No Comment Diary

The News Without Comment

This content shows Simple View

HoloGrid: Monster Battle VR Gets Gear VR Launch

HoloGrid: Monster Battle VR Gets Gear VR Launch

Title inspired by holochess scene from Star Wars come to Gear VR

Remember the scene in Star Wars where Chewbacca, R2-D2 and C-3PO are playing a kind of holographic chess game involving monsters? Ever wanted to play it yourself? Well good news, as users of the Samsung Gear VR can with the launch of HoloGrid: Monster Battle VR.

The title uses creatures and monsters created by visual effects expert Phil Tippett, who was responsible for the aforementioned holochess scene in Star Wars, and was also credited as the ‘Dinosaur Supervisor’ in Jurassic Park. The title is a collaboration between development studios Happy Giant and Phil Tippett’s own Tippett Studio, who have previously been know primarily for producing CGI effects for big Hollywood movies such as Hollow Man. The ‘soft launch’ of the title on Gear VR was announced on the HoloGridMonster official twitter.

The videogame itself is a hybrid between virtual reality (VR) board game and collectable card game, somewhat akin of Blizzard’s Hearthstone. Each monster and spell has a unique ability it can bring to the board and they can combine in unique ways, which brings an element of complex strategy to each match.

HoloGrid: Monster Battle VR can be played single player against the AI, or against friends in Multiplayer mode.

The title is out now for Samsung Gear VR, priced at £2.29 (GBP). Further information can be found at the Oculus Store or on the official HoloGrid: Monster Battle VR website.

You can view a trailer for the title below.

VRFocus will continue to bring you news of new VR titles. Source:

Richard Branson: How collective will can help spur extraordinary individual achievement

Plastic trash is gross. These hungry caterpillars might be able to help us get rid of it.


We learn a lot by paying attention to the little things — in this case, the very little, bug-sized things.

That’s what biologist and amateur beekeeper Federica Bertocchini noticed while tending to her beehives in Madrid.

To keep her bees healthy and happy, Bertocchini has to remove pests that move into the hives, including a tiny beeswax-munching caterpillar known as the wax worm.

A comb full of beeswax is a tasty meal for wax worms. Photo by Chris Hondros/Getty Images.

One day, Bertocchini was clearing out the worms, placing them in a plastic grocery bag. After working for a while, she discovered the plastic bag had developed a bunch of little holes.

The worms were eating their way out!

Plastic-eating caterpillars? Yep, they’re real.

What’s a freak event to one person can be inspiration to a scientist. Bertocchini decided to put the little critters to the test.

She rounded up some colleagues and gave the caterpillars more polyethylene bags to munch on. Polyethylene makes up about 40% of Europe’s plastic demand. Sure enough, the caterpillars started eating through those bags, digesting the plastic, and turning it into ethylene glycol, an odorless compound found in antifreeze.

Taking a step back, Bertocchini’s team said this actually makes sense. The worms normally eat wax to survive, and wax and plastic aren’t that different, chemically. But this discovery could have big consequences for the environment.

A new way to digest plastic could make a difference both on land and in the ocean.

Humans love their plastic — plastic bottles, milk jugs, sandwich baggies — but unfortunately, we don’t pay that much attention to what happens after we use it. Scientists estimate 4 million to 12 million metric tons of plastic enters the oceans each year.

Trash in Manila Bay in 2014. Photo from Jay Directo/AFP/Getty Images

And while ethylene glycol — what the worms are pooping out — isn’t exactly great for the environment either, the substance breaks down in weeks instead of the decades or centuries that a polyethylene bag might take.

Caterpillars, bacteria, and other critters have been seen eating or breaking down plastic bags before, though Bertocchini’s team said the wax worms broke down plastic faster than any other recent discoveries.

This is a really cool example of scientists learning from nature.

Though the digestion happened pretty quickly compared to other methods, it still took 100 worms 12 hours to eat through a little more than 90 milligrams of plastic. It would take those worms about a month to break down one plastic bag.

Bertocchini and her team don’t yet know what exactly it is inside the wax worms that’s breaking down the plastic — it might be an enzyme or some kind of gut bacteria — but once they figure that out, they might be able to supercharge the process and harness it for good.

