ISIS, but it’s misleading to pin the responsibility solely on Clinton. For starters, the roots of ISIS trace back to 2004, when Bush was president and before Clinton was Obama’s secretary of state. She did vote to authorize force in Iraq in 2002 while a senator, but that was advocated by the Bush administration and the vast majority of senators. The intervention in Libya, which she supported, did give ISIS an opening, but Trump is overstating her role by saying she is responsible for ISIS. This claim is inaccurate. We rate it False.” [PolitiFact, 7/20/16]

Washington Post Fact Checker said Donald Trump’s claim that ISIS rose from Hillary Clinton’s and Barack Obama’s policies was “false and facile.” “‘The rise of ISIS is the direct result of policy decisions made by President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton.’ This is false and facile. The terrorist group is the direct result of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, as we explored in our interview with Washington Post reporter Joby Warrick, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his book on the rise of the Islamic State. (Trump, of course, supported the invasion of Iraq in 2003.) At best, one could argue that actions that Obama failed to take (over Clinton’s opposition) helped contribute to the growth of ISIS.” [Washington Post, 8/16/16]

Washington Post: ISIS gained power because of “a complex dynamic that both pre-dates and post-dates [Hillary Clinton’s] tenure as secretary of state.” ”This is a carefully phrased statement — note the use of the word ‘helped’ — that tries to pin the blame on Clinton for a complex dynamic that both pre-dates and post-dates her tenure as secretary of state. To a large extent, the Islamic State of today is simply an outgrowth of al-Qaeda of Iraq. It was established in April 2004 by longtime Sunni extremist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, according to the National Counterterrorism Center. Zarqawi was killed by a U.S. airstrike in 2006, and afterward his successor announced the formation of the Islamic State — more than two years before George W. Bush left office. The Islamic State certainly gained strength and territory from the civil war in Syria, but Clinton as secretary of state had pressed to funnel arms to the rebels; she was rebuffed by the president.” [Washington Post Fact Checker, 7/20/16]

Newsweek: “There were at least six years before Clinton took up the role of secretary of state while ISIS was evolving, and the group’s explosive growth occurred largely after she had left office.” “The roots of ISIS stretch back to Al-Qaeda in Iraq, which developed in the power vacuum created by the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003—way before Clinton took up her post. The group formally split from Al-Qaeda in 2014 and in the same year swept through Iraq from its main base in Syria. So there were at least six years before Clinton took up the role of secretary of state while ISIS was evolving, and the group’s explosive growth occurred largely after she had left office. The question of whether the withdrawal of U.S. troops aided ISIS’s growth remains open, but Clinton advocated the arming of moderate rebels in Syria as a means of filling the space left behind, according to the New York Times.” [Newsweek, 9/27/16]

Associated Press: Military intervention in Libya had “no connection” to the emergence of ISIS in Iraq and Syria. “The U.S.-led military campaign in Libya created a security vacuum and political chaos. But it took three years before IS emerged in Iraq and Syria, and there is no connection between those developments. The group has its roots in a militant organization known as al-Qaida in Iraq, which found haven in Syria after being nearly decimated in Iraq in 2007-2009.” [PBS, 8/15/16]

Fact Check: Trump Lies about Starting off with “Small Loan” from His Father

TRUMP’S LIE:

“I started with a $1 million loan, I agree with that. It’s a $1 million loan. But I built a phenomenal company.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

Trump received loans tied to Fred Trump in excess of $70 million

Donald Trump received more than $74 million from loans tied to his father. “The ‘small loan’ was the $1 million from Trump’s father, Fred, to finance his Grand Hyatt hotel in 1978. (At this point, Donald was already president of his father’s real estate company.) But Fred Trump made out many other loans to Donald until his death in 1999, including a $70 million construction loan for the Grand Hyatt and a $3.5 million casino chip loan to bail out Trump’s struggling gaming empire, the Washington Post’s Fact-Checker reported.” [PolitiFact, 6/22/16]

