The following is a fact-check from the September 5, 2010 episode of Meet the Press:

DAVID PLOUFFE | The Republican Party, when it controlled the House of Representatives, tried to change the rules to allow the majority leader to still serve if they were indicted – TRUE

MR. PLOUFFE: These are the–this is the party that tried to change the rules to allow the majority leader to still serve if he was indicted.

In an investigation of alleged illegal corporate contributions to a political action committee in 2004, three of Tom Delay’s associates, Jim Ellis, John Colyandro, and Warren Robold were indicted by grand jurors in Texas. The investigation involved charges that included raising illegal corporate contributions and funneling them to Republican candidates in the 2002 elections. Then, House Republicans proposed changing their rules to allow members indicted by state grand juries to remain in a leadership position, which would of benefited, then House Majority Leader Tom DeLay in case he was charged by the Texas grand jury.

Tom Delay was eventually indicted by a Texas grand jury on a charge of criminally conspiring with two political associates to infuse illegal corporate contributions into the 2002 state elections, which helped the Republican Party reorder the congressional map in Texas to increase its control of the House in Washington. Five years later, Tom Delay still hasn’t had a trial for the alleged criminal charges.

We rate David Plouffe’s statement TRUE .

The following fact-check took 2 hours to complete.

Here are the statements to fact-check from the September 5, 2010 Meet the Press:
VIDEO/TRANSCRIPT

If you can help us research them please either email us or (preferably) post your work in the comments below. (Anonymity is fine) Also let us know how long you spent researching each fact, we will be tracking it. While we will always fact-check as much as we can on our own, the success and depth of Meet the Facts is definitively improved by the crowd-sourcing of people like you – please help if you can!

Statements are listed in chronological order

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC) | No Democrats campaigning for office right now are talking about the health care reform bill.

SEN. GRAHAM:  Let’s look at the healthcare bill.  The centerpiece of the Democratic agenda for the first two years has been the healthcare bill.  Not one candidate on the campaign trail is talking about it.

DAVID PLOUFFE | The Republican Party, when it controlled the House of Representatives, tried to change the rules to allow the majority leader to still serve if they were indicted.

MR. PLOUFFE: These are the–this is the party that tried to change the rules to allow the majority leader to still serve if he was indicted.

DAVID PLOUFFE | Rep. Boehner has recently lobbied for donations to the Republican Party from the financial industry on the grounds that Republicans have been protecting the industry by opposing things like financial reform.

MR. PLOUFFE: John Boehner, who would be the speaker of the House, years ago was handing out checks from tobacco companies on the House floor and is now up on Wall Street saying, “Give us money because we’re protecting you by opposing things like financial reform.”

DAVID PLOUFFE | Of the people who’s tax cuts would be allowed to expire as currently proposed by Democrats, 80% are millionaires.

MR. PLOUFFE:  First thing I’d say, what the congressional Republicans are proposing is a permanent extension of tax cuts for the wealthiest, which means 80 percent of the people that get those tax cuts are millionaires, OK? Permanent.

DAVID PLOUFFE | Some economists have said that unemployment might be over 20% had it not been for the Recovery Act.

MR. PLOUFFE: Recovery Act played a big role there.  We would have been unemployment rate probably in the high teens.  Some economists even say over 20 percent, by the way.

RICH LOWRY (National Review) | Independents are more likely to agree with Tea Party members than Democrats on the issues of spending, debt, the Arizona immigration law, and the “Ground Zero Mosque.”

MR. LOWRY: And another huge problem, independents are much closer to the tea partiers on the big issues and even on the smaller hot-button ones–spending, debt, Arizona immigration law, Ground Zero mosque, all that–much closer to the tea partiers than they are to the Democrats.

Did we miss something? Let us know!

If you can help us research them please either email us or (preferably) post your work in the comments below. Also also let us know how long you spent researching each fact.

THANKS!

Identifying and posting these statements took 1.5 hours.

POST YOUR RESEARCH HERE

Tomorrow on the September 5, 2010, episode of Meet the Press:

GUESTS:

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Armed Services Committee

David Plouffe, Campaign Manager, Obama 2008 Presidential Campaign; Author, “The Audacity to Win: The Inside Story and Lessons of Barack Obama’s Historic Victory”

Erin Burnett, Anchor, CNBC’s “Street Signs”; Co-Anchor, CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street”

Charlie Cook, Political Analyst, National Journal; Editor and Publisher, The Cook Political Report

E.J. Dionne, Columnist, Washington Post

Rich Lowry, Editor, National Review

TOPICS:

Iraq, Afghanistan, Economy, November elections.

The following is a fact-check from the August 22, 2010 episode of Meet the Press:

GOV. JENNIFER GRANHOLM (D-MI) | The CBO has said that cutting taxes for the wealthiest 2% of Americans is the least effective way to create jobs – MOSTLY TRUE

GOV. GRANHOLM: The CBO has said that cutting taxes for the wealthiest 2 percent is the most ineffective way of creating job growth.

According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the largest decrease of the employment rate this year and next would arise from increasing aid to the unemployed. And the smallest effect would be generated by extending higher exemption amounts for the AMT in 2010 or reducing income taxes in 2011. We could not find the CBO explicitly stating that cutting tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans would be the most ineffective way of creating job growth. But in general, they did say that raising taxes in 2011, which is when Bush’s tax cuts expire, would lead to the smallest effect of reducing the unemployment rate. Thus, we rate Jeniffer Granholm’s statement MOSTLY TRUE.

This fact-check took a combined 1.5 hours.

The following is a fact-check from the August 22, 2010 episode of Meet the Press:

FMR. REP. RICK LAZIO (R-NY)

1) Within a month of Sept, 11, 2001, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf said that America was “an accessory to the crime of 9/11.” – TRUE

2) Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf said that Osama bin Laden was created in America. – TRUE

3) Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has made statements with the past several months regarding Hamas in which he refused to “distance himself” from the group and/or protected them. – LIKELY FALSE

4) Recently one of the Cordoba House developers said that they would consider taking money from Iran. – FALSE

FMR. REP. LAZIO:  Well, first of all I would say, David, there are millions of peace-loving, good Muslims in America.  This Imam Rauf is not one of them.  He’s not a bridge builder.  This is a man, the very same month that people were burying their loved ones that were lost in 9/11, he said that America was an accessory to the crime of 9/11.  He said that Osama bin Laden was created in the USA.  He refuses, only months ago, to, to distance himself from Hamas, in fact, protecting him–protecting them, and only recently one of the developers said that they would consider taking money from Iran.

1) On Sept. 30th, 2001 an interview with Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf was shown on the CBS television program 60 Minutes, in which he stated that he believed that America was an accessory to the crime of 9/11.

MR. BRADLEY (voiceover): And throughout the Muslim world, there is also strong opposition to America’s foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East, because of its support of Israel and economic sanctions against Iraq.

MR. ABDUL RAUF: It is a reaction against the policies of the U.S. government, politically, where we espouse principles of democracy and human rights and where we ally ourselves with oppressive regimes in many of these countries.

MR. BRADLEY: Are — are — are you in any way suggesting that we in the United States deserved what happened?

MR. ABDUL RAUF: I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened, but the United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.

MR. BRADLEY: O.K. You say that we’re an accessory?

MR. ABDUL RAUF: Yes.

Therefore, we rate this statement TRUE.

2) A moment later in the same 60 Minutes interview:

MR. BRADLEY: How?

MR. ABDUL RAUF: Because we have been an accessory to a lot of — of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, it — in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the U.S.A. …

The quote ends there, and the Cordoba Initiative has said it was taken out of context, however at least some context was indeed included in the program, as FactCheck.org has noted:

That was a reference to U.S. support for bin Laden when he was fighting Soviet occupiers in Afghanistan, as CBS’ Bradley made clear in the sequence that immediately followed Rauf’s remark:

CBS’ Ed Bradley, Sept. 30, 2001: “Bin Laden and his supporters were, in fact, recruited and paid nearly $4 billion by the CIA and the government of Saudi Arabia in the 1980s to fight with the Mujahedeen rebels against the former Soviet Union, which had invaded Afghanistan. After the Soviets pulled out, the Saudis, our best friends in the Arab world, our staunchest ally during the Gulf War, poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the newly formed Taliban regime until 1999.”

While it is impossible to know exactly whether or not Fmr. Rep. Lazio believes Mr. Abdul Rauf was speaking literally, we’ll let the above context stand as it is. Regardless, the statement is TRUE.

3) During a June 18th ABC radio interview, in response to the question “Do you believe that the State Department is correct in designating Hamas as a terrorist organization?” – here is the statement Mr. Abdul Rauf made that started this particular controversy, which The New York Times characterizes as being part of “a long conversation with many interruptions” (and also via FactCheck.org):

“Well, I’m not a politician. … The issue of terrorism is a very complex question. … I am a bridge builder. My work is … I do not want to be placed nor will I accept a position where I am the target of one side or another. My attempt is to see a peace in Israel. … Targeting of civilians is wrong. It’s a sin in our religion, whoever does it. … I am a supporter of the State of Israel.”

Fmr. Rep. Lazio said that Mr. Abdul Rauf “refuses, only months ago, to, to distance himself from Hamas, in fact, protecting him–protecting them” and in our judgment that is not an accurate summary of Mr. Abdul Rauf’s comments. This is of course a classic example of journo-political gamesmanship, where someone declining to answer a question is used to imply their opinion on that question. While anyone reading the above remarks could certainly choose to believe that it was a statement of support for Hamas, we see it simply as a more nuanced “I am not going to comment about that” To say that Mr. Abdul Rauf refused to distance himself from Hamas, or that he was protecting them, is LIKELY FALSE. If someone does not answer the question “Do the believe the sky is blue?” that does not mean they believe the sky is not blue, or that it is some other color.

4) Regarding the issue of money from Iran for the Park51 project, this is another even more clear example of “no comment” being used to assume a person’s opinion. Here is what the spokesman for the Park51 developers, Oz Sultan, said to ABC News:

“We’ll look at all available options within the United States to start. We’re hoping to fund this predominately from domestic donors. That can be everything from institutions all the way down to personal [contributors,]” said Sultan.

When asked if they would then turn to foreign donors, Sultan replied, “I can’t comment on that.”

Pressed on whether the developers were willilng rule out accepting donations from the governments of Saudi Arabia or Iran, he repeated, “I can’t comment on that.”

While this is clearly not a “No” to the question, that does not mean Fmr. Rep. Lazio is accurate when saying they are considering taking money from Iran. That is of course unless Fmr. Rep. Lazio is a psychic and knows exactly what they are indeed thinking, which we are going to presume he does not. Therefore, technically his statement is FALSE, as the phrase “we are considering taking money from Iran” or it’s equivalent was not said. Mr. Sultan simply refused to answer the question, and while people can read into that whatever they wish, it is worth noting that on Aug. 26, in an interview with CBS News, Park51 developer Sharif El-Gamal did answer the question:

“We will not take money from Iran. We will not take money from Hamas,”

Incidentally it is also worth noting that ABC News, in its article summary of Mr. Sultan’s statement of “I can’t comment on that” characterized it as “refusing to rule out” taking money from Iran. We believe that to be an inaccurate summary of his statement, and most likely that kind of headlining contributed to the controversy.

We would very much recommend reading in their entirety, both this New York Times article and this FactCheck.org piece regarding these statements and many others referring to the “Ground Zero Mosque” (both were used as references for this check). Also as an editors note, we have used the term “Ground Zero Mosque” because it is the phrase which is now most commonly associated with this particular story, but we agree with PolitiFact that the term itself is likely inaccurate. We recommend reading their judgment on the term here, and also their checks of the statements “There is already a mosque four blocks away” (Michael Bloomberg, TRUE) and “This is not a mosque. It’s a cultural center that has a prayer area.” (Al Hunt, FALSE).

This fact-check took a combined 2.5 hours.

Here are the statements to fact-check from the August 22, 2010 Meet the Press:
VIDEO/TRANSCRIPT

If you can help us research them please either email us or (preferably) post your work in the comments below. (Anonymity is fine) Also let us know how long you spent researching each fact, we will be tracking it. While we will always fact-check as much as we can on our own, the success and depth of Meet the Facts is definitively improved by the crowd-sourcing of people like you – please help if you can!

Statements are listed in chronological order

SEN. MITCH McCONNELL (R-KY)

1) The top 2 [income] brackets of Americans include 50% of small business income and 25% of the work force.
2) In the last quarter of 2009, 84% of jobs lost were in small businesses.

SEN. McCONNELL:  What the administration is proposing, and the majorities in the House and Senate, is to raise taxes on the top 2 brackets, which will affect 50 percent of small business income and in–and impact 25 percent of the work force. For example, if you look at last–the last quarter of last year, 84 percent of the jobs that were lost were lost in small business.

SEN. MITCH McCONNELL (R-KY)

1) A few weeks ago President Obama heard from small businessmen, regarding why they weren’t expanding, that the reason was his agenda.
2) The healthcare reform bill includes a provision that requires small businesses to send a 1099 to the IRS for every vendor they do $600 worth of business with.

SEN. McCONNELL:  Look, the president called in a bunch of small businessmen to the White House a few weeks ago, and he asked them why they weren’t expanding. And their answer was, “Mr. President, with all due respect, your agenda”–healthcare mandates, tax increased headed their way, more and more burdensome regulation.  I mean, look at the new healthcare bill for example. There’s a provision in there that requires that small businesses send a 1099 form to the IRS for every vender they do $600 worth of business with.  That’s just a massive amount of paperwork and problems.  This administration…

GOV. JENNIFER GRANHOLM (D-MI)

1) Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is a member of the Sufi sect of Islam.
2) The Sufi sect is thought of as the most peaceful sect of Islam.
3) The Sufi sect is targeted by Al-Qaeda

GOV. GRANHOLM:  Well, I think that any time somebody stands up for the Constitution, which is exactly what he did, I don’t think there’s any disagreement that they have the right to be able to worship and to build on private property.  I don’t think anybody would disagree with that.  The question is whether it is a good decision on their part, right?  What’s the imam saying.  Now, the imam apparently is overseas and has been overseas on a State Department mission bridge building for three weeks.  And so the question is, what is the nature of this particular imam and the sect?  It’s a Sufi sect, apparently, and that’s supposed to be the most peaceful of all the–that sect is under attack by al-Qaeda.

GOV. JENNIFER GRANHOLM (D-MI) | Michigan has the largest Arab-American population in the country.

GOV. GRANHOLM:  David, I called, because Michigan has the largest Arab-American population outside of the Middle East.

GOV. JENNIFER GRANHOLM (D-MI) | A recent poll indicated that 85% of Americans don’t want to see Social Security cut to solve the deficit.

GOV. GRANHOLM:  Well, you know, no.  I think it’s far outside the mainstream. In fact, one of the things–you just held up Paul Ryan’s, you know, proposal regarding Medicare and regarding Social Security.  I think a lot of which you’ve jumped onto as well.  But there was a recent poll out that said that 85 percent of Americans don’t want to see Social Security cut to solve the, the deficit.

FMR. REP. DICK ARMEY (R-TX) | No Republicans/conservatives are suggesting that Social Security be dismantled.

REP. ARMEY:  Now, there’s nobody that’s talking about dismantling these systems.

FMR. REP. DICK ARMEY (R-TX) | Revenue in America doubled as a result of President Reagan cutting taxes.

REP. ARMEY:  Reagan cut taxes, revenue doubled.

GOV. JENNIFER GRANHOLM (D-MI) | The CBO has said that cutting taxes for the wealthiest 2% of Americans is the least effective way to create jobs.

GOV. GRANHOLM:  It’s–the question is, should the tax cuts expire for the wealthiest 2 percent so that we can make the investments that will grow jobs? Yes.  That’s the most effective way of creating job growth.  The CBO has said that cutting taxes for the wealthiest 2 percent is the most ineffective way of creating job growth.

FMR. REP. RICK LAZIO (R-NY)

1) Within a month of Sept, 11, 2001, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf said that Americans were “an accessory to the crime of 9/11.”
2) Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf said that Osama bin Laden was created in America.
3) Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has made statements with the past several months that could be deemed supportive of Hamas.
4) Recently one of the Cordoba House developers said that they would consider taking money from Iran.

FMR. REP. LAZIO:  Well, first of all I would say, David, there are millions of peace-loving, good Muslims in America.  This Imam Rauf is not one of them.  He’s not a bridge builder.  This is a man, the very same month that people were burying their loved ones that were lost in 9/11, he said that America was an accessory to the crime of 9/11.  He said that Osama bin Laden was created in the USA.  He refuses, only months ago, to, to distance himself from Hamas, in fact, protecting him–protecting them, and only recently one of the developers said that they would consider taking money from Iran.

Did we miss something? Let us know!

If you can help us research them please either email us or (preferably) post your work in the comments below. Also also let us know how long you spent researching each fact.

THANKS!

Identifying and posting these statements took 1.5 hours.

POST YOUR RESEARCH HERE

So we’ve been over Sunday’s show a few times now, and while there were obviously some facts that were presented, we do not feel like there were really any important-to-check statements. Also the nature of the show, one long interview with a military commander, involved a lot more statements of opinion and analysis than would be in a typical Meet the Press with opposing viewpoints and data used to back them.  There were a few times that David Gregory used data to ask a question, which could of course be checked, but it seemed to fall into the realm of commonly known information as best we could judge.

Therefore, we have decided to not fact-check the show this week. That being said, if you find something in the transcript that you think needs our attention, please feel free to email us and we will happily look into it.

(Disclaimer: We are both also extremely busy this week with life stuff, thus this post appearing today instead of yesterday morning)

Tomorrow on the August 15, 2010 episode of Meet the Press:

Interview:

Gen. David Patraeus
Commander of U.S. Forces Afghanistan

This Sunday, we’ll have a special edition of “Meet the Press” from Afghanistan, with our exclusive guest Gen. David Petraeus, in his first interview since taking over as Commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan. With less than a year before the scheduled drawdown of troops, David Gregory goes one-on-one with the General to discuss the tough mission ahead and the U.S. strategy for winning this almost 9 year war.

The following is a fact-check from the August 8, 2010 episode of Meet the Press:

ANDREA MITCHELL (NBC) | The debt commission was set up only after mostly Republican senators, who had previously supported it, abandoned the legislation. – TRUE

MS. MITCHELL: The reason the president appointed the debt commission was because some senators who had supported it… REP. FORD: Republican senators… MS. MITCHELL: …including mostly Republican senators, abandoned it. So they couldn’t pass the legislation which would have a debt commission with teeth.

Up for a vote back in January of 2010, the Conrad/Gregg commission proposal would have created the Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action. It was co-sponsored by Kent Conrad (D-ND) and Judd Gregg (R-NH), the top Democrat and the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee. It would have established an 18-member bipartisan commission to study the current and future fiscal condition of the federal government and make recommendations about how to cut the bulging deficit. The recommendations would have been voted on in the House and Senate floors under a special procedure.

The New York Times reported that President Obama endorsed the Senate bill to create a bipartisan budget commission, whose recommendations for cutting deficits would have to be voted on by Congress. But he also remained ready to establish a panel by executive order if the effort to do so by law failed.

PolitiFact reports that the measure would have passed with 60 votes if only seven additional Republicans who had co-sponsored the Conrad/Gregg proposal had voted for it. Instead, the seven senators — Robert Bennett of Utah, Sam Brownback of Kansas, Mike Crapo of Idaho, John Ensign of Nevada, Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, James Inhofe of Oklahoma, and John McCain of Arizona — withdrew their co-sponsorship in the days before the vote and then voted against it on the floor.

After the failed Conrad/Gregg proposal, President Obama followed through with what he had said and released an executive order to create a non-partisan commission to slash the deficit. Thus, we rate Ms. Mitchell’s statement TRUE.

The following fact-check took combined 1 hour.

The following is a fact-check from the August 8, 2010 episode of Meet the Press:

REP. MIKE PENCE (R-IN) | The President’s “imposed” debt commission will not report until after the fall elections – MOSTLY TRUE

REP. PENCE: Look, we, we’ve got some terrific people on the Republican side working on the debt commission, and they’re working in good faith on it. But, but why, why the president imposed a debt commission that wouldn’t report until after the election was a bit telling.

According to the Executive Order given by President Obama, no later than December 1, 2010, the commission will vote on the approval of a final report containing a set of recommendations to achieve fiscal responsibility. President Obama did order the commission’s creation, but the commission is bi-partisan, containing 6 Republicans and 6 Democrats, as well as 3 business leaders and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute. So in theory, the bi-partisan members could approve the finished report before the elections because President Obama only made a December deadline. But realistically, with a hot button issue such as the national deficit, the members of the commission will probably take the full allotted time.

Mr. Pence is correct in that President Obama did set the deadline for the debt commission’s report after the elections (December 1), but because the commission’s members are made up of Democrats and Republicans equally and in theory, the report could be finished before the November elections, we won’t give Mr. Pence a complete true. We rate Mr. Pence’s statement MOSTLY TRUE.

This fact-check took a combined 1 hour.