In a news release, Bertocchini’s team said they want to find a way to use this discovery to clean up our rivers and oceans. Their paper was published in the scientific journal Current Biology.

<br> Source:

Anonymous’ Controversial Message About Donald Trump: The Truth About War & Conflict

Anonymous has come out with a new video on their YouTube channel bringing attention to the recent events taking place as a result of Trump’s call to attack Syria, which was based on intel his administration received about Assad’s apparent chemical weapons attack on his own people — an event for which we know there is no evidence.

Things have moved forward quickly, with military activity increasing around Europe as tensions continue to build. North Korea has also entered the picture, as their relationship with the U.S. becomes increasingly strained. While no attack has yet broken out, many worry one is imminent.

What to Consider

War is a big business and has been used by the elite cabal for many years to not only take over nations but also control the masses with fear. The cabal is typically always pushing for war, and while it may appear to be a fight between countries, it’s not; it’s often a collaborative effort between powerful individuals to play out big picture plans by creating conflict at various levels within a country to justify war.

“I served in all commissioned ranks from a second Lieutenant to a Major General. And during that time, I spent most of my time being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street, and for the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism.”

General Smedley Butler, one of the highest ranking generals in American History

At the moment, everyone is pointing the finger at Trump, which they should given what he has said on TV and the actions the U.S. has taken under his ‘control.’ An interesting thing to note that has to be shared given the discussion I’ve had with insiders is: Trump’s administration has been receiving cooked intel about what’s happening in other areas of the world from members of the cabal — in other words, it has been infiltrated.

That being said, who knows if he’s receiving the right information or not? We know for certain that a secret government, for lack of a better term, is really calling most of the shots. Not many presidents have had the nerve to oppose these governments, let alone create awareness of them. Eisenhower did it when he warned us about the military industrial complex, JFK did it when he mentioned that there are those who want to capitalize on nationalism to push topics under the rug, and how national security would be “seized upon” by those who want to conceal information from the American public.

Trump’s campaign and his promises were largely against the ruling cabal and although Trump is not the knight in shining armour with a deep conscious knowing we are all hoping for, he came onto the scene as a non cabal ‘leader’ that has the opportunity to start dismantling the way things are done. This of course is part of a much bigger picture shift going on where humanities consciousness is shifting.

John F. Hylan, the Mayor of New York City from 1918-1925, referenced this secret government, saying that it is the “real menace of our Republic,” and that “like a giant octopus” it “sprawls its slimy legs over our cities, states and nation.” He went on to emphasize how “the little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes” and that “they practically control both parties” as well as “all the newspapers and magazines in this country.”

Here’s another great quote from former President Theodore Roosevelt:

Political parties exist to secure responsible government and to execute the will of the people.

From these great tasks both of the old parties have turned aside. Instead of instruments to promote the general welfare, they have become the tools of corrupt interests which use them impartially to serve their selfish purposes. Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.

To destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day. (source)

What Does War Really Show Us? 

It’s great to see that more people have become aware of false flag terrorism. In fact, other world leaders are bringing this up with regards to actions the U.S. takes overseas. Here’s an article we recently published about that, where you can learn exactly what this phenomenon means:

Putin: The Chemical Attack In Syria Was A “False Flag” & “More Are Being Prepared” In Syria

But, as mentioned above, war isn’t really what we’ve been made to believe it is. We are, in a sense, coaxed into accepting it. That’s exactly what false flag terrorism is all about.

“The statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception.”

Mark Twain (source)

A couple of years ago, the Dalai Lama put it perfectly after the terrorist attacks which occurred in Paris, stating we shouldn’t simply pray for Paris, but rather, we must recognize we ourselves created this mess, and only we can solve it — not God.

He put up a post on his website regarding war and large military establishments, stating that they are the greatest source of violence in our world and they exist solely to kill human beings. Echoing the Mark Twain quote above, he went on to explain how, “since armies are legal, we feel that war is acceptable; in general, nobody feels that war is criminal or that accepting it is criminal attitude. In fact, we have been brainwashed.” (source)

There is currently a shift in consciousness taking place, and instead of seeing war as a marvellous weapon and a great piece of technology that kills living people, we are starting to see that world peace and cooperation are necessary, and that there is truly no reason for us to be so divided, or for our governments to fight each other. The justifications for war are falling by the wayside, and the cabal continues to invent problems to withhold this justification.

“No matter how malevolent or evil are the many murderous dictators who can currently oppress their nations and cause international problems, it is obvious that they cannot harm others or destroy countless human lives if they don’t have a military organisation accepted and condoned by society.” (source)

Some of these soldiers that are used by their corporate/big bank puppetmasters are starting to wake up and speak out. Linked below is an article that provides two excellent examples, with some shocking information that many people are still waking up to (graphic footage warning).

Horrible & Numbing”: Chilling testimony from U.S. Air Force Drone Operator On His First Kill”

US Soldier Uses Heart-Breaking Wikileaks Video To Makes His Point

Shifting Consciousness

If you find yourself fearing what is taking place and what is unfolding, explore it. Why is there fear? What is that fear showing you about yourself? Your beliefs? What you feel is going on? Do you feel empowered? Do you feel as though you have no control? Asking ourselves these questions helps us to understand ourselves and how we operate.

As an individual we have the power to assist the collective in massive ways by BEING from a conscious state. Processing our thoughts, worries, fears and ultimately how we feel powerless is a huge part of shifting our consciousness. Fear can serve us to show something about ourselves, but it does not serve us to remain in that state. We cannot create change from that state that is effective and that will lead to a world where we thrive. The change we are looking to create deep down will come from a place of peace.

Remember, these events and what unfolds are a reflection of mass consciousness and are providing insight into hat humanity is creating and going through as a whole. It also gives us the opportunity to reflect and create the necessary change from within in order to shift our experience which helps to shift the world.

The purpose of this is to help dispel the automatic fear state we go into and instead get us into a place where we can effectively do something from a place of peace as opposed to fear.

The Message From Anonymous

While anonymous’ message here is bringing attention to valuable things, it may not be the full story and thus far, there is not evidence Trump cut a deal with the deep state although there are actions being carried out by his administration that are of the goal of the deep state. It’s important to make the distinction so we can better understand the complexity of what is going on as it shows the influence and fight of the cabal as they lose control.

On April 6th, 2017, on the 100 year anniversary of America’s entry into World War I, Donald Trump launched airstrikes against the Syrian government; in retaliation for a gas attack supposedly perpetrated by Assad. There was no investigation, not even a hack job of a frame up like we had in 2003. The evidence we do have contradicts the official story, and the stakes are much higher this time around.

Then before the dust had even settled, Trump pivoted to Asia. Ratcheting up intimidation tactics, towards North Korea. Threatening regime change and practically begging the already insecure Kim Jong-un to do something stupid. And that’s the point. Provoke a response, and then play the victim.

If he cant get it the old fashion way he might just make one up. Trump cut a deal with the deep state, and the neoliberal, neocon, and corporate alliance. They got his back now. As long as they get their war, everybody’s happy.


  • Categories:

It’s #NationalDNADay and #AstroKate was the 1st human to sequence DNA in space. Talk to her and @NIHDirector on FB…

The Fidget Hand Spinner keeps busy minds occupied

Fidget Spinner

When you’re sitting during a lecture where the professor is going off on a tangent or are stuck in a meeting where your boss loves to hear themselves talk, your mind wanders. It’s hard not to be restless and start tapping your feet, fingers, and playing with whatever is nearby. You don’t want to be rude, but you also don’t want to be bored, and have to find a common space in between the two so you don’t go insane.

We’ve seen tools like the Fidget Cube in the past, but if that novelty has worn off or it has seen so much use that you need a new one, this Fidget Spinner might be a good replacement. This is a toy that has ceramic bearings that you can spin as much as you want without needing repairs, oil, or maintenance. If your spin is powerful enough, it could keep going for over 2 minutes.

These come in a variety of color options, and there’s even a glow in the dark version for those that need something to distract themselves before going to sleep. It’s only 3 inches in diameter, so it can easily go wherever you do. They’ll cost you around $9 a piece, and should survive constant use from both adults and children alike. If you are getting one for a child, check in with their teacher, as what might seem like a good idea could quickly become a nightmare in the classroom.

Available for purchase on Amazon
[ The Fidget Hand Spinner keeps busy minds occupied copyright by Coolest Gadgets ]


Webbys Honor

We’re happy to announce that is both the 2017 Webby Award and People’s Voice winner for best political blog or website.

This is the fourth consecutive year that we’ve won both awards, which honor excellence on the internet. Since 2007, we’ve won a total of 18 Webbys, including eight awarded by the judging panel and 10 based on a vote by the general public.

We’re grateful to the International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences and our loyal readers for the recognition.

The 21st annual Webby competition received 13,000 entries from all 50 U.S. states and over 70 countries, according to the IADAS.

The other finalists in the Political Blog/Websites category this year were the Center for Public Integrity, PBS, the Intercept, and Code and Theory.

The post Webbys Honor appeared first on Source:

Trump Spins His First 100 Days


In an interview with the Associated Press, President Donald Trump put some spin on what he has done — and hasn’t done — as he nears the completion of his first 100 days in office:

  • Trump said he has not labeled China a currency manipulator, as promised, because it hasn’t manipulated its currency since he took office out of respect for him. The Chinese president “knew I would do something,” Trump said. In fact, China has not been devaluing its currency to create a trade advantage since 2014.
  • The president also said that the wall he wants to build on the Mexico border will cost “$10 billion or less,” but cost estimates by his own Department of Homeland Security and two independent organizations say it could cost at least twice that much.

The president also repeated several false and misleading claims, including taking too much credit for job creation.


The Associated Press interviewed Trump in the Oval Office on April 21, and published a transcript of the interview on April 24. The interview comes as the president nears completion of his first 100 days in office — which will occur on April 29 — and dealt in part with the promises he made during the campaign.

China’s Currency

During the campaign, Trump issued a “100-day action plan to Make America Great Again.” One of those promises dealt with China’s history of devaluing its currency to gain a trade advantage. In his action plan, Trump said on his first day in office he would “direct my Secretary of the Treasury to label China a currency manipulator.”

That has not happened. In fact, the Treasury Department issued a report on April 14 that declined to label China a currency manipulator.

The president told the Associated Press that “things change” and he needs “flexibility” once he takes office. He said the decision was in part political, as he is trying to convince China to lean on North Korea to halt its nuclear weapons program.

But then he twisted the facts about China’s history of devaluing its currency.

Trump said he decided not to label China a currency manipulator, in part, because it has not manipulated its currency since he took office. Trump claimed credit for that, saying “there’s a certain respect” that China’s President Xi Jinping has for him and “he knew I would do something” if China devalued its currency.

In fact, China has not been devaluing its currency to create a trade advantage since 2014, years before Trump took office.

Trump, April 21: But [Chinese] President Xi, from the time I took office, he has not, they have not been currency manipulators. Because there’s a certain respect because he knew I would do something or whatever. But more importantly than him not being a currency manipulator the bigger picture, bigger than even currency manipulation, if he’s helping us with North Korea, with nuclear and all of the things that go along with it, who would call, what am I going to do, say, “By the way, would you help us with North Korea? And also, you’re a currency manipulator.” It doesn’t work that way. …

And the media, some of them get it, in all fairness. But you know some of them either don’t get it, in which case they’re very stupid people, or they just don’t want to say it. You know because of a couple of them said, “He didn’t call them a currency manipulator.” Well, for two reasons. Number One, he’s not, since my time. You know, very specific formula. You would think it’s like generalities, it’s not. They have — they’ve actually — their currency’s gone up. So it’s a very, very specific formula. And I said, “How badly have they been,” … they said, “Since you got to office they have not manipulated their currency.” That’s Number One, but much more important, they are working with us on North Korea.

As the Washington Post explained, “The value of a currency is determined by supply and demand, and currency manipulation occurs when a country buys or sell [sic] large amounts of its own currency on global markets to change the price. But U.S. policy is really directed at countries that sell large volumes of their own currency to lower its price — a practice that makes a country’s exports relatively cheap on global markets, hurting American exporters. In previous years, when China artificially lowered the value of its currency, it helped the country export products to the United States, and U.S. industries and workers balked at what they saw as an unfair competitive edge.”

The Treasury report found that “after engaging in one-way, large-scale intervention to resist appreciation of the RMB [the Chinese currency] for a decade, China’s recent intervention in foreign exchange markets has sought to prevent a rapid RMB depreciation that would have negative consequences for the United States, China, and the global economy.”

Moreover, the report notes that China’s “lack of intervention to resist appreciation” has been occurring “over the last three years.” In other words, China didn’t make a change in its policy since Trump took office, or because — as Trump said — of a perceived threat that Trump would “do something.”

Economists broadly agree that China has not been holding down its currency since 2014 or 2015.

“The accusation that China is manipulating its currency in order to gain an unfair advantage for its exports is not supported by economic facts,” Eswar Prasad, a professor of trade policy at Cornell University and formerly head of the IMF’s China Division, told us in an email. “Since mid-2014, the Peoples’ Bank of China (PBC, China’s central bank) has in fact been intervening in currency markets to prevent the renminbi (RMB) from falling too sharply in value against the dollar. Over the past three years, China has burnt up $1 trillion of its stock of foreign exchange reserves in order to support its currency and prevent it from depreciating as much and as fast as market forces seem to want.”

“Thus, China has, if anything, been doing the U.S. a favor by not letting the RMB depreciate as much and as fast against the dollar as indicated by market pressures,” Prasad said. “The reason it has done this is largely to forestall any domestic financial instability from panic-driven capital outflows if it were to allow the RMB to depreciate a lot, especially over a short period.”

Brad Setser, a senior fellow and acting director of the Maurice R. Greenberg Center for Geoeconomics at the Council on Foreign Relations, said conventional wisdom is that China shifted from buying reserves to selling reserves several years ago.

“If by manipulation, you mean – when did China stop accumulating reserves to hold its currency down, it stopped manipulating in 2014 or 2015,” Setser told us via email.

But Setser said the issue is made more complex, “because China has held its currency relatively stable against the dollar this year, and that is arguably a change (though holding the currency stable against the dollar has been relatively easy for China because the dollar has been relatively stable or even weakened a bit against the other big currencies).”

Some consider manipulation to mean any government intervention in the market at all, not just depreciating currency, Setser said.

But it is clear from Trump’s statements that he was concerned about China holding down its currency to gain a trade advantage, to the detriment especially of U.S. manufacturers. Economists say that’s exactly what China was doing for more than a decade, but as Eduardo Porter put it for the New York Times, “Trump Isn’t Wrong on China Currency Manipulation, Just Late.”

Trump said his decision to not label China a currency manipulator was partly political, since he is trying to convince China to pressure North Korea to halt its nuclear weapons program. We take no position on that.

But Trump’s claim that China stopped manipulating its currency when he took office — and more, that it did so “because there’s a certain respect, because [Xi] knew I would do something or whatever” — is another example of Trump taking credit for something that long predates his presidency.

Spinning the Border Wall Costs

During the campaign, Trump also promised to build a “big, fat beautiful wall” along the southern border. In his 100-day action plan, Trump said he would work with Congress to fully fund the wall “with the full understanding that the country Mexico will be reimbursing the United States for the full cost of such wall.”

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection, as we will explain later, has moved forward with the project, so that promise is a work in progress.

But in the AP interview, Trump lowballed the estimated cost of the project, claiming it will cost “$10 billion or less.”

Trump, April 21: Well, first of all, the wall will cost much less than the numbers I’m seeing. I’m seeing numbers, I mean, this wall is not going to be that expensive.

Associated Press: What do you think the estimate on it would be?

Trump: Oh I’m seeing numbers — $24 billion, I think I’ll do it for $10 billion or less. …  The opponents are talking $25 billion for the wall. It’s not going to cost anywhere near that.

Associated Press: You think $10 billion or less.

Trump: I think $10 billion or less. And if I do a super-duper, higher, better, better security, everything else, maybe it goes a little bit more. But it’s not going to be anywhere near (those) kind of numbers.

We can’t predict the future, but the estimates to date have been much higher than $10 billion:

  • According to an internal document obtained by Reuters, the Department of Homeland Security estimated the cost could be as much as $21.6 billion.
  • Bernstein Research, an investment-management and research firm, has estimated that the cost of the project is “widely expected to be greater than $15 billion and perhaps as much as $25 billion.”
  • MIT Technology Review, a magazine published by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, estimated in October that a 1,000-mile wall could cost between $27 billion and $40 billion.

The cost of the wall will depend on many factors — such as the height and length of the wall, the construction materials used, and whether parts of the wall are substituted with fencing or other barriers.

Let’s take a look at what the Trump administration envisions and how much it might cost.

On March 17, U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued two requests for proposals “to acquire multiple conceptual wall designs with the intent to construct multiple prototypes.” One RFP is for a “solid concrete border wall,” and the second RFP is for “other border wall.” For the “other border wall,” the RPF says: “Prototypes constructed in response to this solicitation must offer designs that are alternatives to reinforced solid concrete walls (i.e. no solid concrete external faces).”

So, we know that the administration is at least considering not just a solid concrete wall, but a combination of walls and other barriers.

The wall — whether solid concrete or an alternative design — must be between 18 feet and 30 feet tall and 2 feet wide, according to the RFPs. It also must go 6 feet below the ground to prevent people from tunneling under the wall.

As for the length of the wall, the U.S.-Mexico border is 1,933 miles. But the DHS document obtained by Reuters indicated that the administration will not seek to build new barriers the full length of the border.

“The plan lays out what it would take to seal the border in three phases of construction of fences and walls covering just over 1,250 miles (2,000 km) by the end of 2020,” Reuters wrote on Feb. 9. “With 654 miles (1,046 km) of the border already fortified, the new construction would extend almost the length of the entire border.”

The 654 miles of existing barriers is a reference, as we have written before, to the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which called for the construction of 700 miles of fencing and enhanced surveillance technology. In its report, Bernstein Research wrote that under the 2006 law “18ft tall steel ‘primary fencing’ is used in many urban areas … to less substantial ‘vehicle fencing’ in lower-risk areas.”

The cost of the primary fencing, also known as pedestrian fencing, averaged about $6.5 million per mile under the 2006 law, according to a September 2009 report by the Government Accountability Office. At that per-mile average price (not adjusted for inflation), a 1,250-mile “wall” constructed entirely of pedestrian fencing would cost more than $8 billion.

More recently, Trump’s chief budget director, Mick Mulvaney, told talk show host Hugh Hewitt in March that the per-mile cost “starts at $8 million per mile” and “goes up to about $25 million per mile.”

The range of Mulvaney’s per-mile cost estimates would place the total cost at between $10 billion and $31.25 billion for 1,250 miles of walls and fences. Mulvaney added that the total cost “just depends on … what you decide to build in what areas.”

As we said, Homeland Security estimated that the 1,250-mile combination of fences and walls under the Trump administration plan could cost as much as $21.6 billion.

Bernstein Research estimated the cost at between $15 billion and $25 billion. The firm — which provided its estimate during the campaign, when Trump gave no details on the size and scope of the project — assumed construction of a 1,000-mile concrete wall at 40 feet tall and 7 feet deep, but only 10 inches thick.

MIT Technology Review provided its cost estimate in October. The magazine’s cost estimate of between $27 billion and $40 billion assumes construction of a 1,000-mile concrete wall that is 50 feet tall and 10 feet underground — which is taller and deeper than the specifications ordered by DHS, but not as long.

We don’t know what the wall will cost, but independent analyses and Trump’s own Department of Homeland Security say a border wall could cost twice as much as Trump’s figure.

Job Creation and Other Repeats

In his interview, Trump also repeated claims we have fact-checked before — most of them dealing with his campaign promise to be “the greatest jobs president God has ever created.”

Trump once again claimed too much credit for job creation, saying, “we create a lot of jobs, 500,000 jobs as of two months ago, and plenty created since.” As we wrote two weeks ago, under Trump, the U.S. job growth has been 317,000 jobs in February and March. That’s according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The January job numbers  — an additional 216,000 jobs — were based on a survey that was done before Trump was inaugurated.

