Click Here!Click Here!
Home / U.S / Fact-checking a initial Clinton-Trump presidential debate
Fact-checking a initial Clinton-Trump presidential debate

Fact-checking a initial Clinton-Trump presidential debate

Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democratic hopeful Hillary Clinton shake hands during a presidential discuss in New York. (Reuters/Mike Segar)

In a initial discuss between presidential contenders Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Trump regularly relied on heavy and fake contribution that have been debunked via a campaign. Clinton stretched a law on occasion, such as when she attempted to shake out of her 2012 regard of a Trans Pacific Partnership as a “gold standard.” But her misstatements paled in comparison to a list of Trump’s exaggerations and falsehoods.

Trump once again asserted that a 2008 Clinton debate was obliged for swelling a parable that President Obama was innate in Kenya, when that is false. He claimed that “thousands” of American jobs will leave a republic when Ford shifts small-car prolongation to Mexico, yet no one here will mislay their jobs. He also secretly claimed that he was opposite a Iraq War, when all accessible justification demonstrates that he upheld it until a rest of a republic began to spin opposite it in 2004. He also once again secretly pronounced he started his business with a “small loan” from his father.

Here’s a roundup of 23 of a many notable claims that were made. As is a practice, we do not endowment Pinocchios when we do a roundup of contribution in debates.

“So Ford is leaving. You see that, their tiny automobile multiplication leaving. Thousands of jobs withdrawal Michigan, withdrawal Ohio. They’re all leaving. And we can’t concede it to occur anymore.”

Ford is relocating a tiny automobile prolongation to Mexico, yet the enlargement will not impact U.S. workers.

The association has pronounced that while prolongation of Ford Focus models will change to Mexico, a plant in Michigan will build other, incomparable vehicles. Ford and many other automakers are anticipating Mexico some-more appealing for several reasons.

“The cost of labor is indeed incomparable in a United States, that creates producing labor-intensive tiny cars in Mexico some-more profitable. The United States also has advantages, yet — inexpensive electricity, gifted technicians and entrance to worldly materials and apparatus — mostly means building incomparable and some-more costly cars is cheaper in this country,” a co-worker Max Ehrenfreund wrote.

“The usually years that anybody’s ever seen were a integrate of years when he had to spin them over to state authorities when he was perplexing to get a casino license, and they showed he didn’t compensate any emperor income tax.”

Clinton exaggerates here. We know of 3 years in a 1970s when he did compensate emperor income taxes. But there were at slightest 5 years in a 1970s, 1980s and 1990s when Trump did not compensate any, or scarcely any, income taxes.

“Under my devise we will be shortening taxes tremendously.”

Trump’s taxation devise would lift emperor income taxes on some-more than half of America’s singular relatives and one-fifth of families with children, according to an investigate by Lily Batchelder, a New York University consultant on taxation process who before worked for Obama’s National Economic Council.

While a Trump debate called it “pure fiction,” a right-leaning Tax Foundation has pronounced a organisation was means to replicate her findings. Kyle Pomerleau, executive of emperor projects during a Tax Foundation, posted on Twitter that Batchelder’s formula “seem reasonable to me.”

“Independent experts have looked during what I’ve proposed, what Donald has proposed. And fundamentally they’ve pronounced this. … [Under Trump’s taxation plan] we would mislay 3.5 million jobs and maybe have another recession. My skeleton — and they’ve pronounced ‘okay, we can do this,’ and we intend to get it finished — we will have 10 million some-more jobs given we will be origination investments where we can grow a economy.”


Mark Zandi, a well-respected economist, did emanate a report observant that if Trump’s mercantile skeleton were entirely implemented, 3.5 million jobs would disappear, incomes would stagnate, debt would raze and batch prices would plummet. But a news also pronounced it was rarely doubtful that Trump would get many of his skeleton authorized by Congress, even if it is tranquil by Republicans, given so many of his positions are so a depart from Republican principles. Even so, a news pronounced a U.S. economy would expected humour underneath a Trump presidency.

His news also said that if Clinton were means to entirely exercise her mercantile plans, a economy would supplement an additional 3.2 million jobs during a initial 4 years of her presidency. Combined with expected pursuit origination underneath stream law, that adds adult to 10.4 million jobs. But a news also pronounced that Clinton would face poignant roadblocks to removing her mercantile devise by Congress, ensuing in distant fewer pursuit gains.

“I don’t mind releasing. I’m underneath a slight audit, and it’ll be released.”

Trump cites an Internal Revenue Service examination as his justification for not releasing his emperor income taxation returns, yet a examination does not demarcate from releasing a returns. Richard Nixon, who started a tradition of presidents and presidential possibilities releasing their returns, did so in a center of an audit.

Moreover, Trump has not expelled his taxation earnings from before 2009, that are no longer underneath audit, according to his attorney.

Presidential possibilities have no authorised requirement to recover their returns, yet there has prolonged been a tradition to do so for a consequence of transparency. Hillary Clinton has expelled 3 decades’ value of taxation returns.

While Trump has not expelled a returns, his prolonged story of lawsuit has given a open a clarity of what is in his returns. Tax information finished open so distant uncover Trump did not compensate any, or scarcely any, income taxes during slightest 5 times in a past 40 years.

“As distant as taxation return, we don’t learn that much” from taxation returns.

Trump is being misleading. Tax experts contend that taxation earnings yield discernment about a person’s finances in several pivotal areas.

First, a taxation lapse reveals a person’s annual income. A person’s net value is not disclosed, yet electorate would benefit an bargain of a person’s income flow. Second, electorate would know a sources of a person’s income, such as how many comes from certain businesses, speeches, dividends, collateral gains and so forth.

Third, a taxation lapse would divulge how many a chairman gives to charity. Mitt Romney gave roughly $2.3 million to gift in 2011, while Bill and Hillary Clinton gave $3 million to gift in 2014. We know these sum given of information in their taxation returns.

Trump claims he has given $102 million to gift in a past 5 years, yet a Washington Post examination found not a cent in tangible income — mostly usually giveaway rounds of golf, given divided by his courses for gift auctions and raffles. Trump’s taxation lapse would pure adult accurately how many he has unequivocally given to gift — indeed, possibly he has given anything during all.

Fourth, a taxation lapse would exhibit how assertive Trump has been on his taxes. There is no black-and-white proceed to taxes; there are many gray areas theme to interpretation, generally per deductions. Trump frequently suggests that he knows how to diversion a system, so electorate would learn possibly he takes a same proceed to his taxes.

Finally, a taxation earnings would divulge what commission of Trump’s income indeed goes to taxes.

TRUMP: “You called it a bullion customary of trade deals. You pronounced it’s a excellent understanding you’ve ever seen.”


TRUMP: “And afterwards we listened what we pronounced about it, and all of a remarkable we were opposite it.” 

CLINTON: “Well, Donald, we know we live in your possess reality, yet that is not a facts. The contribution are — we did contend we hoped it would be a good deal, yet when it was negotiated.”

Trump is right. Clinton is subtly adjusting her difference here when confronted with a doubt about her coherence on process positions.

But a fact is she never used a word “hoped.” Instead, she was some-more declarative, regulating a word “gold standard” when she was Secretary of State.

“This TPP sets a bullion customary in trade agreements to open free, transparent, satisfactory trade, a kind of sourroundings that has a order of law and a turn personification field,” she pronounced in Australia in 2012. “And when negotiated, this agreement will cover 40 percent of a world’s sum trade and build in clever protections for workers and a environment.”

“You’ve taken business bankruptcies 6 times.”
—Hillary Clinton

“On arise — 4 times — we used certain laws that are there.”
—Donald Trump

Clinton is correct.

Trump’s companies have filed for Chapter 11 failure protection, that means a association can sojourn in business while wiping divided many of a debts. The failure probity eventually approves a corporate bill and a devise to repay remaining debts; mostly shareholders mislay many of their equity.

Trump’s Taj Mahal non-stop in Apr 1990 in Atlantic City, yet 6 months later, “defaulted on seductiveness payments to bondholders as his finances went into a tailspin,” The Washington Post’s Robert O’Harrow found. In Jul 1991, Trump’s Taj Mahal filed for bankruptcy. He could not keep adult with debts on dual other Atlantic City casinos, and those dual properties announced failure in 1992. A fourth property, a Plaza Hotel in New York, announced failure in 1992 after aggregation debt.

PolitiFact uncovered dual some-more bankruptcies filed after 1992, totaling six. Trump Hotels and Casinos Resorts filed for failure again in 2004, after accruing about $1.8 billion in debt. Trump Entertainment Resorts also announced failure in 2009, after being strike tough during a 2008 recession.

Why a discrepancy? Perhaps this will give us an idea: Trump told Washington Post reporters that he counted a initial 3 bankruptcies as usually one.

“In Chicago, they’ve had thousands of shootings. … Stop and play worked unequivocally good … it brought a crime approach down [in New York City].”

Trump cherry-picks a boost in assault in Chicago, yet this is not demonstrative of altogether crime rates, that have been disappearing for years. Moreover, while Trump says stop-and-frisk policies should be enacted in Chicago as it was implemented in New York City, those policies have not been correlated with crime.

While aroused crime altogether has been disappearing for about dual decades, there was a pointy increase in a aroused crime rate in 2015. Homicides have continued to spike in vital cities this year, yet a rates sojourn distant next their arise in a late 1980s and early 1990s. Law coercion officials, including a FBI, have uttered concerns about a uptick in crime in 2015.

Criminal probity experts advise opposite comparing crime trends from brief durations of time, such as month over month or year over year. An annual trend can uncover a arena of where a trend competence be headed, yet still does not give a full picture. Many rapist probity experts contend crime trends are dynamic over during slightest 5 years, preferably 10 or 20 years, of data.

Trump praises stop-and-frisk policies underneath former New York City mayor Rudolph Giuliani. But it’s debatable possibly a stop-and-frisk policies had such a approach impact on crime, as Trump suggests. Crime is influenced by many factors, and New York’s decrease in crime mirrored a decrease in many other vital cities during a time. Moreover, crime was disappearing for 4 years before Giuliani took office, and it continued to decrease for 14 years after he left.

We awarded Three Pinocchios to Trump’s explain attributing stop-and-frisk policies to a decrease in crime.

Trump also claimed that “murders are up” in New York. That is incorrect. Homicides in New York are down so distant this year from a same prove final year, according to a New York Police Department. But homicides did see an uptick in New York City in 2015, identical to trends in countless other cities.

“If you’re too dangerous to fly, we are too dangerous to buy a gun.”

Democrats, including Clinton, frequently prove out that people on a militant watch list can squeeze a gun. But a offer that Democrats have finished in Congress wouldn’t anathema such purchases automatically. We have awarded Two Pinocchios to this explain for miss of context.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has introduced legislation to give management to a profession ubiquitous to confirm possibly or not a suspected militant could buy a gun. Anyone who was subjected to a emperor terrorism examination within 5 years of a attempted gun squeeze would be flagged in a background-check system, and a Justice Department would be means to examination those cases.

The supervision uses a “reasonable suspicion” customary to commission and embody someone in a Terrorist Watchlist, that includes a “no-fly list.” Belonging to a militant organization, or being listed on one of a watch lists, does not automatically stop someone from shopping a gun. There has to be another cause that disqualifies a chairman from shopping a gun underneath emperor or state law, such as a transgression self-assurance or bootleg immigration status.

“He indeed advocated for a actions we took in Libya and urged that Gaddafi be taken out, after indeed doing some business with him one time.”

Clinton is right that Trump emphatically urged a United States to mislay Libyan tyrant Moammar Gaddafi  from power.

Here’s Trump, in Feb 2011, propelling an involvement on his video blog. “I can’t trust what a republic is doing,” Trump said. “Qaddafi in Libya is murdering thousands of people, nobody knows how bad it is, and we’re sitting around we have soldiers all have a Middle East, and we’re not bringing them in to stop this terrible destruction and that’s what it is: It’s a carnage.”

Trump added: “Now we should go in, we should stop this guy, that would be unequivocally easy and unequivocally quick. We could do it surgically, stop him from doing it, and save these lives. This is positively nuts. We don’t wish to get concerned and you’re gonna finish adult with something like you’ve never seen before. …We have go in to save these lives; these people are being slaughtered like animals. It’s terrible what’s going on; it has to be stopped. We should do on a charitable basis, immediately go into Libya, hit this man out unequivocally quickly, unequivocally surgically, unequivocally effectively, and save a lives.”

“I did not support a fight in Iraq.”

This is usually totally false.

We have found no justification of his early antithesis to a invasion. Trump voiced lukewarm support a initial time he was asked about it on Sept. 11, 2002, and was not clearly opposite it until he was quoted in a Aug 2004 Esquire cover story patrician “Donald Trump: How I’d Run a Country (Better).”

But by a center of 2004, many Americans had incited opposite a war, origination Trump’s position not quite unique. In light of Trump’s steady fake claim, Esquire has combined an editor’s note to a Aug 2004 story, saying, “The Iraq War began in Mar 2003, some-more than a year before this story ran, so nullifying Trump’s timeline.”

We have awarded this explain Four Pinocchios, compiled a timeline of all of Trump’s comments before to a advance in Mar 2003, and even a video documenting how this is a fraudulent claim.

Trump pronounced he had “numerous conversations with Sean Hannity” before to a invasion, expressing his antithesis to a war. These seem to be private conversations. Hannity told Erik Wemple Blog that Trump “would watch a uncover and call after and we argued a lot about” a war. We should note that Hannity is one of Trump’s biggest boosters and has never asserted that Trump finished these private claims to him until recently, even yet this has been a consistent source of debate during Trump’s campaign. Hannity has also not offering any justification to behind adult his explain that he and Trump had such conversations during a time.

Clinton: “You know, we finished a mistake regulating a private email.”

Trump: “That’s for sure.”

Clinton: “And if we had to do it over again, we would, obviously, do it differently. But I’m not going to make any excuses. It was a mistake, and we take shortcoming for that.”

Lester Holt: “Mr. Trump?”

Trump: “That was some-more than a mistake. That was finished purposely. OK? That was not a mistake.”

Regarding Clinton’s statement, a pivotal emanate with a email debate was that Clinton had a private server not usually a private email and she never used her designated State Department email account, that would have kept annals of emails theme to requests underneath a Freedom of Information Act.

The correctness of Trump’s explain depends on possibly he is referring to her preference to use a private server, or if he is suggesting that Clinton purposefully dictated to desecrate personal information. On a former point, yes, Clinton chose on purpose to use a private email server. On a latter, a FBI would disagree.

FBI Director James B. Comey has pronounced Clinton was “extremely careless” in doing personal information by her private server. Our colleagues Matt Zapotosky and Rosalind Helderman noted: “But Comey also has pronounced that investigators found quite lacking any observant on Clinton or her staff’s partial to desecrate personal information, and that would criticise any probable rapist box opposite them.”

Click here for a round-up of 14 fact-checks about a Clinton email controversy.

“In addition, we was usually permitted by ICE. They’ve never permitted anybody before on immigration. we was usually permitted by ICE.”

How can a emperor agency, a Immigration and Customs Enforcement, validate a candidate? Trump is indeed referring to a National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council, that is a kinship representing ICE officers. In a matter released by a campaign, National ICE Council President Chris Crane pronounced it was a union’s first-ever endorsement.

“We have a trade necessity with all of a countries that we do business with, of roughly $800 billion a year.”

Trump is fundamentally right. The trade necessity in 2015 was $762 billion, according to a Census Bureau.

“You even during one time suggested that we would try to negotiate down a inhabitant debt of a United States.”

“Wrong. Wrong.”

Clinton is correct. Trump in May caused a stir when he suggested a United States should steal some-more and renegotiate new terms later. “I would borrow, meaningful that if a economy crashed, we could make a deal,” Trump pronounced on CNBC. The comments caused angst in a financial markets, as a U.S. Treasury bonds are deliberate a world’s safest investment precisely given a United States is during low risk of default. Renegotiating a terms would be seen as a form of default.

Trump after walked divided from his comments, claiming he had been misquoted.

“Sidney Blumenthal works for a debate and unequivocally tighten crony of Secretary Clinton. And her debate manager, Patti Doyle, went to — during a campaign, her debate opposite President Obama, fought unequivocally hard. … Patti Solis Doyle was on Wolf Blitzer observant that this happened. Blumenthal sent McClatchy, rarely reputable contributor during McClatchy, to Kenya to find out about it. They were dire it unequivocally hard. She unsuccessful to get a birth certificate.”

To support the debunked notion that Clinton’s debate originated “birther” rumors during a 2008 presidential campaign, Trump forked to these dual examples. But they don’t supplement adult to many of anything.

James Asher, former D.C. business arch of McClatchy, has pronounced that longtime Clinton fan Sidney Blumenthal “strongly urged” him to “investigate a accurate place of President Obama’s birth, that he suggested was in Kenya.” McClatchy reserved a contributor to go to Kenya, and a contributor found a explain was false, Asher said. (We reached out to Asher several times yet did not accept a response.)

Blumenthal, disappearing to elaborate further, pronounced in a matter to The Fact Checker: “This is false. Period. Donald Trump can't confuse from a fact that he is a one who embraced and promoted a birther lie, and bears a shortcoming for it.”

Solis Doyle did contend in a new CNN speak that in Dec 2007, a proffer coordinator in Iowa forwarded an email perpetuating a birther conspiracy. Clinton “made a preference immediately to let that chairman go,” Solis Doyle pronounced in a interview.

As in a instance with a Iowa proffer coordinator, a debate denounced removed instances of Clinton’s staffers doubt possibly Obama was Muslim. We found that there’s no justification that she or her debate were “pressing it unequivocally hard” yet some of her supporters did continue a claims in a sour 2008 primary debate opposite Obama.

“As multiple, eccentric fact checkers have endorsed in a years since, conjunction a 2008 debate nor a claimant ever questioned a President’s citizenship or birth certificate. Period,” pronounced Clinton debate orator Josh Schwerin.

“The 28 countries of NATO, many of them aren’t profitable their satisfactory share. Number dual — and that bothers me, given we should be seeking — we’re fortifying them, and they should during slightest be profitable us what they’re ostensible to be profitable by covenant and contract. we review on a front page of a Wall Street Journal that NATO is opening adult a vital apprehension division. And we consider that’s great. And we consider we should get — given we compensate approximately 73 percent of a cost of NATO. It’s a lot of income to strengthen other people. But I’m all for NATO. But we pronounced they have to concentration on terror, also. And they’re going to do that. And that was — trust me — I’m certain I’m not going to get credit for it — yet that was mostly given of what we was observant and my critique of NATO.”

Trumps mixes adult a lot of things here.

The United States pays about 22 percent of a common-fund bill for a North American Treaty Organization. But a volume of a U.S. invulnerability expenditures effectively represents 73 percent of a invulnerability spending of a Alliance as a whole. But that does not meant that a United States pays 73 percent of a costs of using NATO.

The figure reflects a fact that United States, as a universe power, projects a competence opposite a globe. Experts contend it is all yet unfit to calculate how many of altogether U.S. invulnerability spending is clinging exclusively for NATO, yet there is tiny brawl that many members are not assembly their joining to have invulnerability expenditures should volume to 2 percent of any country’s sum domestic product.

As for Trump patting himself on a behind for spurring NATO to concentration on terror, he’s teasing himself. The devise was in a works prolonged before Trump starting observant NATO was obsolete.

“Violent crime is one-half of what it was in 1991. Property crime is down 40 percent. We usually don’t wish to see it climb behind up. We’ve had 25 years of unequivocally good cooperation.”

This information checks out, according to investigate by a Brennan Center for Justice. Nationally, a aroused crime rate has depressed by 51 percent given 1991, and skill crime has depressed by 43 percent.

“President Obama and Secretary Clinton combined a opening a approach they got out of Iraq, given they got out — what, they shouldn’t have been in, yet once they got in, a approach they got out was a disaster. And ISIS was formed. … But they wouldn’t have even been shaped if they left some infantry behind, like 10,000 or maybe something some-more than that. And afterwards we wouldn’t have had them.”

As Clinton remarkable in her response, a terms of depart from Iraq were creatively set by a George W. Bush administration. The Bush administration sealed a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with Iraq in 2008 that determined a deadline for a withdrawal of all U.S. army from Iraq by Dec. 31, 2011.

Clinton, as Secretary of State, had pushed for some infantry to sojourn in Iraq yet a administration was not means to strech an agreement and so U.S. infantry left Iraq. Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, in his memoir, pinned a censure on Obama: “To my frustration, a White House concurrent a negotiations yet never unequivocally led them. Officials there seemed calm to validate an agreement if State and Defense could strech one, yet though a President’s active advocacy, [Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri] al-Maliki was authorised to trip away.”

To a immeasurable extent, a Islamic State of currently is simply an tusk of al-Qaeda of Iraq, that emerged after a 2003 advance of Iraq.

At best, one could disagree that actions that Obama unsuccessful to take (over Clinton’s opposition) helped minister to a expansion of ISIS, also famous as a Islamic State. Islamic State positively has turn an critical actor in a Middle East, holding advantage of a polite fight in Syria and a irregularity in a Iraqi supervision to explain immeasurable areas of both countries. In a past integrate of years, a group’s activities have collected courtesy in a United States; it was usually in 2014 that President Obama dismissed Islamic State as a “JV team.”

Clinton was Secretary of State when Obama finished decisions that could be seen as contributing to a arise of a Islamic States, yet ironically she was one of a loudest army for gripping a residual force in Iraq and for inserted in Syria, such as defending a rebels. Both stairs advocated by Clinton competence have thwarted a presentation of a apprehension group. Moreover, Clinton was not Secretary of State when Obama all yet abandoned a Islamic State as it changed behind into Iraq in late 2013.

But — and here’s a irony Trump criticizes Obama for a process position he had advocated be taken even earlier than 2011. “I would announce that we have been winning in Iraq and all a infantry are entrance home and let those people have their polite war,” Trump told CNBC in 2006. “I usually said, announce victory, get them home…. Let’s say, ‘Victory, Tremendous.’ Have a large thing in a streets. Then get out genuine quick before we get shot. Let’s get home.”

“We have gangs roaming a street. And in many cases, they’re illegally here, bootleg immigrants. And they have guns. And they fire people. And we have to be unequivocally strong. And we have to be unequivocally vigilant.”

Indeed, there are victims of carnage by undocumented immigrants, including by those in gangs. But there are dual critical information points to remember when Trump talks about this.

First, a immeasurable infancy of unapproved immigrants do not fit Trump’s outline of aggravated felons, whose crimes embody murder. U.S. Sentencing Commission information shows homicides are a tiny commission of a crimes committed by noncitizens, possibly they are in a United States illegally or not.

Second, bootleg immigration flows opposite a Southern limit in mercantile 2015 were during a lowest levels given 1972, solely for in 2011. The apprehensions in mercantile 2016 so distant have exceeded mercantile 2015, yet still prove an altogether decline.

“I pronounced it to we once, had we taken a oil — and we should have taken a oil — ISIS would not have been means to form either, given a oil was their primary source of income. And now they have a oil all over a place, including a oil — a lot of a oil in Libya, that was another one of her disasters.”

ISIS does not control oil in Libya. Trump has been called out before on this point, yet he keeps observant this fake claim.

As for gripping a oil in Iraq, This is nonsensical. The Bush administration invested a lot of tactful bid in assuring Middle Eastern allies that a United States was not invading given of Iraq’s oil fields. Moreover, oil income was essential to ensuring a functioning Iraqi state — that is because insurgents mostly targeted a oil zone in Iraq.

In any event, seizing a oil of a emperor republic after invading it would be deliberate a “grave breach” of a Geneva Conventions, one of a cornerstones of general law, as good as other general agreements. Maybe Trump’s staff should arrange a educational on general law.

Our co-worker Steven Mufson looked deeply during whether, general law aside, such a offer was even feasible. One consultant pronounced it was “beyond goofy.”

“You know, your debate manager pronounced that we built a lot of businesses on a backs of tiny guys.

Clinton is referring to this matter by Kellyanne Conway, behind when she was ancillary Trump opposition Ted Cruz, a Texas senator.  Conway, who now defends Trump with fervor, told CNN on Mar 8: “For Trump, a debates are fought with peril. The Trump victims. The reason a messaging has gotten improved is they are starting to speak about victims of Trump University, victims of Trump in Atlantic City. Before it was regressive apostasies, and now it is, we built your business on a backs of a tiny guy.”



(About a rating scale)


Send us contribution to check by stuffing out this form

Check out a guide to all Trump and Clinton fact checks

Sign adult for The Fact Checker weekly newsletter


About admin

Scroll To Top