Trump: ‘I’m not sure that I’ve ever heard of a Category 5’ hurricane. There have been 4 during his presidency |
Politics Election

Trump: ‘I’m not sure that I’ve ever heard of a Category 5’ hurricane. There have been 4 during his presidency

President Trump speaks at the Federal Emergency Management Agency on Sunday, Sept. 1, 2019, in Washington.

During a Federal Emergency Management Agency briefing Sunday about Hurricane Dorian, President Trump expressed disbelief that a Category 5 storm was possible.

“I’ve seen some Category 4s, you don’t even see that many of them. But a Category 5 is something that, I don’t know if I’ve ever even heard the term, other than I know it’s there,” Trump said. “That’s the ultimate, and that’s what we have unfortunately.”

Problem is, now with Dorian, there have been four such storms during his presidency.

In September 2017, Hurricane Irma affected nine states. Later that month, Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico and drenched the U.S. Virgin Islands.

In October 2018, Hurricane Michael swelled to a Category 5 when it struck the Florida Panhandle, the first Category 5 storm to strike the country since 1992.

This is also not the first time Trump has said he’s never heard of a Category 5 storm.

On two different occasions in September 2017, the president said he “never even knew a Category 5 existed” and that no one had ever “seen anything like that.”

Meanwhile, Trump had to be corrected when he announced on Twitter that Alabama could be in Dorian’s path.

“In addition to Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama, will most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated. Looking like one of the largest hurricanes ever,” Trump posted.

Problem is, no model shows that Alabama could be hit. The National Weather Service branch in Birmingham had to send out a clarification.

“Alabama will NOT see any impacts from #Dorian,” wrote the NWS. “We repeat, no impacts from Hurricane #Dorian will be felt across Alabama.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.