Friday, March 25, 2016

What does it mean to be Presidential?

Today, I had a conversation on my Tighty White Press Facebook Page about what it means to be Presidential.  I would recommend for everyone to visit the article I posted there about Cruz's wife being attacked by Donald Trump and read the discussion in the comments.

I wrapped up the conversation after the other participant ended the dialogue.  Here's what I wrote:

"It would appear that you have stopped engaging the conversation about how unpresidential Donald Trump is. Let me wrap this up then.
First, you stated that Trump and Cruz were both deplorable in the way they behaved. I presented evidence that shows we have had Presidents in the past not acting as Presidential to your standards. We also talked about how Marco Rubio lured Donald Trump into the hand/penis bait comment and you agreed both were immature to do that as well.
When I asked you to define what it means to you to be "Presidential", you did not provide the criteria. I stated that no one currently in this election held to the standard of your criteria based on what I could surmise. You then mentioned Kasich and Sanders both acted with civility.
In a previous conversation with you on a friend's page, you suggested Donald Trump was not like Ronald Reagan and alluded to the fact that Ronald Reagan was the mark of a Presidential standard.
I provided links to 4 videos showing how Ronald Reagon told protesters to "Shut up" (not acting with civility) and then 2 videos of Kasich getting walked over by protesters (showing civility) and Sanders having his mic and podium taken over by protesters (showing civility). Then I stated that a President's first priority was to LEAD. How can a man/woman lead a country if they can't even control their own rallies? You ignored the Reagan comparisons to both Kasich and Sanders.
You brought up Paul Ryan who isn't even in the race! (Of course, I do believe the GOP is gunning for a brokered convention to nominate him, but that's a different subject altogether).
So we agree that Cruz, Rubio and Trump have been crass and many people have the opinion that all acted immaturely in some way. We also agreed that Clinton's behavior in the past wasn't Presidential either. 
So that leaves us looking at Kasich and Sanders who both allowed protesters to walk over them during their own rallies.
As I stated when I posted this article, I was expressing a distaste for the rhetoric and hyperbole that somehow made Cruz a victim in all of this. Cruz is no victim, but he is pandering for sympathy votes to try to win by making Trump be some kind of bully. And to a degree, it is my opinion that Trump can be very rude and brash, but as I've mentioned on my blog, my research thus far does not show Trump taunting anyone without provocation. I will continue to do research and if you find an example of this, please let me know.
As far as provocation goes, if a man were to come after my wife to get at me, I would declare his wife/spouse fair game for retaliation. I'm not talking violently. I understand the power of words and I would not hesitate to defend my family. That's what someone with morals would do if those words could cause harm. Cruz of all people should understand that given his wife's own mental issues. Society has a very negative perspective of people who suffer from mental illness. Cruz should have immediately come to Melania's defense at the very first deplorable use of that photo in that way. But he didn't. Could of, would of, should of. It didn't serve Cruz's political agenda at the time.
This has ben a dirty race. I for one am relieved to see the veil of hypocrisy removed so the public gets a good, hard look at the ugliness that is known as politics. Our politicians do not work for the voters, but the lobbyists, which is why I like Trump and Sanders who call attention to that. It is no accident that lobbyists spent $67 million dollars to try to shut Trump down. I would imagine that if Bernie was winning on his side, the lobbyists propaganda machine would also be in full swing against him too. Instead, they are using a different tactic on Bernie. They are appealing to his sense of fairness and civility. Bill Clinton violating the law in Massachusetts campaigning within 50 feet of a polling station, in Arizona, switching long-term registered Democrat voters to independent and denying them the right to cast a ballot, and so many more antics. They don't have to be so blatant with their attempts to bring Sanders down, he's already losing.
But Trump, well they have been gunning for him with everything and his numbers have gone up. Not because he's a racist or a misogynist as the media and establishment would have you to believe. No, People understand that their government has been taken over by special interests and lobbyists money. They can see that the system has thrown them overboard and the fake smiles and weak handshakes are tools that the establishment has used to disarm the people's feelings that something is wrong.
The people are essential recruiting the establishment's "bully" to stand up and fight for them. Why? Because he's proven that he can beat them at their own games."

I understand that there's a lot of commentary and opinion in the discussion at the end, but as you can see by the flow, I tried to keep the conversation to the facts.  The truth is, the particiant wanted to discuss political theory and philosophy.  I'm down with that.

In conclusion, I feel that I have not done enough fact checking for this blog yet to be fully effective.  I am working on it and I prefer to have more facts than commentary here.  I have other writing obligations I'm trying to fulfill, so please bear with me.


Thursday, March 24, 2016

The Burden of Proof

In the court of law, the burden of proof falls on the plaintiff, not the defendant.  This rule doesn't seem to apply in the court of public opinion in places like social media. People make outlandish claims expecting the defendants to prove them wrong.