This job growth is a continuation of a trend that began pre-Trump: The economy added more than 250,000 new jobs a month in 20 of the 96 months under President Obama, and as of March, the U.S. has had 77 straight months of job growth.

The president also cited examples of his job creation, and in some cases he took too much credit.

Trump: As an example, Ford, General Motors. I’ve had cases where the gentleman from China, Ma, Jack Ma [chairman of Alibaba Group], he comes up, he says, “Only because of you am I making this massive investment.” Intel, only because of you. … The press never writes that.

But, as we’ve written before, investments made by Ford and GM were part of longtime trends and market decisions. Ford CEO Mark Fields, for example, praised Trump’s promises to cut taxes and regulation, but said recent investments in U.S. plants were market-based. Asked on Fox Business News if he would have made the investments had Trump not won the election, Fields said, “Yes, absolutely.”

As for Intel, we wrote in February that Trump had a stronger case in that instance. The Intel CEO credited Trump’s pro-business policies for a $7 billion investment in an Arizona factory, though Intel had announced a $5 billion investment in that facility in 2011. The project wasn’t completed.

“We’re making this investment now to meet demand that we now expect,” Intel spokesman William Moss said. “That said, we certainly join other companies in supporting the administration’s pro business and pro investment goals.”

And Jack Ma, of Alibaba, the e-commerce Chinese company, told Trump in early January that he would add 1 million U.S. small businesses to the online platform over the next five years, a move Alibaba said could add 1 million jobs (one each per small business).

Trump also again took credit for saving hundreds of millions on the F-35 jet made by Lockheed Martin, savings that were in the works before he was sworn in.

“[A] little before I took office there was a terrible article about the F-35 fighter jet. It was hundreds of billions of dollars over budget,” he said, going on to say that he called Lockheed and said he would have to “bid this out to another company, namely Boeing” and that “I started getting competing offers back and forth.”

Trump claimed he saved $725 million. In the past, he has claimed a savings of $600 million. But as the Washington Post‘s Fact Checker found, Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the head of the F-35 Joint Program Office, had already announced on Dec. 19 — before Trump met privately with Lockheed CEO Marillyn Hewson — that the cost of the F-35 would come down. His cost reduction estimate came out to $549 million to $630 million, according to the Post’s calculation.

Aviation Week also wrote that Trump “overstates” his role and that the price reduction on the jet had been “ongoing.”

In addition, the president rehashed a campaign claim that distorts the facts on the vetting process required for those entering the U.S.

Trump: We have people allowed into our country with no documentation whatsoever. They have no documentation and they were allowed under the previous administrations, they were allowed into our country.

Trump didn’t specify that he was talking about refugees, but he indicated he was speaking about his “stance on having people come in to this country that we have no idea who they are and in certain cases you will have radical Islamic terrorism.”

Throughout the 2016 campaign, Trump made similar claims. For instance, in a late August speech on illegal immigration, he said that Syrian refugees seeking admission to the U.S. have “no documentation” and “no paperwork.” That’s false.

As we wrote, Barbara Strack, chief of the refugee affairs division of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, told Congress in October 2015 that “we’ve found with Syrian refugees … in general they have many, many documents.” Documents were also one part of the vetting process, she said. Those applying for refugee status are also interviewed by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and go through security checks by the National Counterterrorism Center, the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Center, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense. There’s a health screening and a three-day “cultural orientation,” too.

Editor’s Note: We will be doing more on Trump’s first 100 days in office later this week, so be sure to return to our website as the new president approaches the milestone. 


U.S. Department of the Treasury Office of International Affairs. “Report to Congress: Foreign Exchange Policies of Major Trading Partners  of the United States.” 14 Apr 2017.

Trump Campaign Website. “Donald J. Trump Contract with the American Voter.”

Swanson, Ana, and Ehrenfreund, Max. “Trump administration officially declines to label China currency manipulator.” Washington Post Wonkblog. 14 Apr 2017.

Porter, Eduardo. “Trump Isn’t Wrong on China Currency Manipulation, Just Late.” New York Times. 11 Apr 2017.

Prasad, Eswar, Cornell University. Email interview with 24 Apr 2017.

Setser, Brad, Council on Foreign Relations. Email interview with 24 Apr 2017.

Finnegan, Michael. “‘It’s going to be a big, fat, beautiful wall!’: Trump’s words make his California climb an even steeper trek.” Los Angeles Times. 3 Jun 2016.

Edwards Ainsley, Julia. “Exclusive – Trump border ‘wall’ to cost $21.6 billion, take 3.5 years to build: internal report.” Reuters. 9 Feb 2017.

Rosenberg, Phil et al. “Bernstein Materials Blast: Who Would Profit from The Trump Wall?” Bernstein Research. 15 Jul 2016.

CBP Requests Proposals for Border Wall Prototypes.” Press release. U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 17 Mar 2017.

“Solid Concrete Border Wall RFP.” Request for proposal. U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 17 Mar 2017, updated 1 Apr 2017, accessed 25 Apr 2017.

“Other Border Wall RFP.” Request for proposal. U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 17 Mar 2017, updated 1 Apr 2017, accessed 25 Apr 2017.

U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2011. Table 359 — U.S.–Canada and U.S.–Mexico Border Lengths.” U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed 25 Apr 2017.

Farley, Robert. “Cherry-picking Pryor on Border Security.” 6 Aug 2014.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. “Secure Border Initiative.” GAO. Sep 2009.

Dinan, Stephen. “Trump’s border wall is estimated to cost $8 million to $25 million per mile.” Washington Times. 6 Mar 2017.

Donald Trump: ‘I will be greatest jobs president God ever created’ – video.” The Guardian. 16 Jun 2015.

Gore, D’Angelo. “Trump Takes More Undue Credit.” 12 Apr 2017.

U.S. Department of Labor. “Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National).” Accessed 25 Apr 2017.

Farley, Robert. “Trump: Jobs Returning ‘Because of Me’.” 21 Jan 2017.

Henderson, Peter et al. “Alibaba’s Ma meets Trump, promises to bring one million jobs to U.S.” Reuters. 10 Jan 2017.

Ye Hee Lee, Michelle. “Trump’s claim taking credit for cutting $600 million from the F-35 program.” Washington Post. 31 Jan 2017.

Seligman, Lara. “Trump Exaggerates Role In F-35 Price Reduction.” Aviation Week. 30 Jan 2017.

Kiely, Eugene et al. “Trump Still Off on Immigration.” 1 Sep 2016.

U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. “Oversight of the Administration’s FY 2016 Refugee Resettlement Program: Fiscal and Security Implications.” Hearing. 1 Oct 2015.

Farley, Robert. “Cruz Misquotes Clapper on Refugees.” 8 Oct 2015. Source:

Cameron Sinclair joins Airbnb to provide housing for 100,000 displaced people

Cameron Sinclair, Airbnb, Architecture for Humanity, Airbnb refugees, Airbnb displaced people, Cameron Sinclair small works, Small works, #weaccept, humanitarian housing, humanitarian projects, architecture for good, Airbnb housing

Airbnb wants to provide temporary housing for 100,000 displaced people, and to help reach that goal, the home-sharing service has put together a team lead by designer and Architecture for Humanity co-founder Cameron Sinclair. Sinclair heads architecture firm Small Works, which focuses on building for communities in need, making him the perfect fit for Airbnb’s temporary housing project.

Cameron Sinclair, Airbnb, Architecture for Humanity, Airbnb refugees, Airbnb displaced people, Cameron Sinclair small works, Small works, #weaccept, humanitarian housing, humanitarian projects, architecture for good, Airbnb housing

Sinclair has been working with Airbnb over the past year on various pilot projects, with the official project launching this summer. The ultimate goal is for one million Airbnb users to register as “hosts for good,” signaling that they will provide housing for people impacted by natural disasters or otherwise displaced.

Related: INTERVIEW: We Talk with Architecture for Humanity Founder Cameron Sinclair

Airbnb announced its ambition to host displaced people during this year’s Super Bowl with a commercial tagged #weaccept. In addition to working on the commercial, Sinclair also worked on Airbnb’s Yoshino Cedar House.

via Dezeen

images via Flickr (1, 2) Source: