President Donald Trump on Friday complained about energy-efficient light bulbs that he claimed made him look orange.
As reported by Reuters White House correspondent Jeff Mason, the president said he wanted to bring back older light bulbs that would give him a more flattering skin tone.
“Trump quips that the new light bulbs don’t make him look good and being a ‘vain’ person, that’s important to him,” Mason reports. “He says they make him look orange. He plans to bring cheaper light bulbs back.”
Despite the president’s complaints, however, many observers have noted the orange hue of his skin color even in broad daylight without any artificial lights.
Scott Waldman, a reporter who focuses on climate change for E&E News, comments that Trump has consistently used complaints about how the light bulbs make him look to justify blocking light bulb efficiency standards.
“It’s also premised on a false claim because you can purchase LED bulbs that give off an incandescent glow and last 4x times longer,” he writes.
Watch the video below.
TRUMP: "They got rid of the lightbulb that people got used to. The new bulb is many times more expensive. And I hate to say it — it doesn't make you look as good. Being a vain person that's very important to me. It gives you an orange look. I don't want an orange look." pic.twitter.com/geujwcUa8v
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) December 6, 2019
Trump quips that the new light bulbs don’t make him look good and being a “vain” person, that’s important to him. He says they make him look orange. He plans to bring cheaper light bulbs back. pic.twitter.com/Bj2r19lOhW
— Jeff Mason (@jeffmason1) December 6, 2019
This is a frequent talking point from Trump on why he is rolling back lightbulb efficiency rules. It’s also premised on a false claim because you can purchase LED bulbs that give off an incandescent glow and last 4x times longer. https://t.co/a2nqhsvb1F
— Scott Waldman (@scottpwaldman) December 6, 2019
Genocide expert breaks down how all of the ‘warning signs’ are present in Trump’s America
Defense research scientist and genocide expert Brynn Tannehill laid out a terrifying warning on Thursday about President Donald Trump's administration.
As the United States Senate conducted an impeachment trial for the commander-in-chief, Tannehill posted an extended Twitter thread examining the situation in America from her perspective as a researcher studying the conditions that lead to genocide.
Here is what she wrote:
I study genocide. It's been a theme in my academic endeavours for nearly 30 years. More accurately, I study the conditions in the lead up to genocide, be they cultural, social, political, economic, etc... 1/n
Year of Rat hails easy ride for Donald Trump — but bumps for Harry and Meghan
As the world prepares to welcome the Year of the Rat, feng shui masters predict a lucky year for Donald Trump, but warn Harry and Meghan's futures are less certain as they make a bid for freedom.
Both the US President and the Sussexes have begun 2020 with a bang.
The former is facing down an impeachment trial -- and seeking re-election in November -- while the latter are beginning a new chapter in Canada after consciously uncoupling from the gilded but pressured career of being a working British royal.
But if experts in the field of Chinese horoscopes are to be believed, it is the US president that will have the easier journey this year.
John Roberts caused a ‘crisis of democratic legitimacy’ — it’s ‘entirely fitting’ he has to preside over his mess: columnist
Supreme Court Justice John Roberts was blasted in The Washington Post on Thursday for his culpability in creating the dynamics that resulted in President Donald Trump -- and his impeachment.
"There is justice in John Roberts being forced to preside silently over the impeachment trial of President Trump, hour after hour, day after tedious day," Dana Milbank wrote. "Roberts’s captivity is entirely fitting: He is forced to witness, with his own eyes, the mess he and his colleagues on the Supreme Court have made of the U.S. political system. As representatives of all three branches of government attend this unhappy family reunion, the living consequences of the Roberts Court’s decisions, and their corrosive effect on democracy, are plain to see."