There needs to be an understanding as to why this is true. When you look at people making false claims, they fall into two categories: People who are pushing an agenda and people who are misinformed.  It is imperative that we understand the difference.

The Ideologist

Someone who is beholden to an ideology doesn't care about facts. They will pick and choose which facts or opinions that validate their perspectives. They are not capable, critical thinkers and in most cases, they only seek to incite hostilities if they cannot sway people to their side of the issue.

It is easy to identify ideologists when you ask them for evidence to support their claims.  Here are the 3 most common reactions from a propaganda ideologist:

  1. A Waste of Time
    1. This type of propagandist chooses to make a false claim based on feelings without providing evidence or they will utilize evidence taken out of context. 
    2. When asked to provide proof of their claim, they will feign indifference and act like they either don't care enough to bother or claim that there's so much evidence that proves them right they don't have time to present every single piece.
  2. Fact Bombardment
    1. This type of propagandist is highly aggressive and will seek to suppress questions about their ideology by rapidly firing off a multitude of facts or present multiple new false claims in an attempt to suppress the presentation of facts.
    2. This falls under the needle in the haystack scenario where the facts that invalidate the false accusers claims get buried quickly.
  3. Name Calling
    1. Some propagandists will take offense immediately upon being questioned or asked for evidence. They will immediately make personal attacks against the inquirer to invalidate them before the evidence disarms their false claim.
    2. Other propagandists will use fact bombardment to suppress the question and if an inquirer provides facts that refute their claim, they will make a new false claim. When the inquirer attempts to bring them back to the false claim at hand, they will instigate personal attacks against the inquirer.
    3. Most commonly attacks are against the inquirer's intelligence or lack of knowledge.
  4. I'm the Victim
    1. As a final resort, the person making a false claim will react as if they are the one under attack.
    2. They are beholden to an ideology and firmly believe that everyone who disagrees with them ar wrong.  And not just wrong about one specific point, but to every viewpoint, the opposing opinion may hold.  This is why when you see people who disagree with one specific thing, suddenly the false claim maker disagrees with absolutely everything the opposing opinion has to say even if it isn't related to the original disagreement.
In most cases, you will not be able to present compelling evidence to an ideologist who is beholden to a preconceived notion.

The Misinformed

The second type of person that may make a false claim is someone who misunderstands. They have either not bothered to research beyond the surface claims they have been exposed to, such as the mainstream media or social media, or they do not consider the subject matter to be a high priority in their lives.

Present a pleasant tone and do not belittle the misinformed for not having the correct information. 

How to Present Facts

  1. Remain emotionally neutral. If you see a claim that upsets you, take a moment to breathe and relax.
  2. In a polite manner, inform a person who is making a false claim that they have not presented evidence to validate their claim.  If there is evidence in their initial claim, ask them to source their information.
  3. Do not present facts until they have either provided evidence or sourced the evidence.
  4. If bombarded with evidence, ask them to present the first piece of evidence and reciprocate with a fact.  This will initiate a dialogue.
  5. If a person stating a claim begins name calling or claims to be the victim, advise them that it was not your intent. Inform them they have a right to their opinions and beliefs, but if they want to make a claim about someone else, then the decent thing to do would be to support the claim with evidence.
  6. Do not present evidence that isn't sourced.
  7. If you do not have the time or you need to research evidence presented to support a false claim, do not rush. Explain that the facts matter to you and that you do not want to rush.  Set a reasonable time frame of 24 to 48 hours if you need.
  8. If you do not have enough time to present the full evidence within the timeframe, present what evidence you have and inform them you will continue to do more research.
  9. Be objective and willing to change your opinion based on the information you discover.  If the facts are in context and are true, willfully admit the error in your opinion.  You can't win every battle.  Sometimes, it takes time for all the facts of a situation to come to the surface.
  10. When breaking news generates false claims, I would advise withholding your opinion until the evidence come in.  Do not immediately turn to the breaking news for your evidence unless there is a history readily available about the issue.
  11. Finally, at any time you realize the person presenting the false claim has no interest in the fact, simply thank them for their participation in the discussion and let them know that you have no interest in changing their opinion. Your only goal was to set the record straight by presenting the facts.
In the end, you should not set out to change people's opinions to yours.  We all have a right to our own opinions.  We are also inclined to offer our opinions without evidence.  If asked for evidence, simply do the work.  This would be a good indication that you may not be fully informed if you cannot present the evidence.

People have deeply held beliefs.  They have been through many different experiences in their lives and those opinions were not formed by one or two events. People who make false claims are not bad people, not even the ideological ones.  They BELIEVE in what they are saying.  Most have good intentions.

You can never offer a compelling argument to someone you antagonize or someone you have insulted. Please be respectful and objective. Work hard and be honest so you can gather the trust of the opposing opinion holders.  Who knows?  You might be the one who doesn't have all the facts.  Be prepared to accept that.

This is by no means a fully detailed write up on how to address false claims.  Do not take on the burden of proof unless you are the person making a claim. Be sure to provide evidence that is sourced and if you need time to collect the evidence, give the facts the time and respect they deserve.

As you can see, when I present facts in a single article, I do research the information extensively. This is not a bombardment of facts. All facts relate to the existing claim and are presented in a clear, time linear fashion.  If additional information about the sources is required to understand the perspectives of the source, I strive to include the information at the end of the articles.


Tuesday, March 22, 2016

Donald Trump Attacks Carly Fiorina

The claim insists that Donald Trump attacked Carly Fiorina because she was a woman and this proves his mysognistic tendancies.

“Look at that face!” said of former Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina. “Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?!"

The quote first appeared in Rolling Stone magazine on September 9, 2015 and in an article titled "Trump Seriously: On the Trail with the GOP's Tough Guy" written by Paul Solotaroff. The article can be found here:

In the article, the author starts off by describing his time riding on Trump One to a Trump rally Hampton High School in Hampton, New Hampshire. It took me awhile to find out that the event was held on August 14, 2015 at Winnacunnet High School.

The article jumps around a lot. First on the plane with Trump, then a few weeks before this event to discuss meeting with Trump in New York, then it jumps back to the rally held at Winnacunnet High School, and finally after the rally.

In the article, Solotaroff writes:

Trump takes the stage to a standing ovation. His speech goes the way it always goes. "They had 24 million people [at the debate the other night]. . . . Do you think they were there for . . . Rand Paul? Rand, I've had you up to here!" He touches his armpit, zinging the vertically challenged Paul: "He didn't like it when I said you have to pass an IQ test to get up on the stage." Then he pivoted to Carly Fiorina. "Carly was a little nasty to me — be careful, Carly! Be careful! But I can't say anything to her because she's a woman. . . . I promised that I wouldn't say that she ran Hewlett-Packard into the ground. I said I wouldn't say it! That her stock value tanked. That she laid off tens of thousands of people, and she got viciously fired. I said I will not say that. And that she then went out and ran against Barbara Boxer, and . . . lost in a landslide. And I said, 'I. Will. Not. Say. That!' "

But when I listen to the speech, I noticed a few things.  First, the comment about "passing an IQ test" was wrongfully contributed to refer to Rand Paul. The remarks regarding Carly Fiorina have been heavily redacted.  Here's a transcript that I made based on video taping of the event:

"And actually Carly was a little nasty to me — be careful, Carly [shakes outstretch hand side to side to indicate shakey ground]! Be careful. But I can't say anything to her because she's a woman and I don't want to be accused of being tough on women. [addresses the crowd] I can't do that, right? Women, am I allowed to fight back? [women in audience shout "yes"] Huh? Am I allowed? She's been a little nasty to me. I promised that I wouldn't say that she ran Hewlett-Packard into the ground. I said I wouldn't say it! That her stock value tanked. That she laid off tens of thousands of people, and she got viciously fired. I said I will not say that. And that she then went out and ran against Barbara Boxer for the United States Senate in California and it's a race that should have been won but she lost it in a landslide. And I said, 'I. Will. Not. Say. That!' Ok? Alright? I will not say it."

The Hampton, New Hampshire rally video can be found here (the comments about the other GOP candidates begins at 29:29 mark and the comments about Fiorina begin at the 33:58 mark in the video):

Further down in the Rollingstone article, the author writes about what happened after this rally:

After the Hampton rally, Trump is so exultant he practically floats the 10 miles back to his plane. 
He parks himself at the dining table in the center of the big plane's cabin, turns on the massive flat-panel unit that is preset to Fox News and watches reports of the speech he's just given, while wolfing down a takeout dinner. Onscreen, it is wall-to-wall coverage of Trump, though none of it is mediated by Megyn Kelly, the network's golden girl and homegrown star. A week after the Republican debate, in which she'd taken on Trump and tried to gore him over his caddish remarks about women, she'd gone missing from the conversation, vanishing to her beach house till late August. In the sweet but too-brief battle between Trump and the network that followed his ugly dust-up with Kelly, Trump had emerged from it the walk-off winner after staring down Roger Ailes, the Fox News chief. During his four-day boycott of the station, he pumped up the ratings of its rival networks by appearing on their shows and savaging Fox, and escalated his all-out war on Kelly with the crack about her bloody "wherever." Ultimately, peace broke out, and Ailes brought him back on. Trump's return, on Sean Hannity's show, drove ratings back up, beating out the competition several times over. It devolved into a victory lap for Trump, but even in triumph, he couldn't keep the truce. In his office, Trump slipped me a printout of a story titled "How Roger Ailes Picked Trump, and Fox News' Audience, Over Megyn Kelly." "I don't start these fights, but I sure as hell win them," he told me. 
And that is Trump all over: He can't-stop-won't-stop whaling away at anyone who dares to bait him. The day after Kelly returned from exile, Trump trashed her afresh with snarks and retweets, refusing to give Kelly peace. This is the other thing he learned from his father, who taught his sons to "attack, attack, attack," says Blair, the biographer. "He's constantly on offense, picking massive fights, and it always results in polling spikes," says Matt Boyle, a correspondent for Breitbart News, the only other writer on Trump's plane. 
With his blue tie loosened and slung over his shoulder, Trump sits back to digest his meal and provide a running byplay to the news. Onscreen, they've cut away to a spot with Scott Walker, the creaky-robot governor of Wisconsin. Praised by the anchor for his "slow but steady" style, Walker is about to respond when Trump chimes in, "Yeah, he's slow, all right! That's what we got already: slowwww." His staffers at the conference table howl and hoot; their man, though, is just getting warm. When the anchor throws to Carly Fiorina for her reaction to Trump's momentum, Trump's expression sours in schoolboy disgust as the camera bores in on Fiorina. "Look at that face!" he cries. "Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?!" The laughter grows halting and faint behind him. "I mean, she's a woman, and I'm not s'posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?" 
So you see from the details of the article, Trump feels that he is being attacked by Megyn Kelly of Fox News and states, "I don't start these fights, but I sure as hell win them." This reliation style of insulting attacks does fall within Trump's code of "do not cast the first stone."

So what does this say about Carly Fiorina?  At what point did she attack Donald Trump that made him feel he needed to give her a warning on August 14, 2015 to be careful about throwing stones, the same day the Rolling Stone documented the "Look at that face!" comment?

For the answer, we have to go back to the infamous Fox News debate held on August, 6 2015. During the debate, Megyn Kelly asked Carly Fiorina a question:

Fox News Debate 8/6/15:

Megyn: "Let me ask you the same question as it is true of all of you on this stage and like it or not, there's a huge disparity between the poll numbers you have and the poll numbers that he [Donald Trump] has. Given also the fact that Ruddy Giuanni said he thought there may be some Reagan qualities to Donald Trump, so Carly Fiorina, is he [Donald Trump] getting the better of you?
Carly responded, "Well I don't know, I didn't get a call from Bill Clinton before I jump in the race, did any of you get a phone call from Bill Clinton? I didn't. Maybe it was because I didn't give money to the foundation or donated to his wife's senate campaign.  Here's the thing I would ask Donald Trump, in all seriousness, he is the party's front runner right now, and good for him. I think he's tapped into an anger that people feel. They're sick [pause] of politics as usual. You know, whatever your issue, your cause, the festering problem you hope would be resolved, the political class has failed you, that's just a fact and that's what Donald Trump taps into. I would also say this: Since he's changed him mind on amnesty, on healthcare and on abortion, I would just ask what are the principles by which he would govern?"

On August 7, 2015, Donald Trump accused Megyn Kelly of not being fair and balanced and accused her of going after him with questions about how Donald Trump has treated women like Rosie O'Donnell, and others as Donald Trump had admitted. Feeling Megyn Kelly cast the first stone, he told CNN:

“You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes. Blood coming out of her — wherever,” 

After the CNN comments aired, Carly Fiorna tweeted:

On August 12, 2015, two days before the rally and Rolling Stone quotes,  Carly Fiorina went on CBS to once again compare him to the Democrats and then accused Donald Trump of attacking women (comments start at 5:25 mark):

In this video, she is quoted as saying "Women of all kinds are horrified by Donald Trump's statements and that President's can't be so thin skinned." I have not be able to find the interview where this Fiorina quote came from, but once I do locate it, I will update this article with a link.

So looking over the evidence presented here thus far, I was not able to find a single Donald Trump insult attack before the Fox News Debate on August 6, 2016.  It does appear to me that Carly Fiorina did throw the first stone.

But I did discover a video posted by Carly Fiorina regarding Hillary Clinton from a Fox and Friends interview on July 8, 2015:

Question: "What did you think of Mrs. Clinton saying Republicans pretty much all coming from the same point of view that they are "hostile to hispanics"? 
Carly: "Well I think it's entirely predictable and I think it's vintage Clinton that she would equate not supporting a pathway to citizenship for those who have come here and stayed here illegally . I certainly do not and never have. She would equate that hostility to immigration, that's simply false. But of course it serves her political narrative which is to continue the Democrat playbook of identity politics - lump Americans into various identity groups, make them victims, pit one identity group against another. I think it was vintage Clinton in another way. Didn't accept accoutablity for nothing. She was not asked a single question about her state department time and she blamed the vast right wing conspiracy for everything."
The video can be found here:

Carly Fiorina clearly believed in July that dividing people based on how they identify was a move from the Democrat playbook and yet no one held her accountable when she tried to claim she was a "victim of misogyny" at the hands of Donald Trump.

In fact, she famously said at the CNN Debate on September 16, 2015

Finally, on September 20, 2015 with Fox News Sunday, she was enjoying the additional name recognition from the CNN Debate and the Donald Trump Feud:

In conclusion, Carly Fiorina violated her principles to divide people by political identity by starting a battle against Donald Trump.. She knew based on his history, he would retort her accusations with insults because he sees anyone who attacks him as fair game.  In my opinion based on the evidence presented here, Donald Trump did not attack Carly Fiorina because she is a woman.


Monday, March 21, 2016

Claims I am currently Fact Checking

Here is the current list of claims I'm fact checking as time and leads permit.
  1. “26,000 unreported sexual assults [sic] in the military — only 238 convictions. What did these geniuses expect when they put men & women together?"
  2. “He’s not a war hero,” said of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. “He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.”
  3. Here is a guy who insists Mexico is going to pay for a wall that will do nothing, because those that cross the border illegally use tunnels. 
  4. Do you believe Ronald Reagan would approve of the above quotes? Would he say the same thing? 
Please keep in mind that I'm one man with only so much free time on my hands. As I gather the facts, I will post them as quickly as I can.
In the meantime, if you have any claims that you would like to have me fact check, please comment your request on this post.


Did Donald Trump Loan His Campaign $250 Million?

On March 20, 2016, the Liberal America Facebook page posted a meme suggesting that Donald Trump was not self-funding his campaign.

The meme read:

"Claims to be self-funded. Borrows $250M for himself to be repaid by campaign contributors. Let that sink in."

The Liberal America Facebook Page can be found here:

So I did a search to verify the fact to see what he had borrowed from himself up to the date the meme was posted.  I found a USA Today article published on March 20, 2016 (same date of the meme) which stated:
"Donald Trump, the billionaire businessman, remains the biggest financial investor in Donald Trump, the front-running candidate for the GOP presidential nomination.
The real-estate magnate lent his presidential campaign another $6.85 million last month, bringing the total Trump-to-Trump loan amount to $24.38 million. Those investments have helped him prepare for the March primary battles and build a larger campaign staff than his remaining rivals in the GOP contest."

As far as having his campaign contributors pay back the loan, the article also says:

Trump’s total February receipts — a combination of the loans, donations from other people and the roughly $32,000 Trump gave directly to his campaign for services such as staff and rent — came to a little more than $9.2 million. That’s less than the nearly $12 million his rival Cruz raised last month.

I had heard reports that his donations from individuals since his campaign started were only about $7 million.  So I researched a little deeper to see if I could get a clearer picture of how much money was not from Donald Trump.

According to OpenSecrets, as of March 7, 2016, the Donald Trump campaign had only received a total of $7,497,985 from individual contributions both small and large. This amount is the total of all campaign contributions since Donald Trump entered the presidential race on June 16, 2015.

The USA article greatly exaggerates the claim that "Trump's total February receipts came to a little more than $9.2 million."

Trump has actually only received $7.49 million during the entire campaign run from June 2015 through March 2016 (over a 9 month period, not all in February 2016).

The OpenSecrets Donald Trump campaign data page can be found here:

In conclusion, the Liberal America meme claim is greatly exaggerated because according to USA Today, he hasn't even borrowed 10% of their $250 million claim.


Wednesday, March 16, 2016

Donald Trump Attack List

Donald Trump has a reputation of someone who likes to attack people publicly.  He claims to only attack others when they "cast the first stone."  I intend to fully investigate that claim.

I found a list of people Trump has attacked on Twitter (with links to the tweets used to compile the list).  I took a look at the 112 people mentioned and broke it down.

A quick glance shows that Trump favors to attack men.  Women only account for 25.89% of those Trump has targeted.

Interestingly, 55.35% of the attacks are directed at journalists and people in the news media.  Another 33 03% of the attacks are directed at current/former establishment politicians.  The question begs to differ:  Is this the reason for his success on the campaign or is it the source of his infamy?  I'll let my readers decide.

Here's a summary of the basic info I uncovered using the article:

  • 29 women
  • 83 men
  • 5 Celebrities
  • 6 Citizens
  • 2 Foreign
  • 37 Politicians
  • 62 News Media

The list from the NY Times can be found here:

This list is by no means complete. Over time, I will go through and investigate each claim made to determine who cast the first stone.  As I publish posts on these, I will come back to this list and create hyperlinks so it will be easy to navigate.