Donald Trump received what he characterized as “a small loan” of $1 million loan from his father. “Donald Trump on Monday said his climb to the top of the business world hasn’t been an easy one and depicted a $1 million loan from his father as ‘small.’ ‘My whole life really has been a ‘no’ and I fought through it,’ Trump said Monday at an NBC-sponsored town hall here. ‘It has not been easy for me, it has not been easy for me. And you know I started off in Brooklyn, my father gave me a small loan of a million dollars.’” [CNN, 10/26/15]

• Donald Trump’s “small loan” of $1 million would likely be worth around $6.8 million in 2016 dollars. “That small loan from Trump’s father was worth $1 million, probably given before Trump entered the Manhattan real estate market in the early 1970s. If Trump’s father made the loan in 1968, the year his son graduated from the University of Pennsylvania, that $1 million would be worth $6.8 million in today’s dollars, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Price Index inflation calculator.” [CNN, 6/22/16]

Donald Trump received an illegal $3.5 million casino chip loan from his father. “One of Donald Trump’s casinos has admitted that it broke the law and violated terms of its license when the developer’s father lent it $3.5 million by purchasing gaming chips when he had no plans to gamble, the state Division of Gaming Enforcement said yesterday. Through his attorney, Fred Trump bought 700 gray chips, each worth $5,000, in December so that Trump Castle Casino Resort would have enough cash to make an $18.4 million interest payment on its mortgage, the division said.” [Philadelphia Inquirer, 4/9/91]

Donald Trump’s father was one of two guarantors of a $70 million loan for his Grand Hyatt Hotel, one of his first major projects. “Trump’s father, however, helped him throughout his career with millions in loans. As The Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler explains, Fred Trump was one of two guarantors of a $70 million construction loan from the bank Manufacturers Hanover that financed one of Donald Trump’s first major projects, the Grand Hyatt in Manhattan, in 1978.” [Washington Post, 3/4/16]

• Donald Trump’s father assumed a 50 percent share in the Grand Hyatt loan and committed to complete the project if his son failed. “It was Fred and the Hyatt chain who jointly guaranteed the $70 million construction loan from Manufacturers Hanover, each assuming a 50 percent share of the obligation and each committing itself to complete the project should Donald be unable to finish it.” [Trump: The Deals and the Downfall, pg. 147, 1992]

Trump received $30 million in loans from his siblings.

Donald Trump received loans totaling $30 million from his siblings. “Given Fred Trump’s fortune, and his influence, his son Donald had advantages worth tens of millions of dollars more than the simple $1 million loan he mentioned in New Hampshire. However his father’s wealth provided him with even more direct benefit. In the early 1990s, as two of his casinos went bankrupt and his Trump Airlines failed, he went to his siblings for loans totaling $30 million.” [CNN, 10/26/15]

Trump received millions from his father’s inheritance

Donald Trump appeared to have inherited about $40 million from his father. “Trump appears to have inherited about $40 million. He also benefited from numerous loans and loan guarantees, as well as his father’s connections, to make the move into Manhattan. His father set up lucrative trusts to provide steady income. When Trump became overextended in the casino business, his father bailed him out with a shady casino-chip loan — and Trump also borrowed $9 million against his future inheritance.” [Washington Post, 6/23/16]

Trump’s “small loan” claim has been panned by independent fact checkers

FactCheck.org: “Donald Trump’s success wasn’t built just on a $1 million loan.” “Trump’s campaign told us that he borrowed $1 million from his father, but it did not tell us when or for what reason. Fred Trump’s obituary in the Times said that he ‘lent support — and a small amount of money — to his son Donald’s aspirations of becoming a developer.’ However, as O’Donnell’s book suggests, Donald Trump’s success wasn’t built just on a $1 million loan. Another Trump author, Gwenda Blair, who wrote ‘The Trumps: Three Generations of Builders,’ told us in an email that Donald Trump benefited from his father’s ‘considerable financial and political clout.’” [FactCheck.org, 3/4/16]

Washington Post Fact Checker gave Donald Trump’s claim that he built his success on a “small” $1 million loan from his father a rating of “Four Pinocchios.” “Trump protests too much when he says that Rubio’s $200-million figure is ‘wrong by a factor of hundreds.’ Trump likely did not inherit $200 million by himself, though perhaps that was the size of the father’s estate, before taxes. Moreover, Trump’s claim that he built a real-estate fortune out of a ‘small’ $1 million loan is simply not credible. He benefited from numerous loans and loan guarantees, as well as his father’s connections, to make the move into Manhattan. His father also set up lucrative trusts to provide steady income. When Donald Trump became overextended in the casino business, his father bailed him out with a shady casino-chip loan—and Trump also borrowed $9 million against his future inheritance. While Trump asserts ‘it has not been easy for me,’ he glosses over the fact that his father paved the way for his success — and that his father bailed him out when he got into trouble. For ignoring and playing down the substantial advantages his father’s wealth gave him, Trump earns Four Pinocchios.” [Washington Post, 3/3/16]

• Washington Post Fact Checker: Donald Trump “glosses over the fact that his father paved the way for his success — and that his father bailed him out when he got into trouble.” “While Trump often asserts ‘it has not been easy for me,’ he glosses over the fact that his father paved the way for his success — and that his father bailed him out when he got into trouble.” [Washington Post, 6/23/16]

New York Times: Donald Trump’s claim that he built his businesses with a small loan “substantially understates the financial assistance that Mr. Trump received from his father.” “Mr. Trump defended his business record, recalling that he began his career in Brooklyn with a small loan and built a business worth more than $10 billion. ‘I have always had a talent for building businesses and, importantly, creating jobs,’ he said. ‘That is a talent our country desperately needs.’ Fact Check: This substantially understates the financial assistance that Mr. Trump received from his father, Fred, a major real estate developer in New York City. The decades-old ‘loan’ was for $1 million, a handsome sum that is by no means ‘small.’ But the elder Mr. Trump did not stop there: He handed his son control of a large company with significant property holdings across the city, whose substantial value is difficult to quantify or overstate. Without this leg up, it’s unclear whether Mr. Trump could have built the business empire that he has.” [New York Times, 6/22/16]

 Associated Press: “Trump’s $1 million loan from his father was just the beginning of his family subsidies, which included a far larger inheritance, loan guarantees and even occasional bailouts.” “THE FACTS: Trump’s $1 million loan from his father was just the beginning of his family subsidies, which included a far larger inheritance, loan guarantees and even occasional bailouts — one of which was found to be illegal by New Jersey casino regulators. As for the value of Trump’s business, every independent appraisal has found his assets to be worth far less than he says; Forbes says Trump is worth less than half what he claims.” [Associated Press, 6/22/16]

CNN rated Donald Trump’s claim that he started off with a “small loan” as “False.” “Given that for almost all Americans, $1 million is hardly a small loan, especially back in 1968, we rate his claim that he started his business with a ‘small loan’ as false.” [CNN, 6/22/16]

Fact Check: Trump Lies, Claims Clinton’s State Department Misplaced $6 Million

TRUMP’S LIE:

“Just like when you ran the State Department. $6 billion was missing. How do you miss $6 billion? You ran the State Department, $6 billion was either stolen, they don’t know. It’s gone. $6 billion.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

Washington Post Fact Checker: “The $6 billion was not lost or misplaced; it’s that $6 billion in contracts had missing paperwork.” “The $6 billion was not lost or misplaced; it’s that $6 billion in contracts had missing paperwork. On top of that, the majority of contracts with missing or incomplete paperwork stemmed from the Bush administration, before Clinton became secretary of state. So it’s ridiculous to claim Clinton was in anyway responsible for the problems with the contracts. The only thing ‘lost’ in Trump’s statement is reality.” [Washington Post, 10/13/16]

Washington Post Fact Checker: “For the past two years, it was known that taxpayer money was not lost or misplaced.” “Paperwork was missing, not dollars. Indeed, the State Department had no argument with the IG’s message, pledging to agree to the IG’s recommendations. So, for the past two years, it was known that taxpayer money was not lost or misplaced.” [Washington Post, 10/13/16]

Washington Post: “Easily two-thirds, or perhaps more, concerned contracts that predated Clinton’s tenure at State.” “About two-thirds of the $6 billion stems from a set of contracts issued in Iraq. The IG looked at 115 contracts, worth about $7.5 billion, that were issued between October 2004 and October 2011. The report does not give a breakdown, but it’s safe to assume that more than half were issued before Clinton took charge of the State Department. […] Easily two-thirds, or perhaps more, concerned contracts that predated Clinton’s tenure at State.” [Washington Post, 10/13/16]

