The Schmalz Report
All the News that's Fit to Rehash
Today's Report
About Me
Special Report
Library
Favorite Links
Contact Me
Archived Reports
05/15/2017

It's been a long time since the last report, I know. This was due mostly to a loss of hope that anything would effect the downward spiral of our society led by the Democrat party and Republican leadership. I am, however, heartened that a coalition of the Republican base, along with the Tea Party and disaffected Democrats united in an unprecedent ouster of that regime. Only time will tell if that is enough to stem the tide. I remain guardedly optimistic.

However, a rehash of that last report (
07/19/2015) is most telling. Below are the contents of that post:

"Recently, Planned Parenthood was exposed in a chilling video sting to have been harvesting fetus organs during abortion procedures and selling them.
My first thought was, this cannot possible be true! Then, after having visited the various websites and determining that this indeed, had been verified - I was horror stricken.

Who would do this and think this was somehow - permissable? Sane? Legal? There are laws against PBA, against human orgran trafficking. How is this happening?

The matter-of-fact demanor and lack of emotion displayed by Nucatola has to be seen to be believed. Below please find a sample of one of the many URL's available.

http://www.centerformedicalprogress.org/cmp/investigative-footage/

That we have a situation like this happening in our society is troubling enough. I'm hoping sincere investigation will ensue - but know it probably will not. The various MSM outlets are already attempting to 'down-play' this and justify this. Mostly it's been along the lines of attacking the credibility of the sting, or claiming the video was too highly edited to have veracity.

That we would have a political party affiliated with them, and defend them, is beyond this writer's ability to express adequately.

I encourage you to speak out to your local, state and federallly elected leaders and officials. Let them know that under no circumstances should this be allowed without repercussions."


2017 Update - unapologetic and remarkably unashamed - Planned Parenthood sued the video makers for 'unlawfull recording':

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/03/29/Activists-who-secretly-filmed-Planned-Parenthood-charged-with-felonies/3211490793997/

Although the suit was utlimately dismissed, a Democrat attorney - said the following in comment, "
The right to privacy is a cornerstone of California's constitution, and a right that is foundational in a free democratic society. We will not tolerate the criminal recording of confidential conversations"

I find it most revealing that the only thing the attorney dwelt upon was the recording of confidential conversations. There was no mention of the content of the conversations. If I interpret this correctly, there was no dispute on the content of the recording - he objected only to the fact they were confidential. 

So, the content was factual - otherwise he would have disputed it. This is in direct opposition to the official public statement from Planned Parenthood that, "
Planned Parenthood insisted it did not profit from sale of fetal tissue".

So which is it? Does PP profit from the sale or do they not?
What the attorney does NOT say speaks volumes.


07/19/2015

Recently, Planned Parenthood was exposed in a chilling video sting to have been harvesting fetus organs during abortion procedures and selling them.
My first thought was, this cannot possible be true! Then, after having visited the various websites and determining that this indeed, had been verified - I was horror stricken.

Who would do this and think this was somehow - permissable? Sane? Legal? There are laws against PBA, against human orgran trafficking. How is this happening?

The matter-of-fact demanor and lack of emotion displayed by Nucatola has to be seen to be believed. Below please find a sample of one of the many URL's available.

http://www.centerformedicalprogress.org/cmp/investigative-footage/

That we have a situation like this happening in our society is troubling enough. I'm hoping sincere investigation will ensue - but know it probably will not. The various MSM outlets are already attempting to 'down-play' this and justify this. Mostly it's been along the lines of attacking the credibility of the sting, or claiming the video was too highly edited to have veracity.

That we would have a political party affiliated with them, and defend them, is beyond this writer's ability to express adequately.

I encourage you to speak out to your local, state and federallly elected leaders and officials. Let them know that under no circumstances should this be allowed without repercussions.


04/30/2015

The Republicans who voted 'Yea' on the confirmation of Loretta Lynch as US AG;

1. Ayotte - NH
2. Cochran - MS
3. Collins - ME
4. Flake - AZ
5. Graham - SC
6. Hatch - UT
7. Johnson - WI
8. Kirk - IL
9. McConnell - KY
10. Portman - OH

The Replican leadership say they oppose the goals of the Democrat party.
Really?
Nothing could be farther than the truth.
Always check voting records.

08/26/2014

My commentary on the Judicial Watch Article - BHO lifts ban on Libyan Pilot Training
URL: http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2014/08/obama-ignores-congress-lifts-ban-libyans-training-u-s-pilots-nuke-scientists/

The Obama administration lifted a decades old ban on Libyans attending flight training and nuclear engineering schools in the U.S. This ban was implemented in 1983 as a result of increasing terrorist incidents involving Libyans. 

BHO believes the ban is no longer necessary because the relationship wth Libya has been "normalized". Really - and how is that, exactly?

It is clear to this author, that BHO is either clueless OR welcomes the elevated chaos the Libyans would present to the U.S. 

He remained famously unaffected by the murders of American citizens, including the U.S. Ambassador to that country in Benghazi just a short time ago. Stating inf effect, 'there was nothing to see here.' His SecState pushed the now discredited line about the event being 'spontaneous' as the result of an internet video. Given the ban, one can make the connection that the video was pushed to facilitate it.

I believe it is sheer lunacy to make the determination that the ban is no longer necessary. 

What it seems BHO wishes to normalize, therefore, is the potential for further threats from Libya to target U.S. and it's citizens in the name of "normalization".  


12/15/2013

If there were any other evidence needed that House Speaker Boehner had betrayed the Republican base and conservatives at large it can be found when he rammed the budget through the House. He further went on to 'belittle' conservative members and groups because of their warrented criticism. This deserves some review.

They were upset because they COULDN'T read it! To rub salt into that wound, Boehner claims the moral high ground since he claims he did. So...he read the bill and and we have to simply trust him. This was because Speaker Boehner moved the bill before the 72 hour time limit for review he promised to provide. This echos eerily the same procedure Nancy Pelosi used to push the ObamaCare bill through the Senate.

Now we know for sure. Speaker Boehner is working in cahoots with the Democrats! This writer had suspected before, but now we have proof. Any opposition to Democrat policies before were simply meant to mis-direct the populace.

On the very next election, remember to vote this man out of office.

We have a term for people like him.

We call them Traitor!

03/14/2013

I've been reviewing the vote to confirm John Kerry as SecState on January 29th, 2013. While you might have expected that the Democrats vote in 'lock-step' with the party to secure a vote, you might be surprised how the Republicans voted;

By my count there were 47 voting Senators.
There were 3 Nays.
There were 44 Yeas.
There was 1 not voting.

The Republican Party Leadership voted as follows;

Senate Minority Leader McConnell - Yea
Senate Minority Whip Cornyn - Nay
Republican Conference Chair Thune - Yea
Republican Committee Policy Chair Barrasso - Yea
Republican Committee Policy Vice Chair Blunt - Yea

As a Viet-Nam era veteren, John Kerry's comments before the Senate back in 1971 particularly rankled. There are a number of Republican senators that also serverd during Viet-Nam - and they voted to approve his appointment. This left me scratching my head. Shouldn't they have voted 'Nay' instead? After all, he represents the anathema of all things conservative AND Republican.

His duties include;
1. Advises POTUS on matters of Foreign Policy.
2. Participates in high-level negotiations with foreign countries.
3. Direction, coordination and supervision of interdepartmental activities of the US government overseas.
4. Passports and Visas.
5. Supervises US Immigration policy overseas.
6. Custody of the records of the former Secretary.

I wouldn't want Kerry in charge of the foregoing. Why would any of the Republican Senators?


11/14/2012

I watched a rant on You-Tube that was really funny - I can't find it just now, but I'll paraphrase;

Let me get this straight...[BHO] and his cronies won an election based on his 'accomplishments'. Really?

OK. Let's review just ONE of these accomplishments - 'ObamaCare'.

1. Said health care plan that we will be be forced to purchase and fined if we don't.
2. Said health care bill contains a provision to hire 16,000 new IRS agents to enforce it.
3. Said health care bill was approved by a committe chairman that publicly says he doesn't understand it.
5. Said health care bill will be funded by a Treasury Secretary that didn't pay his taxes.
6. Said health care bill will tax the American public starting Januray 1st, 2013, but whose benefits will not go into effect until 4 years later.
7. Said health care bill was passed by a Congress that didn't read it.
8. Said health care bill will be run by a government that has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare.
9. Said health care bill will not be forced on most government leaders who passed it.
10. Said health care bill will cover 10 million new people, without providing a single new doctor, but coverage will remain the same.

Really?

7/25/2012

You've read from me in past reports that I'm very concerned about how the Federal government, led by BHO and the Democrats [assisted by some Republicans], are constructing an ecomonical climate that will crush the middle class. What follows is a brief citation of my concern about the production of energy during the next 10 - 20 years.

In 2008, BHO had stated in an interview with the SF Chronicle that he will 'bankrupt" the coal industry. The video was available for a time, but has been pulled. No transcripts have been made available of that interview. A curt note appears when you attempt to access the orginal link, "This video is no longer available."

If you have been attempting to follow the actions of the EPA lately, you will have problems, because the media has not been doing their job. Even though the original 'Cap and Trade' failed approval in Congress, BHO has enacted 'decrees', among which in 2009 that define CO2 and other gases as 'toxic' air pollutants subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act.

The result of this legislation will raise the cost of electricity for all Americans.

So, to sum up;
1. ObamaCare is increasing taxes as of Jan 1st, 2013.
2. Gas prices are not going anywhere but up, if Congress has anything to do with it.
3. Electricity costs are now going up.

Last time I checked, the Federal government is not adding any tax credits to the IRS code so I can offset the loss of my income to pay for these cost of living increases.

What I don't get, why isn't there more outcry from ALL media outlets about this?

3/3/2012

A "new scheme called 'Life End' will respond to sick people whose own doctors have refused to help them end their lives at home. A controversial system of mobile euthanasia units that will travel around the country to respond to the wishes of sick people who wish to end their lives has been launched in the Netherlands."

This is no lie. It actually is happening in the Netherlands. [see the following link for the full story]. In it, there appear to be 'specially trained doctors and nurses' who will perform this 'service'. Really. and whom do you think 'trains' the medical personnel? Well, their federal government of course. Further, these people step in when the patient's medical staff refuse to carry out the patient's wishes to enuthanize themselves. Really. [Who gives these people such God-like powers of discernment and discretion to terminate people's lives - you guessed it, the Dutch federal goverment]. Remember, this is the SAME kind of government that Obama and his crony's wish to impose on America. [Think Socialism...]

It is not a reach to speculate whether ObamaCare, when implemented, will also accept Euthanasia as perfectely acceptable. After all, the 'death panels' were widely denied by the Obama adminstration until a NYTimes reported let the cat out of the bag by admitting they were in the bill. The bill that so many of our Senators simply didn't read because they needed to "pass the bill to find out what was in it". Really.

Death panels and euthanasia. All part of a "Health Care" bill pushed by a Democrat controlled Congress so that all Americans could have the same access to health care.

Well, we might all have access, but the level of care might be something worth reviewing...especially if you are over 65. And.. wait for it...the largest segment of the population, the baby boomers, are all heading into this phase of their lives.

Anyway, the article can be found at the UK Guardian via the following link;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/01/dutch-mobile-euthanasia-units



2/1/2012

In the Wednesday Chronicle [1/25/212] of the Patriot Post the following quote from Congressman Hoyer; "[T]his president has reached out as seriously and sincerely as any president with whom I've served over the last 30 years, to work together in a bipartisan fashion. No president with whom I've served over those last 30 years has spent as much time working with Republicans and Democrats in the room, exchanging ideas, evidencing a willingness to compromise as President Obama has." --House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD)

David Limbaugh had it right when he said,"...Obama's idea of bipartisanship is to consider each and every idea Republicans offer, except those he refuses to consider." [Crimes Against Liberty, David Limbaugh, pp. 92]

Further, Karl Rove told Chris Wallace, "...in reallity he [Obama] is a very-you know a hyperpartisan who's failed to reach across party lines when he had a terrific opportunity to do so in the aftermath of his victory." Fox News 3/15/2010.

When Obama famously pushed the stimulus bill through Congress, the Republicans were shut out of the process until the last day - just for a photo session with journalists to provide the impression that he was 'working together' with them.

This was to become Obama's signature operating style. In point of fact, few other presidents have been so divisive and partisan. So, for Hoyer to aver that he is not, is the height of disingenuousness - if not outright dishonesty.

01/06/2012

I had multiple conversations with liberals about my concerns with ObamaCare. When I brought up the fact that socialized medicine inevitably becomes rationed, they cried, "Show me where ObamaCare has rationed care!!" "It simply is NOT true!"

Well....

From Judicial Watch today;
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2011/12/new-obamacare-tax-to-help-govt-ration-healthcare/



New Obamacare Tax To Help Govt. Ration Healthcare

In just a few days a new Obamacare tax—that will double the following year—will kick in to fund “comparative effectiveness research” that’s supposed to help the government save money by finding ways to ration healthcare.

This is crazy; a semi-secret tax so the feds have cash to pay bureaucrats to examine everyone’s health records and, in turn, the government can save money by cutting back on care. The official plan, as noted by a national news wire this week, is to conduct research to find out which drugs, medical procedures, tests and treatments work best. It’s part of a “little-known provision” of the president’s socialist takeover of the nation’s healthcare system.

Who will conduct this valuable research? A new quasi-governmental agency (Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute or PCORI) created by Obamacare to provide information about the “best available evidence to help patients and their health care providers make more informed decisions.” PCORI claims its research is intended to give patients a better understanding of the prevention, treatment and care options available.  

To conduct this valuable work, PCORI needs cash. That’s where the new, little-known tax kicks in. Beginning in 2012, Uncle Sam will charge insurance companies a new fee to fund the PCORI’s research. The tax will be $1 per person in 2012 and will double in 2013 and increase with inflation in the following years. Insurers will soon receive guidance on the new tax from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

Obama has already given this sort of medical effectiveness research a big chunk of change. In fact, his disastrous 2009 economic stimulus bill included more than $1 billion for this kind of work through a different government agency. When his Affordable Care Act passed, the newly created PCORI became the official center to find ways to more “effectively and appropriately” prevent, diagnose, treat, monitor and manage health conditions.

Most Americans are opposed to Obama’s hostile takeover of the nation’s healthcare system and two separate federal courts—in Florida and Virginia—have ruled it unconstitutional. The Virginia ruling came in 2010 and the Florida decision, referred to as “another legal blow” by a mainstream newspaper, came last year. Here is the 2010 Virginia decision and the 2011 Florida ruling. The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the case next March.

Judicial Watch has been a leader in comprehensively investigating Obamacare and has uncovered details related to secret healthcare meetings between powerful unions and Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, waivers to companies and unions exempting them from inconvenient provisions of the new law and the regulation and funding of Obamacare in general. Read about JW’s Obamacare work here. 

Judicial Watch has also obtained internal Justice Department documents that suggest Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan helped coordinate the Obama Administration’s legal defense of the healthcare law while she served as Solicitor General. JW has long believed that Kagan could be Obama’s political operative on the Supreme Court. After all, she is a liberal activist with a thin resume, little legal experience and no judicial experience.

12/19/2011

In his speech in Osawatomie, BHO said, speaking of American capitalism -"But here’s the problem: It doesn’t work. It has never worked. It didn’t work when it was tried in the decade before the Great Depression. It’s not what led to the incredible postwar booms of the 50s and 60s. And it didn’t work when we tried it during the last decade. I mean, understand, it’s not as if we haven’t tried this theory."

So, if capitalism didn't work for all this time, then it's his brand of economy [read socialism] that will work - at least, that's his message. Really.

Hmm, double digit unemployment, sky-rocketing deficit, a much denied - but now admitted recession. All these have occurred during his administration. His reply - we didn't know it was so bad. Really.

He would have you believe that ALL of today's issues are solely due to the Repblicans in general and George Bush in particualr. Really.

I guess if the American public believes that, then we truly deserve four more years of BHO . Really.


11/7/2011

Global Warning A Hoax - Again!
You know, I’ve lost my patience with the Global Warming advocates that justify their support of GW because ANYTHING that helps the environment is better than nothing at all. This approach is intellectually dishonest because this belief is based on a lie. No good can come of that. So, Liberals in the US and UN appropriate Billions of dollars to support this cause. That should qualify these lawmakers for theft prosecution and the perpetrators subsequently jailed.

I believe the money could be better spent…let’s say…for a Liberal cause even… – on the HOMELESS with better results than Global Warming.

At least… the HOMELESS… ACTUALLY… EXIST.


10/24/2011

 
I was sharing this idea with a friend about the labels we sometimes use to describe things.
 
 
 
Such as;
 
Democrats - are liberals
 
Republicans - are conservatives.
 
 
 
However, we both know that these labels are not necessarily factual and can be misleading.
 
For example, I know some Democrats that are not liberal and some Republicans that are not conservative.
 
 
 
I do know one thing to be true, musing about this....Only liberals think its appropriate to publicly slander a conservative leader armed with nothing more than an opinion.
 
 
 
Just a thought.



10/10/2011
"The message of the protesters is a message for the establishment everyplace. No longer will the recklessness of some on Wall Street cause massive joblessness on Main Street. ... God bless them for their spontaneity. It's independent ... it's young, it's spontaneous, it's focused. And it's going to be effective."
--House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)

Spontaneous, really?
Not long after this statement was uttered, evidence has come to light that this protest is anything BUT spontaneous. Apparently funding and organization has been funnelled to protest organizers through various channels. The conclusion is that based upon this SOLE fact - the protest is NOT spontaneous. However, this did not keep Ms. Pelosi from speaking her mind. Apparently also, she has a gift for disingenousness.

What's interesting about the funding of this 'protest' is that little was completed as most 'events' are supposed to be. For example, the Tea Party planned their events for months, spent large sums of money to ensure that permits were filled out, facilities were available, etc. No such planning was evident by the Occupy Wall Street organizers. Indeed, they intentionally 'stuck' the host city with the bill. A real class act. [Pun intented for those of you up on the ObamaCare ingredients.]

Additionally, according to the MRC, the MSM provided much needed support, covering more stories on this protest in the first nine days [24 stories] than they did during the first nine months [19 stories] regarding the Tea Party. Ahem, no bias there.


10/17/2011
The current president has said,"We actually now have the lowest tax rates since the 1950s. Our tax rates are lower now than they were under Ronald Reagan. They're lower than they were under George Bush -- senior or George Bush, junior." --Barack Obama

Hmm, let’s do some fact checking that the MSM apparently cannot or WILL not do;
http://www.taxfoundation.org/
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html

Note: Current top marginal tax rate is now 35.0 % for tax bracket above $379,150.