Competition Candidates:
Jeb Bush 
Ben Carson
Lincoln Chafee
Chris Christie
Hillary Clinton
Ted Cruz
*Carly Fiorina
Lindsey Graham
Bobby Jindal
John Kasich
Martin O'Malley
George Pataki
Rand Paul
Rick Perry
Marco Rubio
Bernie Sanders
Scott Walker

Politicians, Media and Other:
Elizabeth Beck
Glenn Beck
Joy Behar
Charles Blow
Brent Bozell
Frank Bruni
George W. Bush
George H.W. Bush
Carl Cameron
Alisyn Camerota
Ben Cardin
Graydon Carter
Amy Chozick
Bill Clinton
Anderson Cooper
S.E. Cupp
Sopan Deb
Erick Erickson
Major Garrett
Willie Geist
Whoopi Goldberg
Bernard Goldberg
Maggie Haberman
Nikki Haley
Mark Halperin
Mary Katharine Ham
John Harwood
Melinda Henneberger
Dan Henninger
Jeff Horwitz
Arianna Huffington
Brit Hume
Kasie Hunt
Harry Hurt III
Hallie Jackson
Samuel L. Jackson
Cheri Jacobus
Penn Jillette
Woody Johnson
Megyn Kelly
Charles Koch
Serge Kovaleski
Charles Krauthammer
Bill Kristol
Charles Lane
John Legere
Errol Louis
Rich Lowry
Frank Luntz
Ruth Marcus
Jonathan Martin
John McCain
Joe McQuaid
Angela Merkel
Ana Navarro
Michael Nutter
Tim O'Brien
Clare O'Connor
Lawrence O'Donnell
Barack Obama
John Oliver
Dana Perino
Steve Rattner
Tom Ridge
Cokie Roberts
John Roberts
Mitt Romney
Ronda Rousey
Karl Rove
Jennifer Rubin
Ben Sasse
Ben Schreckinger
Rick Scott
Molly Sims
Paul Singer
Tavis Smiley
Shep Smith
Stuart Stevens
Chris Stirewalt
John Sununu
Alwaleed bin Talal
Marc Thiessen
Chuck Todd
Katy Tur
Bob Vander Plaats
Frank VanderSloot
Paulina Vega
Nicolle Wallace
Marty Walsh
George Will
Juan Williams
Rick Wilson
Neil Young
Mort Zuckerman
Bill de Blasio

Please Note:  This is not an exhaustive list.  I will be updating it with more information as I find it.


Fact Checking Trump: Misogyny Quote #2

“All of the women on 'The Apprentice' flirted with me — consciously or unconsciously. That’s to be expected."

The earliest report I could find regarding this quote was from an article titled "Donald to Cuomo: Mario, You're Fired" which was published by The Daily News on March 24, 2004.  The article appears to be an entertainment news piece talking about Donald Trump's book, "Trump: How To Get Rich", released the day before on March 23, 2004, The article also includes celebrity news about the divorce of Michael Jackson's parents, titillating details about a romantic tryst between Brittany Spears and Colin Ferrell, as well as a mention about the opening to Johnny Depp's latest movie, "Secret Window".

The article states:

Apprentices aren't the only people in danger of getting fired by Donald Trump. Friends like Mario Cuomo are, too. The Donald dubs the ex-Gov.: "a total stiff, a lousy governor and a disloyal former friend" in "Trump: How to Get Rich," his new book. "Now, whenever I see Mario at a dinner, I refuse to acknowledge him, talk to him, or even look at him," he writes. "Mario's wife, Matilda, is a fine woman and was a terrific friend to my mother. It's not her fault that her husband is a loser.
" Initially, Trump was a major Cuomo supporter and "one of his largest campaign contributors.
" But after Cuomo was unseated by Gov. Pataki, his son, Andrew Cuomo, held a position with the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Trump's request to Mario for a related favor was denied. Neither Trump's book nor Cuomo would say what the request was. "Trump's accurate when he says I said no to the favor," the former governor tells us. "And he's dead right about Matilda being a fine woman.
" While Cuomo found his proposal resistible, Trump says his charms were not lost on the ladies on his reality show. "All of the women on 'The Apprentice' flirted with me - consciously or unconsciously," he boasts. "That's to be expected.

I found a copy of "Trump: How to Get Rich" and found the information about Cuomo in Part IV: "The Secrets of Negotiation" in the section titled "Sometimes You Have To Hold A Grudge" which began on Page 144.

There was no mention of the Apprentice or the women of the Apprentice.
The story the article references about the women of the Apprentice begins in Part XI: "Inside the Apprentice" in the first section titled "Prime Time" which is on Page 222.  Here's an excerpt where the quote is made:

As everyone saw, the women dominated the men at first, and it made some people wonder whether women are superior at business. I believe we’re all equal, except in one respect: Women still have to try harder, and they know it. They will do what they have to do to get the job done and will not necessarily be demure about it.

A lot of people were surprised when I decided to lecture the women about the way they were using their sex appeal. They used it successfully at first, but I knew that would not always be the case. It works, and then it doesn’t, and I didn’t want them to fall into a trap.

All the women on The Apprentice flirted with me—consciously or unconsciously. That’s to be expected. A sexual dynamic is always present between people, unless you are asexual.

The Daily News article clearly casts the quote into an egocentric statement by including the words "he boasted".  The way I'm reading this, he appears to be talking about human nature, not making bragging rights.


If the media wants to use this quote from this book to suggest Trump was speaking disparingly towards women, let's look at some of his other quotes:

On Page 20:
Ask God for a great assistant. No joke. A great one can make your life a whole lot easier—or, in my case, almost manageable. Norma Foerderer has been with me for twenty-three years. If you want to know what a great guy I am, just ask her. But not on a Friday. 
Handling me, the office, and several hundred calls a week isn’t easy. She’s as tough and smart as she is gracious. She’s also indefatigable, which helps a lot if you work for me.

My phones are so busy that I require two executive assistants, and they never stop. They alone handle, on the average, more than 1,250 calls a week. They are not only efficient and fast, but also very pleasant and beautiful young women.

You don’t have to be beautiful to work for me—just be good at your job. I’ve been accused of admiring beautiful women. I plead guilty. But when it comes to the workplace, anyone who is beautiful had better have brains, too. You need competent people with an inherent work ethic. I’m not a complacent person and I can’t have a complacent staff. I move forward quickly and so must they. 

On Page 99:
It’s certainly not groundbreaking news that the early victories by the women on The Apprentice were, to a very large extent, dependent on their sex appeal. The fact that sex sells is nothing new. However, women are judged harshly when they go too far, so be careful in how you present yourself. If you want to be acknowledged for your intelligence as well as your beauty, don’t stand in your own way. Not everyone can tune out a knock-em-dead appearance. Think of how you would like to be perceived, and proceed from there. 
On Page 152 - 153:
However, I must admit that the day may come when I will wear a hairpiece, wig, or rug—but only if I go bald, which I hope never happens.The reason for this is because I, like most men, am very vain. Many times over the years, I’ve heard people say that men are vainer than women, and I believe it. Guys don’t like to talk about it, but Random House is paying me a fortune for this book and specifically

On Page 190:
I call Paula Shugart, president of the Miss Universe Organization, to go over a few things with her. An interviewer recently asked me what motivated me to buy the rights to the Miss Universe pageant. My answer was that I love beautiful women and I’m also a businessman, so it seemed like a good idea, which it has turned out to be. Sometimes things are that simple. I realized early on that I was an aesthete by nature, being attracted to beauty in both people and buildings. My work has shown that some early self-knowledge was right on target. 

The Daily News article can be found here:

Trump: How To Get Rich can be found here:

In conclusion, this quote doesn't provide sufficient evidence to support misogyny claims against Donald Trump.


Tuesday, March 15, 2016

Why did I start Tighty Whitey Press?

There is a lot of anger in the US today and our citizens are divided by many causes and movements. Any attempts to have a reasonable and honest discussion about the facts is not heard due to everyone shouting accusations at one another.  Attacks on politicians are intentionally directed at their followers as a way to discredit the competition.

My intention with this website is to find some of the statements being made and discover how factual these statements are without attempting to frame them in any political context.  I want to be objective as I can be as a human being and I do not want to tell people what to believe.  It is my desire to present the facts and then allow the reader to decide.

I also want to offer some suggestions on what I think is going on.  I am an independent voter, but in the effort of full disclosure, I want my readers to know that I am currently considering two candidates, Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, as my top choices for President.  I have chosen these two candidates for two reasons:  One, both are fighting against the establishment's lobbying machine and two, they are both against the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which I feel are the two greatest threats to our national sovereignty and our personal freedom.

At the same time, I am not beholden to either of these choices because as I continue to research these candidates for my own purposes, I am open-minded to accepting hard evidence that objectively redefines any candidate.  If I see the hard evidence against either Donald or Bernie, there is absolutely no question in my mind that I would willingly change my mind.

The first few articles that will be presented here will be about Donald Trump.  I was asked by a friend to examine 8 statements made that appeared to show Donald Trump as a racist and misogynist. I have already posted my first fact-finding endeavor from this initial request.

You can find that article here:

I hope to at least publish one fact-finding article per day, so please be patient.  I am a married father of four children.  We homeschool our kids, I run a full-time business and I'm also a self-published fantasy writer.  I feel it is very important to get this information to the public so we can turn down the volume on the anger that is intentionally being stirred up within us by our politicians and our news media.  There is a tremendous amount of lies, misinformation and spin putting many of these claims intentional out of context in order to perpetrate a false narrative intended to manipulate and deceive the public.

If I post any fact-finding claim and there is an important piece of information or something is incorrect, please comment on the article with the correct information and I will be happy to update the article.  I am not perfect, I am simply one guy with a computer and too much free time on my hands (not really, I should be writing my novels).


P.S.  My grammar may not always be the best, but I will do my utmost to examine any article I post for errors.  Like I said, I'm a writer, not an editor.

Fact Checking Trump: Misogyny Quote #1

"You know, it doesn't really matter what [the media] write as long as you've got a young and beautiful piece of ass."

This quote is originally sourced from an Esquire magazine online article:

The online article was originally published online July 19, 2013, by Barry Friedman. It has been updated to talk about the 2016 campaign even though it was written almost a full two years prior.  In the final bullet point of the article, the quote is referenced as coming from an Esquire interview in 1991. I found it suspicious that there was no clear source information for this interview.

I went through all of the Esquire magazines online looking for all articles related to Trump. I found a "Hangout" article in March 1991 titled "The Ghost and Mrs. Trump" which I do not believe to be about Donald Trump. Then I found an "Arts and Politics" article in May 1991 titled, "Donald Trump Gets Small" by Harry Hurt iii. The tagline of the article reads: "The only thing shrinking faster than the former billionaire’s assets is the size of his scalp." This appears to NOT be an interview, but a political commentary defaming Donald Trump. I couldn't find a copy of the article available online and I did not want to pay $4.99 to read it (even if the first month is free).

You can find the Esquire 1991 article here:

Since I hit a dead end researching the quote, I decided to do some researched about Harry Hurt iii, the author of the Esquire article. He is the author of the book titled "Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump" which was published 2 years after the Esquire article and after Donald's very nasty public divorce from Ivana Trump. In this book, Harry Hurt asserts that Donald Trump raped Ivana Trump. As the book was about to be published, Ivana Trump wrote a statement that was printed on the first page of that book:

"I felt violated, as the love and tenderness, which he normally exhibited towards me, was absent," she said in the statement. "I referred to this as a 'rape,' but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense."

The book can be found here:

In July 2015, a Daily Beast reporter contacted Michael Cohen, special counsel to Donald Trump and an executive vice president of the 
Trump Organization, about the rape allegations.  It was reported that Cohen responded with a fervor denial and threats.

Ivanka Trump quickly dismissed the assertion of rape by Donald Trump with a statement to CNN:

“Donald and I are the best of friends and together have raised three children that we love and are very proud of. I have nothing but fondness for Donald and wish him the best of luck on his campaign. Incidentally, I think he would make an incredible president.” - Ivanka Trump

The NY Post article about Michael Cohen and Ivanka's follow up statement can be found here:
Interestingly enough, this issue came up on Jan 24, 2016, through a documentary called "The Mad World of Donald Trump" which can be found here:

In conclusion, I can safely determine that Harry Hurt iii wrote an expose on Donald Trump in 1991, not an interview for Esquire magazine as originally attributed to the quote to without providing a fully verifiable source. Mr. Hurt and Mr. Trump were in a heated battle over the book when it was released and in MY OPINION, Mr. Hurt has a questionable journalistic history.

This quote is unsubstantiated and most likely false because there has never been a Donald Trump interview in Esquire magazine for any month in 1991.


Monday, March 14, 2016

End the Violence at Political Rallies!

It is clear to me that the Democrat establishment doesn't like Bernie Sanders. It is also clear to me that the GOP establishment doesn't like Trump.  I believe it is because these two candidates have two things in common: One, they both reject Lobbyist money and two, they both are saying "NO!" to the Trans-Pacific Partnership. So call Trump a racist and Sanders a weak socialist all you want. That's the narrative Washington DC and the media wants you to believe.
You see, there's another anti-lobbyist candidate that drew support from both Republicans and Democrats during the last election. His name was Ron Paul.He won the 2nd place in the Iowa Caucus and all media reports literally didn't even mention his name, instead, they talked about the 1st and 3rd placeholders. Ballot boxes in pro-Ron Paul districts mysteriously disappeared and were unaccounted for.He was portrayed as weak and out of touch, much like Sanders. Truth is, anyone who stands up to the lobbyists gets smeared and their supporters are shamed in order to discredit the candidate.
I've had enough of these attacks against Bernie and Trump supporters, even when the attacks are against each other. Don't intrude or protest either candidate's rallies. Sanders needs to tell his people to stay away and Trump needs to stop suggesting his followers will show up at Bernie events.You don't like either of these candidate's messages, fine. Stay outside on the street and protest. These candidates pay money to book buildings and places to host events for their supporters to gather. They have a right to reject or refuse anyone who tries to enter under dishonest reasons. These are events that are open to the public but are NOT PUBLIC EVENTS, so the right to protest inside is actually TRESPASSING if you are asked to leave and refuse to leave.People have the right to gather and listen to their candidate speak without fear of disruption or possible violence.
It's not Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders working up the violence. It's the media. They intentionally and falsely associated Trump with the KKK who had disavowed David Duke 4 times prior to the "earpiece malfunction" over the last year (one at a conference 2 days before). That's when protesters started showing up with tomatoes and Trump stance didn't let them throw tomatoes. Then the punches started. Then the civil disobedience. So where will it escalate from here?
It's UN-AMERICAN and it needs to STOP!
(and for those people who are insisting upon violence and openly admit that they hate this country, simply ignore them. Ostracize them and do not give the attention seekers any recognition like the MEDIA has chosen to do.)


Trump disavowals David Duke two days before infamous "earpiece malfunction" interview where he was accused of not disavowing Duke fast enough:

FEBRUARY 26, 2016:

February 28, 2016: