2. You can't judge PolitiFact by your extreme immigration standards. You can't deflect what PolitiFact says about Trump by listing things about Clinton. That makes no sense.
3. The NYT is a world class newspaper. It may have a moderate liberal bias but most news sources are not moderate. What do you accept as a source?
4. Your previous post provided no evidence of the video Trump claimed to have seen.
5. I referred to Trump's claim that Obama didn't call the families of slain servicemen: “If you look at President Obama and other presidents, most of them didn’t make calls”. He later admitted this might be incorrect but it was what he was told.
7. Democrats are the opposition party so what has Trump done to work with them? He has made deals with either one party or the other but he hasn't been able to bring both together. It can be said the GOP are opposing Trump's desire for compromises.
My standards are in no way "extreme"..They reflect FACT. jobs taken from Americans, Dollars lost from US businesses and the economy, and numerous other HARMS to Americans.
Politifact - I have heard more idiotic things said by their people than I can count - just read the link for a prime example. (about their moronic statement about Syrain refugee "vetting" (of which there is no such thing)
HA HA HA. The NY Times is an idiot newspaper, and has been ever since the National Enquirer showed what fools the Times writers were, way back in 1979. Stupid Times thought they could insult the Enquirer and get away with it. Aren't you aware of the Oil Shortage story ? I guess CNN has that one well hidden too, huh ?
The NYT was trounced in a credibility dispute with the National Enquirer, over 35 years ago. Maybe you're not old enough to remember ? The tabloids came out on top with good credibility, while the Times sunk to near zero. And the Times has suffered numerous credibility bruises ever since.
For all the youngsters in here, who don't remember, here's the 1979 fiasco where the Enquirer kicked the Times' ass, and hard. Both the Enquirer and the Times made this quote >>
"The oil shortage is a hoax".
In the Times, the quote began with
"According to an unknown spokesman"....
In the Enquirer, the quote began with >>
"According to Senator Howard Metzenbaum (D-Ohio), head of the Senate Energy Committee"....
The Times, not realizing the Enquirer had already gone to print, with a fully sourced quote, attacked the Enquirer for its veracity and sourcing. They never fully recovered from this embarrassment, and have been exposed with one screw-up after another for decades. Here's an example of one of their later ones (December 2015), pertaining to the San Bernardino terrorists.
http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.c...rection-margaret-sullivan-public-editor/?_r=0