Tax History

1. In 1959, believe it or not, the top marginal tax rate was 91.0% for tax bracket above $300,000.
2. The first drop in this rate was in 1964 when the top marginal tax rate was changed to 77.0% for tax bracket above $200,000. This was in response to the Tax Reform Act of 1964 passed during the year.
3. The next drop was in 1965 to 70.0% for tax bracket above $180,000. Also, in response to the Tax Reform Act of 1964, passed the year before.
4. The next change, although minor, was in 1977 when the bracket floor was changed to $182,200. This was in response to the Tax Reduction and Simplification Act of 1977, passed during the year.
5. The next change was in 1979, when the bracket floor was adjusted to $161,300. This was in response to the Revenue Act of 1978.
6. The next change was in 1982, when the top marginal tax rate was adjusted to 50.0% and the bracket floor to 60,000. This was in response to the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act passed during the year.
7. The next change was in 1983, under the same act of 1982, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $81,000. This was an adjustment due to inflation.
8. The next change was in 1984, under the same act of 1982, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $108,300.
9. The next change was in 1985, under the same act of 1982, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $112,720.
10.  The next change was in 1986, under the same act of 1982, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $116,870.
11. The next change was in 1987, under the same act of 1982, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $80,000 and the rate adjusted to 38.5%.
12. The next change was in 1988, under the same act of 1982, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $23,900 and the rate adjusted to 28.0%.
13. The next change was in 1989, under the same act of 1982, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $26,850.
14. The next change was in 1990, under the same act of 1982, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $26,050.
15. The next change was in 1991, under Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $70,450 and the rate adjusted to 31.0%.
16. The next change was in 1992, under the same act of 1990, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $74,150.
17. The next change was in 1993, under Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $250,000 and the rate adjusted to 39.6%.
18. The next change was in 1995, under Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $256,500.
19. The next change was in 1996, under Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $263,750.
20. The next change was in 1997, under Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $271,050.
21. The next change was in 1998, under Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $278,450.
22. The next change was in 1999, under Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $283,150.
23. The next change was in 2000, under Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $288,350.
24. The next change was in 2001, under the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $297,350 and the rate adjusted to 39.1%.
25. The next change was in 2002, under the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $307,050 and the rate adjusted to 38.6%.
26. The next change was in 2003, under the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $311,950 and the rate adjusted to 35.0%.
27. The next change was in 2004, under the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $319,500.
28. The next change was in 2005, under the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $326,450.
29. The next change was in 2006, under the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $336,550.
30. The next change was in 2007, under the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $349,700.
31. The next change was in 2008, under the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $357,700.
32. The next change was in 2009, under the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $372,950.
33. The next change was in 2010, under the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, the top marginal tax bracket floor was adjusted to $373,650.

George W. Bush was president from 2001 – 2009. Tax rate when he took office was 39.1% and 35.0% during his last year.
Geoge H. W. Bush was president from 1989 – 1993. Tax rate when he took office was 28% and 39.6% during his last year.
Ronald Reagan was president from 1981 – 1989. Tax rate when he took office was 70% and 28% during his last year.

So let’s dissect the president’s statements.

1. "We actually now have the lowest tax rates since the 1950s.”
                a. Answer: False – the lowest tax rate was during President Reagan’s term at 28.0%, which is mathematically less than the current rate of 35.0%.
2. “Our tax rates are lower now than they were under Ronald Reagan.”
                a. Answer: False - Same as #1a above - the lowest tax rate was during President Reagan’s term at 28.0%, which is mathematically less than the current rate of 35.0%.

3. “They're lower than they were under George Bush -- senior or George Bush, junior."
                a. Answer:  True – the tax rate under Bush Sr. was 39.6%, which is mathematically more than the current rate of 35.0%.
                b. Answer:  False – the tax rate under Bush Jr. was 35.0%, which is mathematically equal to the current rate of 35.0%.

By my calculation – the president is wrong 3 out of 4 times. If this were a quiz he would get a 25% - certainly a failing grade by any standard.

Conclusion:
The president is more factually incorrect than factually correct in this statement.
Either he does NOT know what he is talking about OR he DOES know what he’s talking about, but doesn’t bother to fact check his speech-writer’s work knowing that the general public will not look this stuff up and his sycophantic media will NOT hold him accountable.
Both possibilities are disturbing to say the least.