I have to laugh at the folks who think we are no longer fact checking Biden. For the record, in the past week we have awarded 4 Pinocchios to Biden --> washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…
and also a timeline on what Biden said vis a vis xenophobia and travel bans, which was an issue readers asked about --> washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…
But it's also true that a) months would go by when the Trump WH never responded to fact-checking questions (it got a bit better at the end b) I never saw a Trump COS retweet a fact-checking article saying that being accurate matters.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We welcome all suggestions for fact checks. Some of our fans on the right (we see you @redsteeze@FDRLST) have been urging fact checks of “Biden lies” and so we thought we’d take an opportunity to explains what we think makes for a good fact check….
The best fact checks are pinned on a number, uttered by a politician. We then use that number to dig into policy issues. The last president was rather loquacious, speaking or tweeting without any prior fact checking, and much of it was not worth detailed fact checking….
We rarely fact check statements by PR people like Press Secretaries. We only did that once or twice during Trump and Obama. We have a high bar for such statements because we prefer to pin the Pinocchios on a policy-maker and hold her or her accountable for their words….
In the wake of the Jan. 6 electoral college count in Congress, I read "Centennial Crisis: The Disputed Election of 1876," by the late chief justice William Rehnquist. A terrific, insightful history. I was curious because ... amazon.com/gp/product/037…
...Ted Cruz offered a 1876 commission as a possible compromise. And he was a Rehnquist clerk. But if you read this book, you see how crazy and cynical this proposal was. Is it possible Cruz never read this book? Or he did and just decided to ignore its lessons? ....
Moreover, Rehnquist makes clear that the vice president has literally no role but to announce the results for the individual states. So, again, the lie that Pence could have in some way blocked Biden's election is again exposed, in a well-explained history....
In the light the debacle concerning the distribution of the vaccine, worth recalling that for months Trump falsely said the military was going to distribute it. Here's an example from an Oct. 18 campaign rally: "Under my leadership, we are delivering a safe vaccine..." 1/2
"...we're all set to deliver it. We have the military ready to deliver it. It's going to be incredible. We have a General, that's what he does. He delivers soldiers and delivers everything. This is easy for them. It'll be delivered very, very rapidly." 2/2
and this during the 2nd debate with Biden: "We have our generals lined up. One in particular that's the head of logistics and this is a very easy distribution for him. He's ready to go as soon as we have the vaccine and we expect to have 100 million vials."
Is the Electoral College sustainable when Trump fights to overturn the results in a handful of states, in a vain hope to win, even though he lost the popular vote by more than 5 million votes? Bush in 2000, by contrast, only barely lost the popular vote. Moreover....
What if John Kerry challenged Bush in handful of states? Ford narrowly lost NY and would have beaten Carter if he had won. Nixon v. Kennedy was also close. But in each case, the loser accepted the result, quickly, and the country moved on.....
The system only works when all sides accept the result under the rules previously agreed to. Trump's refusal to accept the reality of his loss, despite losing by substantial margins in key states, underscores how undemocratic the Electoral College can be.
In the annals of tacky presidential campaign ads, Trump running an ad that touts he was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize ranks up there. Hundreds of people get nominated every year. Stalin and Mussolini were nominated! It's meaningless. What matters is if you win.