Fact Check: Trump Falsely Claims Clinton is Going to Substantially Raise Taxes

TRUMP’S LIE:

“Her plan is going to raise taxes and even double your taxes. Her tax plan is a disaster.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

FactCheck.org: “Donald Trump repeatedly claims that Hillary Clinton is going to ‘raise your taxes very substantially.’ She’s not, unless you are among the top 10 percent of taxpayers.” “Donald Trump repeatedly claims that Hillary Clinton is going to ‘raise your taxes very substantially.’ She’s not, unless you are among the top 10 percent of taxpayers.” [FactCheck.org, 6/28/16]

FactCheck.org: “When Trump claims that Clinton would ‘raise your taxes very substantially,’ that’s not true for the vast majority of taxpayers.” “It is true that Trump has called for tax cuts that would result in lower taxes at all income levels, though the biggest cuts would come for the wealthiest taxpayers, according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation. But when Trump claims that Clinton would ‘raise your taxes very substantially,’ that’s not true for the vast majority of taxpayers.” [FactCheck.org, 6/28/16]

Multiple nonpartisan analyses concluded that almost all of Hillary Clinton’s proposed tax increases would fall on the top 10 percent of taxpayers. “Analyses by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center and the pro-business Tax Foundation both concluded that almost all of the tax increases proposed by Clinton would fall on the top 10 percent of taxpayers. Hardest hit would be the less than 0.1 percent of taxpayers who earn more than $5 million per year.” [FactCheck.org, 6/28/16]

The two biggest sources of revenue in Hillary Clinton’s tax proposals would fall on the very wealthy. “The two biggest revenue-generators in Clinton’s proposal are the Buffet Rule and the 4 percent surcharge on income over $5 million, said Roberton Williams, the Sol Price fellow at the Tax Policy Center. ‘We’re talking about a tiny sliver of people who would be affected by these very high taxes,’ Williams said. The 4 percent surcharge, for instance, kicks in for those who earn more than $5 million a year. That’s less than a tenth of 1 percent of U.S. taxpayers.” [FactCheck.org, 6/28/16]

The bottom 40 percent of taxpayers would see no increase under Hillary Clinton’s plan according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. “According to the TPC analysis, the bottom 40 percent of taxpayers would see no increase in their tax rates. The next 40 percent of taxpayers would see a 0.1 percent increase on average in their tax rates, and the top 20 percent of taxpayers would see an average rate increase of 1.3 percent. The very wealthiest taxpayers would bear the greatest burden, with the top 1 percent getting a 3.4 percent tax rate hike on average, and the top 0.1 percent seeing an average 5 percent tax rate increase.” [FactCheck.org, 6/28/16]

Fact Check: Donald Trump Lies About Refugee Vetting Process

TRUMP’S LIE:

“And he [Obama] has thousands and thousands of people that have no idea where they come from.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

Associated Press: Donald Trump’s claim that “the U.S. doesn’t know who is being allowed into the country” is “demonstrably false.” “THE FACTS: Trump may be right on his overall description of the U.S. immigration system as ‘dysfunctional.’ It’s demonstrably false to say the U.S. doesn’t know who is being allowed into the country. Illegal immigration along the Mexican border remains a problem. Tens of thousands of unaccompanied children and people traveling as families, mostly from Central America, have arrived at the U.S. border this year. The U.S. still lacks a comprehensive exit system to determine more effectively who has stayed in the country after their visas have expired. But the U.S. government obviously knows who receives the government’s permission to legally immigrate into the country. Would-be immigrants, refugees and foreign tourists are all subjected to background checks and various forms of screening.” [Associated Press, 6/19/16]

Fact Check: Trump Falsely Claims that We Don’t Know if Russia Hacked the U.S.

TRUMP’S LIE:

“She has no idea whether it’s Russia, China, or anybody else. She has no idea.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

The FBI has said it suspects Russian intelligence agencies of having carried out the attacks. “The Federal Bureau of Investigation suspects Russian intelligence agencies are behind the recent hacking of the emails of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman and of a contractor handling Florida voter data, according to people briefed on the investigations. Top Russian officials on Wednesday, meanwhile, shifted away from denying a role in a separate hack of the Democratic National Committee. President Vladimir Putin said it is irrelevant who stole the computer records, and the foreign minister said the U.S. hasn’t proven anything so far.” [Wall Street Journal, 10/12/16]

DHS: “The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of emails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations.” “The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of emails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked emails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.” [U.S. Department of Homeland Security press release, 10/7/16]

U.S. intelligence officials have determined that WikiLeaks and other sites are receiving or publishing information from Russian intelligence. “Intelligence officials have identified WikiLeaks and other sites as among those receiving or publishing information from Russian intelligence, a claim that Assange has dismissed in the past.” [Washington Post, 10/7/16]

Donald Trump was shown documents drawing “direct links” between Putin’s government and the recent hacks and email leaks. “As NBC News previously reported, classified materials prepared for the first briefing and examined by NBC News showed U.S. officials had drawn ‘direct links’ between Vladimir Putin’s government and the recent hacks and email leaks. ‘It’s common practice for all things in the briefing book to be used in the briefing,’ said one U.S. official. Since then, said an intelligence official, Trump and Clinton have had a second briefing, and their transition teams have received additional briefings on the Russian hack.” [NBC News, 10/10/16]

• Intelligence official: “To profess not to know at this point is willful misrepresentation.” “During Sunday’s debate, Donald Trump once again said he doesn’t know whether Russia is trying to hack the U.S. election, despite Friday’s statement by the U.S. intelligence community pointing the finger at Putin — and despite the fact that Trump was personally briefed on Russia’s role in the hacks by U.S. officials. A senior U.S. intelligence official assured NBC News that cybersecurity and the Russian government’s attempts to interfere in the 2016 election have been briefed to, and discussed extensively with, both parties’ candidates, surrogates and leadership, since mid-August. ‘To profess not to know at this point is willful misrepresentation,’ said the official. ‘The intelligence community has walked a very thin line in not taking sides, but both candidates have all the information they need to be crystal clear.’” [NBC News, 10/10/16]

Former CIA and NSA head Michael Hayden on Donald Trump’s refusal to acknowledge Russia perpetrated cyberattacks against the U.S.: “It defies logic.” “Former senior U.S. national security officials are dismayed at Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s repeated refusal to accept the judgment of intelligence professionals that Russia stole files from the Democratic National Committee computers in an effort to influence the U.S. election. The former officials, who have served presidents in both parties, say they were bewildered when Trump cast doubt on Russia’s role after receiving a classified briefing on the subject and again after an unusually blunt statement from U.S. agencies saying they were ‘confident’ that Moscow had orchestrated the attacks. ‘It defies logic,’ retired Gen. Michael V. Hayden, former director of the CIA and the National Security Agency, said of Trump’s pronouncements.” [Washington Post, 10/14/16]

Fact Check: Trump Falsely Claims that Hillary Clinton wants a 550% increase in Syrian Refugees

TRUMP’S LIE:

“People are going to come in from Syria, she wants 550% more people than Barack Obama.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

NBC News: Donald Trump’s claim that Hillary Clinton wants to increase Syrian refugee acceptance by 550% is “profoundly misleading.” “We fact-checked the 620,000 number yesterday: It’s what Senate Republicans assume Clinton’s plan would entail, not what her plan actually entails. But the 550 percent figure merits another look because it’s true — and profoundly misleading. Clinton did once support a 550 percent increase in the number of Syrian refugees the country expected to admit. Obama said the country would accept 10,000 refugees, and she supported admitting between 10,000 and 55,000 refugees. Clinton now says she’d support as many as 65,000 refugees — a 650 percent increase — and the nation has already absorbed more than 11,900 refugees, so government plans also appear to have grown as well. But where Trump errs here is in not explaining to his raucous rally crowds that the 550 percent increase does not mean that those 620,000 refugees — that he and his party are falsely saying Clinton’s plans will allow into the country — are all Syrian. They’re not.” [NBC News, 9/20/16]

Fact Check: Trump Claims He Was Endorsed by ICE

TRUMP’S LIE:

“The border – as you know, the border patrol agents, 16,500 plus I.C.E. last week endorsed me. First time they’ve ever endorsed a candidate..” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

PolitiFact rated Donald Trump’s claim that he was endorsed by ICE as “Mostly False.” “Trump said, ‘ICE just endorsed me.’ He made it sound like a federal agency had taken the remarkable step of formally supporting him. But ICE, which enforces federal immigration laws and employs more than 20,000 people, cannot do that. He has the support of employee groups, but that’s vastly different than what he said at the debate. We rate his claim Mostly False.” [PolitiFact, 10/10/16]

Politico: “No, Donald Trump was not endorsed by an entire government agency, Immigration and Customs Enforcement.” “‘I was endorsed by ICE’— Donald Trump No, Donald Trump was not endorsed by an entire government agency, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He was endorsed this week by a union of ICE employees, but that’s not the same. The National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council had never endorsed a candidate for president. Trump is right that their endorsement of him was a first, but a union is an independent body distinct from the agency where its members work.” [Politico, 9/26/16]

ICE spokeswoman: “Per the Hatch Act, federal agencies are prohibited from engaging in partisan political activity including the endorsement of any candidate for office.” “‘I was just endorsed by ICE,’ he boasted about two-thirds of the way through the presidential debate, referring to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. ‘They’ve never endorsed anybody before on immigration. I was just endorsed by ICE. I was just recently endorsed—16,500 Border Patrol agents.’ It would have been a historic endorsement. If it had actually happened. But it didn’t. ‘Per the Hatch Act, federal agencies are prohibited from engaging in partisan political activity including the endorsement of any candidate for office,’ said ICE spokeswoman Sarah Rodriguez. ‘U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has not and will not endorse any candidate for office.’ So Trump’s statement at the debate wasn’t just false; it was patently ludicrous. ICE is the federal agency responsible for enforcing America’s immigration laws (as its name would suggest). ICE is part of the Department of Homeland Security, and its agents oversee deportations and border enforcement.” [Daily Beast, 9/27/16]

Fact Check: Trump Lies, Says Hillary Clinton Supports Open Borders

TRUMP’S LIE:

“She wants to have open borders.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

PolitiFact rated the claim that “Hillary Clinton is for open borders” as “False.” ”Giuliani said, ‘Hillary Clinton is for open borders.’ Clinton supported a 2013 bill that would have invested billions in border security in addition to a path to citizenship. As a presidential candidate she has called for securing the border and targeting deportation to criminals and those who pose security threats. While her plan would make it easier for many undocumented immigrants to avoid deportation, that’s not the same as allowing a free-for-all at the border and ending enforcement. We rate this claim False.” [PolitiFact, 7/18/16]

PolitiFact said Donald Trump’s claim that Hillary Clinton’s immigration plan would “create totally open borders” was “a huge distortion” and gave the claim a rating of “False.” “Trump said Clinton’s immigration platform would ‘create totally open borders.’ This is a huge distortion of Clinton’s proposals. Clinton has praised work already done to secure the border, and she said she supported a 2013 bill that would have invested billions more in border security while creating a path to citizenship for some undocumented immigrants. Her plan calls for protecting the border and targeting deportation to criminals and security threats. Her plan would make it easier for many undocumented immigrants to avoid deportation, but that’s not the same as ending all enforcement. We rate this claim False.” [PolitiFact, 6/23/16]

PolitiFact: Hillary Clinton “has not called for open borders in this campaign.” “We don’t have more context about what Clinton meant by ‘open borders’ because she has not released the full speech. Her campaign has said she was talking about clean energy across the hemisphere. Trump argues that it directly applies to her current immigration policy. She has not called for open borders in this campaign. Clinton has proposed making it easier for the current undocumented population to gain a path to citizenship with conditions, but she has also supported beefed-up border security. The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False.” [PolitiFact, 10/12/16]

FactCheck.org called claims Hillary Clinton supports “open borders” wrong.”  “Giuliani and Rep. Michael McCaul, the chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, both wrongly claimed that Hillary Clinton supports ‘open borders.’ As we wrote when Trump himself made a similar claim, Clinton supported a Senate immigration bill that would have created a path to citizenship for those in the country illegally, but it also would have included large investments in border security. […] On her campaign website, Clinton says she would ‘focus resources on detaining and deporting those individuals who pose a violent threat to public safety.’ But the site also states that she will ‘uphold the rule of law’ and ‘protect our borders and national security.’ […] At a campaign stop in November, Clinton was even more explicit. ‘We need to secure our borders, I’m for it, I voted for it, I believe in it, and we also need to deal with the families, the workers who are here, who have made contributions, and their children,’ Clinton said in New Hampshire in November. ‘We can do more to secure our border and we should do more to deal with the 11 or 12 million people who are here, get them out of the shadows.’ That’s far short of advocating for open borders.”  [FactCheck.org, 7/19/16]

Associated Press: “It’s not true that Clinton’s plan would create open borders.” “THE FACTS: It’s not true that Clinton’s plan would create open borders. Her plan does call for a pathway to citizenship that would allow people currently in the country illegally to stay, but only after going through a series of steps to become a citizen. On enforcement, Clinton has called for focusing on ‘detaining and deporting those individuals who pose a violent threat to public safety,’ but not ending enforcement outright.” [Associated Press, 6/22/16]

Hillary Clinton: “We need to secure our borders….We can do more to secure our border, and we should do more to deal with the 11 or 12 million people who are here, get them out of the shadows.” ”During this campaign, Clinton has called for addressing immigration laws including a path to citizenship within her first 100 days. But she has also called for protecting borders and deporting criminals or those who pose threats. ‘We need to secure our borders. I’m for it, I voted for it, I believe in it, and we also need to deal with the families, the workers who are here, who have made contributions, and their children,’ she said in November. ‘We can do more to secure our border, and we should do more to deal with the 11 or 12 million people who are here, get them out of the shadows.’ This is pretty consistent with her view as a New York senator and secretary of state.” [PolitiFact, 7/18/16]

Fact Check: Trump Falsely Claims Hillary Clinton Will Effectively Abolish The Second Amendment

TRUMP’S LIE:

“We need a Supreme Court that, in my opinion, is going to uphold the Second Amendment and all amendments, but the Second Amendment, which is under absolute siege. I believe if my opponent should win this race, which I truly don’t think will happen, we will have a Second Amendment which will be a very, very small replica of what it is right now.” [Third Presidential Debate, 10/19/16]

THE TRUTH:

PolitiFact rated Donald Trump’s claim that Hillary Clinton “wants to essentially abolish the Second Amendment” as “False.” “Trump said, ‘My opponent wants to essentially abolish the Second Amendment.’ The addition of the word essentially doesn’t change the accuracy of this claim. We found no evidence of Clinton ever saying verbatim or suggesting explicitly she wants to abolish the Second Amendment. The bulk of her comments suggest the opposite: She wants to enact stricter gun control, but has no objection to responsible gun ownership. Gun advocates say Trump’s claim is backed up by Clinton’s openness to a gun buyback program and her disagreement with a Supreme Court decision on the Second Amendment. But whether or not these cherry-picked comments actually reveal Clinton’s intentions is a matter of interpretation. We rate Trump’s claim False.” [PolitiFact, 7/21/16]

New York Times: “The notion that [Hillary Clinton] would nominate judges who would somehow overrule the Second Amendment is a Republican talking point that is not based on statements or past actions by Mrs. Clinton.” “Mrs. Clinton has not said whom she would appoint, but the notion that she would nominate judges who would somehow overrule the Second Amendment is a Republican talking point that is not based on statements or past actions by Mrs. Clinton. She does favor new gun control rules, but she has said she would seek them through legislation or executive action.” [New York Times, 6/22/16]

Hillary Clinton: “I respect the 2nd Amendment.” ‘“I respect the 2nd Amendment. I respect the rights of lawful gun owners to own guns, to use their guns,’ she said. ‘But I also believe that most lawful gun owners whom I have spoken with for many years across our country also want to be sure that we keep those guns out of the wrong hands. And as president, I will work to try to bridge this divide, which I think has been polarizing and, frankly, doesn’t reflect the common sense of the American people.’” [Washington Post, 8/27/15]